Appeal No. 1998-1045
Application 08/482,674
After reviewing the combined teachings of the applied
prior art, we reach the conclusion that the subject matter of
claim 38 would not have been suggested to one of ordinary
skill in the art at the time the invention was made.
Specifically, we agree with the appellant that there is no
suggestion, motivation, or teaching in the prior art whereby
the person of ordinary skill would have been instructed to
attach the core member 21 of Gould to the catheter wall at or
near the distal tip area as opposed to the flexible coil or
coiled tip 23 explicitly taught by Gould absent the use of
impermissible hindsight. We note that claim 38 is concerned
with the anchoring of a torque transmitting member to the wall
of a catheter. However, Jackowski’s wire member 16 is clearly
not intended to be twisted or to serve as a torque
transmitting member. Further, while Jackowski does teach that
bending control can be achieved by a wire member 16 hooked
into electrical contact with an electrode 18 which is mounted
in the catheter wall, the reference provides no teaching or
suggestion that we can discern that improved bending control
of the catheter can be achieved by attaching the wire member
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007