Appeal No. 1998-2051
Application 08/426,814
slit in the adapted wall." When questioned at oral hearing,
appellant's attorney stated that "being adapted" meant that
the wall of the catheter is modified in some manner to form a
slit. With this definition in mind, it is our finding that
Neracher does not have a wall that is modified in some manner
to form a slit. Neracher merely shows a port 20 in the side
of the adapter. A single port cannot be considered a slit.
Furthermore, as to the examiner's theory that the "adapted to"
language is so broad that a reference showing no modification
at all of the catheter wall, and which could be cut with a
tool to form a slit, can be considered as "adapted to form a
slit", this theory is merely an admission that Neracher does
not have such a slit forming structure and does not anticipate
appellants claimed subject matter. Appellant's claimed
subject matter including a wall being adapted to form a slit,
which we have construed as a wall modified in some manner to
form a slit, while broad, is not so broad as to read on a wall
showing no modification at all. The rejection of claim 21 is
reversed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007