Appeal No. 1999-0076
Application No. 08/348,699
In the main brief (page 3), appellants expressly indicate
that claims 1 through 7 and 9, stand or fall together. In
light of the above, we select independent claim 1 for review,
as per
37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7). Accordingly, claims 2 through 7 and 9
shall stand or fall with claim 1. It is noted that
independent claims 1, 7, and 9 each address contrasting colors
for latching and retaining members of a surgical device.
OPINION
In reaching our conclusion on the issues raised in this
appeal, this panel of the board has carefully considered
appellants’ specification and claims, the applied teachings, 1 2
1In claim 9, line 2, "An" should apparently be --an--.
2In our evaluation of the applied prior art, we have
considered all of the disclosure of each document for what it
would have fairly taught one of ordinary skill in the art.
See In re Boe, 355 F.2d 961, 965, 148 USPQ 507, 510 (CCPA
1966). Additionally, this panel of the board has taken into
account not only the specific teachings, but also the
inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably have
been expected to draw from the disclosure. See In re Preda,
401 F.2d 825, 826, 159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).
(continued...)
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007