Appeal No. 1999-0512
Application No. 08/701,979
2. In the matter of the patentability of claims 8 and 11, the
examiner should consider the collective teachings of the Ryan
reference (the alternative of a bonded end cap and catheter)
and U.S. Patent No. 4,733,665 to Palmaz, the latter patent
being referenced by appellants on page 2 of this application
and cited in appellants’ Information Disclosure Statement of
December 30, 1996 (Paper No. 4). We draw the examiner’s
attention to Palmaz’s teaching of the alternative of retaining
ring members 86 integral (formed as a single member) with a
catheter 83 (Fig. 3), a teaching acknowledged by appellants in
their specification (page 2).
In summary, this panel of the board has:
affirmed the rejection of claims 1 through 5, 7, 9, 20,
and 39 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Ryan,
but reversed the rejection of claim 8 on this same ground;
affirmed the rejection of claim 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Ryan, but reversed the rejection of
claim 11 on this same ground; and
15
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007