Appeal No. 1999-0701
Application No. 08/705,005
surface of the balloon would be spaced radially inwardly at
least along portions of the band (perfusion brace), as
required in the claims on appeal. For this reason alone we
will not sustain the examiner's rejection of independent
claims 1, 16 and 23 on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) based
on Blackshear, or the rejection of claims 5, 7, 8, 10 and 27
which depend from claim 1, claims 17, 18, 20, 22 and 28 which
depend from claim 16, or claims 29 and 30 which depend from
claim 23 on that same statutory basis.
In addition, we will also not sustain the examiner's
rejection of claims 3, 4, 9, 11 through 15, 19, 21 and 24
through 26 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Blackshear in view of Sahota. Given the examiner's total lack
of any comments or explanation in the examiner's answer with
regard to this rejection and the examiner's somewhat anomalous
and cryptic position as set forth on page 3 of the final
rejection (Paper No. 22), we are at a complete loss to
understand exactly what teachings the examiner is relying on
from Sahota and exactly how the examiner intends to modify the
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007