Ex parte BONUTTI - Page 3




          Appeal No. 1999-0925                                                        
          Application No. 08/735,916                                                  


               The claims on appeal are drawn to an implant apparatus,                
          and are reproduced in Appendix A of appellant’s brief.                      
               The references applied in the final rejection are:                     
          Walker                   3,774,244                     Nov. 27,             
          1973                                                                        
          Hodorek                  4,979,957                     Dec. 25,             
          1990                                                                        
          Mikhail                  5,383,937                     Jan. 24,             
          1995                                                                        
          (filed Feb. 26, 1993)                                                       
               The claims stand finally rejected on the following                     
          grounds:                                                                    
          (1) Claims 28 to 31, 33, 35, 36, and 38 to 40, unpatentable                 
          for failure to comply with 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph.               
          (2) Claims 28 to 31, 33, 35, 39 and 40, anticipated by Mikhail              
          or Hodorek, under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).                                       
          (3) Claims 36 and 38, anticipated by Walker, under 35 U.S.C.                
          § 102(b).                                                                   
          Rejection (1)                                                               
               The examiner asserts that the rejected claims are                      
          indefinite because (answer, pages 4 and 5):                                 
                         These claims are directed to an apparatus                    
                    which comprise [sic] the combination of an                        
                    implant and a plurality of spaced apart cement                    
                    bodies.  Examiner maintained that the apparatus                   
                    as claimed does not exist except in vivo.  The                    
                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007