Ex parte EVERETT - Page 3




            Appeal No. 2000-0087                                                          Page 3              
            Application No. 08/592,006                                                                        


                   The appellant’s invention is directed to a gynecological procedure for sterilizing a       
            female patient by placing a heating device in fixed contact with tissue adjacent to the tubal     
            ostia in order to coagulate the interstitial portion of the patient’s fallopian tube and thereby  
            close the fallopian tube.  As disclosed, the method utilizes a light-transmitting optical fiber   
            conduit that transmits laser light energy, which is converted at least in part to heat energy.    
            The optical fiber is inserted through the patient’s uterus.   As manifested in independent        
            claim 32, the appellant’s inventive method comprises the steps of                                 
                   (a) inserting into the patient’s uterus an elongated light energy transmitting             
                   conduit having a distal end;                                                               
                   (b) transmitting light energy through said conduit such that at least a portion            
                   of the transmitted energy generates heat; and                                              
                   (c) coagulating tissue adjacent to the patient’s fallopian tubes and thereby               
                   closing the patient’s fallopian tubes by applying said heat to said tissue.                
            Independent claim 6 is more limited, in that it specifies that the tissue to which the heat is    
            applied is a portion of the uterus, and includes the additional step of repeating the step of     
            applying heat for the other of the patient’s fallopian tubes, so that both are closed.            
            Independent claim 35 also is more limited than claim 32, for it requires that the distal end      
            of the light transmitting conduit be positioned adjacent to the patient’s tubal ostia.            
                   It is the examiner’s position that the claimed method would have been obvious to           
            one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the teachings of Sagie.  The appellant argues that    
            this would not have been the case, and points out a number of deficiencies in Sagie’s             








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007