Appeal No. 2000-1934 Page 2
Application No. 08/779,420
The appellants' invention relates to a tract wound
irrigation tip (claims 1-11) and a method for irrigating a
tract wound (claims 14 and 15). A copy of the claims under
appeal is set forth in the appendix to the appellants' brief.
The examiner relied upon the following prior art
references of record in rejecting the appealed claims:1
Abramson 4,508,533 Apr. 2, 1985
Muto 5,167,622 Dec. 1,
1992
(1) Claims 1-5, 14 and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by Abramson.
(2) Claims 1-3, 5, 8 and 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by Muto.
(3) Claims 10 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Muto.
(4) Claims 6 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Abramson.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced
by the examiner and the appellants regarding the above-noted
Given the subject matter of appellants' claims, it appears to us that1
a search of appropriate commercial databases and medical journals would be
advisable in the event of further prosecution in this or a continuing
application. There is no indication in the record that such a search has been
conducted.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007