Appeal No. 2000-2047 Page 2
Application No. 09/014,759
BACKGROUND
The appellants’ invention relates to an apparatus and method for creating an
aperture at an access site in a patient’s existing tubular body organ structure. An
understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claims 1, 13,
23 and 24, which appear in the appendix to the Brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Kim 5,676,670 Oct. 14, 1997
Makower 5,830,222 Nov. 3, 1998
(filed Oct. 11, 1996)
Claims 1-12, 23 and 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Makower.
Claims 13-22, 24 and 26 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Makower in view of Kim, each in view of the other.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the
appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the Answer (Paper
No. 16) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the Brief
(Paper No. 15) and Reply Brief (Paper No. 17) for the appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007