Appeal No. 2001-0129
Application No. 09/035,655
We turn next to the examiner’s rejection of claims 1
through 3, 5, 6, 8 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Masuda. In support of this rejection, it is
the examiner’s opinion that Masuda discloses a package
containing a planar fibrous pad (medical device 1) disposed in
a plastic pouch (sterile bag 2) which is hermetically sealed.
The examiner is of the view that the sterile bag 2 containing
the medical device 1 is capable of functioning as animal
bedding. In regard to the recitation of a “rigid” planar
fibrous pad, the examiner states:
The examiner points the applicant to col. 2, lines
2-9, wherein Masuda claims a medical device for use
with the package being a “cellulose acetate hollow
fiber membrane . . . preferable a laminated
polyester-aluminum-polyethylene sheet”. The
examiner believes that a “cellulose acetate hollow
fiber membrane . . . preferable a laminated
polyester-aluminum-polyethylene sheet” does indeed
anticipate a rigid planar fibrous pad as recited by
the applicant in claims 1 and 5. [answer at page 9]
We agree with the appellant that Masuda does not disclose
a rigid planar fibrous pad. The laminated polyester aluminum-
polyethylene sheet referred to by the examiner is the oxygen-
impermeable wrapper 4 not the medical device 1 which the
examiner finds to be a planar fibrous pad (See Col. 1, line 51
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007