Appeal No. 2001-0515
Application 08/926,358
1. A one piece prosthetic glenoid component, comprising an oval body1 having a major
axis extending along the largest diameter2 of said oval body, said body having a concave
laterally facing surface and an opposed medially facing surface3 with only a single keel extending
from the medial [sic, medially facing] surface, said concave lateral [sic, laterally facing] surface
being defined by one or more radii4, said keel lying in a medial-lateral plane5 parallel to and
anteriorly6 offset from a medial-lateral plane containing said major axis of said oval body.
The following references are relied upon by the examiner as evidence of anticipation
and obviousness in support of his rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) and
35 U.S.C. § 103:
Kinnett 4,550,450 Nov. 5, 1985
Worland 4,986,833 Jan. 22, 1991
Lippincott III et al. (Lippincott) 5,405,401 Apr. 11, 1995
Williamson et al. (Williamson) 5,800,551 Sep. 1, 1998
Rambert et al. (Rambert)
(French Patent document) 2,579,4547 Oct. 3, 1986
The grounds of rejection are as follows:
1 When read in light of appellants’ specification, we interpret the recitation of an “oval body” to
mean that the perimeter of the body has an oval configuration.
2 The recitation of the “largest diameter” is understood to mean the largest dimension of the oval
defined by the perimeter of the body.
3 The claimed “laterally facing surface” and “medially facing surface” are understood to relate to
anatomical terms of the human body. For explaining these terms, appellants have attached to their main brief
a copy of a page from an unidentified text on the human anatomy . This page from this text illustrates figures
of the human body and identifies various anatomical terms, including the terms “medial”, “lateral”,
“anterior”, “posterior”, “sagittal plane” and “frontal plane” (also referred to as the “coronal plane”). As we
understand the claim language, all recitations of anatomical terms in claim 1 are with reference to the
implanted orientation of the glenoid component in the human body. In the event of further prosecution,
appellants should identify this anatomical text .
4 This limitation is understood to refer to the radii of curvature of the concave laterally facing
surface.
5 Based on the illustrations in the page of the anatomical text referred to in note 3 supra, the “medial
direction” and the “lateral direction” are perpendicular to the sagittal plane. Therefore, “a medial-lateral
plane” (which may be vertical or horizontal) is understood to perpendicularly intersect the sagittal plane.
6 This anatomical term is identified in the page of the anatomical text referred to in note 3 supra.
7 An English translation of this French document is attached to this decision.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007