Appeal No. 2001-0846 Page 7
Application No. 08/797,960
We have reviewed the reference to Lane applied in this
rejection of the claims under appeal but find nothing therein
which makes up for the deficiency of Trotter discussed above.
In that regard, Lane's clamps 9, which hold the tissue 16 in
the stretched position, do not surround the position where the
cut is formed as required by the claims under appeal. Thus,
the claimed subject matter is not suggested by what the
combined teachings of the applied prior art would have
suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art. Accordingly,
the decision of the examiner to reject claims 15, 17, 18, 21,
23, 24, 29 to 33 and 35 to 37 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 15, 17, 18, 21, 23, 24, 29 to 33 and 35 to 37 under 35
U.S.C.
§ 102(b) is reversed and the decision of the examiner to
reject claims 15, 17, 18, 21, 23, 24, 29 to 33 and 35 to 37
under
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007