Interference No. 104,190
the prototype on a live dog at the University Of Minnesota
Medical School Animal Laboratory. PR-7, 14. PX-9 is Rydell’s
record of the test. This contemporaneous record states that
scissors no. 3 [PX-10, hooked scissors] “still did not cut
as good as it should have.” PX-9. Rydell states that he was
satisfied that the scissors carried out its intended function,
even though improvements still had to be made before it would
serve as a commercially acceptable scissors. PR7. O’Brien
states that the scissors was operated in its normally intended
fashion to cut various tissue types in the living dog, and it
was able to cut and coagulate tissue and blood vessels.
O’Brien further states that the scissors worked well in
coagulating blood but that mechanical cutting ability was not
on par with conventional laparoscopic scissors. PR14. In
O’Brien's interoffice report on the completed dog testing the
report stated: “Good coagulation but poor mechanical cut.”
PX-14.
At the point of the live dog test, the
contemporaneous record and the after-the-fact testimony seem12
12In evaluating whether a particular test constitutes an
actual reduction to practice, one factor to be considered is
19
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007