Appeal No. 1998-2637 Page 8
Application No. 08/470,142
Claim 147 also has been rejected on the basis of Melker and Lee. This claim
contains the steps of initiating formation of an opening by pressing a leading end of at
least one of the wires and at least a portion of the leading end surface of the sheath
adjacent to the one wire against the body tissue, moving the said leading end surfaces
through the opening so formed, and then moving a leading end surface of a second wire
through the opening. This rejection suffers from the same defects as were discussed
immediately above with regard to claim 57, and we will not sustain it.
(3)
Claim 62, which depends from independent claim 57, and claims 73-75, which
depend from independent claim 70, stand rejected as being unpatentable over Taricco in
view of Lee. These claims add to the claims from which they depend the step of
expanding the leading end portion of the sheath while it is disposed in the vessel by
applying fluid pressure against an inner side surface of the sheath.
Lee has been discussed above with regard to the Section 102 rejection of claim
70, and the structure and method disclosed by Lee is equally as unresponsive against
claim 57, which also requires that the end of the cannula, along with the wires, initiate
formation of an opening in the vessel. Taricco discloses a cannula in which initial piecing
of the vessel is accomplished by the cutting edge 25 of the tip of a trocar 22, which
protrudes beyond the end of the cannula. Of course, claim 62 incorporates all of the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007