Appeal No. 2001-2073
Application No. 09/098,799
novelty is the ultimate or epitome of obviousness. See, for
example, In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792, 794, 215 USPQ 569, 571
(CCPA 1982); In re Pearson, 494 F.2d 1399, 1402, 181 USPQ 641,
644 (CCPA 1974).
As for claim 7 and the requirement therein that the
longitudinal bore of the housing be "smaller than fifteen (15)
gauge in diameter," we agree with appellant's arguments on pages
15-18 of the brief that there is no reasonable basis to modify
the housing (A) of the vaginal syringe of Graham to be smaller
than fifteen gauge, and that if such a modification were made,
the vaginal syringe of Graham would be unusable for its intended
purpose. Thus, we will not sustain the examiner's rejection of
claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on Graham.
In summary: we have
1) reversed the examiner's rejection of claim 6 under
35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph;
2) reversed the rejection of claims 1 through 10 under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph;
1414
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007