Appeal No. 2002-0450
Application No. 09/142,814
DISCUSSION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellants= Specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the
Examiner's Answer for the examiner=s complete reasoning in support of the rejection,
and to the appellants= Brief for the appellants= arguments thereagainst. As a
consequence of our review, we make the determinations which follow.
Background
Appellants claim a material for use in a wound dressing or wound implant, the
material comprising a plurality of beads, wherein each bead comprises a porous core of
a first bioabsorbable material and a substantially non-porous layer of a second
bioabsorbable material around said core.
According to appellants= specification, the porous core of the first bioabsorbable
material is a bioabsorbable sponge, for example, a product of freeze-drying or solvent
drying of a solvent liquid dispersion. This sponge material generally has irregular,
interconnected pores. The porous core is enclosed in a substantially non-porous layer
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007