Appeal No. 2002-1487 Page 7
Application No. 09/404,461
removed by the cutting means 20 through the first channel 62 defined by the spirally
wound tube 58.
Claim 1
Claim 1, the only independent claim on appeal, reads as follows:
An angled rotary tissue cutting instrument comprising
an outer member including a rigid tube having proximal and distal portions
connected by a bend and a cutting window defined at a distal end of said tube;
and
an inner member rotatably disposed within said outer member and
including an inner tube of integral one-piece construction with a helical cut
formed therein in a first direction to define a flexible region adjacent said bend, a
cutting tip disposed at a distal end of said inner tube adjacent said cutting
window, and a first strip of material spirally wound over said helical cut in a
second direction opposite said first direction.
In making the anticipation rejection before us in this appeal, the examiner
determined (answer, pp. 3 and 5-7) that the claimed "inner tube of integral one-piece
construction with a helical cut formed therein" was readable on Trott's inner spiral 60.
The appellants argue throughout both briefs that Trott clearly fails to disclose an "inner
tube of integral one-piece construction with a helical cut formed therein" since Trott's
inner spiral 60 is not a "tube" and does not have a helical "cut" formed therein.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) applies to the
verbiage of the claims before it the broadest reasonable meaning of the words in their
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007