Appeal No. 2002-1671 Page 6
Application No. 08/993,985
stent-graft implantable at a treatment site in a body lumen. Claim 56 further recites that
(1) the structural layer is adapted to radially self-expand when deployed at the
treatment site and thereby exert a radial force tending to fix the stent-graft at the
treatment site and maintain patency of the body lumen; (2) the structural layer is further
adapted to be absorbed in-vivo following deployment to gradually reduce the radial
force; and (3) the graft layer is substantially nonabsorbable and adapted to remain at
the treatment site.
The appellant argues (brief, pp. 16-17) that the stent of Kawai is not radially self-
expandable as recited in claim 56 and thus the claimed subject matter is not taught or
suggested by the combined teachings of Kawai and Fontaine as applied in the rejection
before us in this appeal. We agree. In our view, the terms "self-expandable" and "self-
expand" as used in this application and the claims under appeal clearly means that
when a radially compressive force on the structural layer is released the structural layer
will radially self-expand. Thus, Kawai's stent which is made from a shape-memory
material which is radially compressible but requires heating to a prescribed temperature
to radially expand is not radially self-expandable. Thus, the examiner has not correctly
ascertained the differences between Kawai and claim 56 since Kawai does not teach
the self-expandable limitation of claim 56. Moreover, the examiner has not made any
determination that it would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007