staplers is insufficient to establish prior conception of Wýng
claims 7 and 12. That US Surgical sold staplers, does not mean
that Wang conceived of using a stapler as a surgical instrument
on the end of a robotic arm as claimed.
Wang exhibit 2035 is a copy of a notebook with handwritten
notes. For the entry of '11/1211, there is a reference that Wang
',talked to Jeff white", however the entry does not describe a
robotic system where the surgical instrument is a stapler. Even
absent from the entry is the word stapler.
In paragraphs 18 and 19 of Dr. Wang's declaration, Dr. Wang
directs us to another entry from his 1995 notebook (Wang Ex.
2036), annotating an "Earlier mtg with Leon Hirsch" which,
according to Dr. Wang was actually a phone conversation with Mr.
Hirsch. Absent too in this entry is any reference to a stapler,
or a description of a robotic system where the surgical
instrument is a stapler.
In paragraph 19, Dr. Wang states that he recalls discussing
with Mr. Hirsch (during the phone conversation) whether US
Surgical would be interested in a partnership to develop a system
where a stapler was attached to the system disclosed in the ATP
proposal'. Dr. Wang d6ts not state when the phone conversation
Wang relies on the ATP proposal to demonstrate a prior
conception of a robotic system for those claims upon which Wang
claims 7 and 12 depend.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007