Ex Parte BERG et al - Page 2




                    Appeal No. 2002-1117                                                                                                                                  
                    Application No. 09/569,607                                                                                                                            


                    claimed graft connector is exemplified by that depicted in Figure                                                                                     
                    22 of the application and described on page 20 of the                                                                                                 
                    specification.  Independent claim 1 is representative of the                                                                                          
                    subject matter on appeal and a copy of that claim can be found in                                                                                     
                    Appendix A of appellants' brief.                                                                                                                      


                    The sole prior art reference of record relied upon by the                                                                                             
                    examiner in rejecting the appealed claims is:                                                                                                         
                    Berg et al. (Berg '416) 6,074,416                                                                  Jun. 13, 2000                                      


                    Claims 1 through 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)                                                                                            
                    as being anticipated by Berg '416.                                                                                                                    


                    Rather than reiterate the examiner's full commentary                                                                                                  
                    regarding the above-noted rejection and the conflicting                                                                                               
                    viewpoints advanced by the examiner and appellants regarding the                                                                                      
                    rejection, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper No.                                                                                      
                    12, mailed April 5, 2002) for the reasoning in support of the                                                                                         
                    rejection, and to appellants' brief (Paper No. 11, filed March                                                                                        
                    21, 2002) and reply brief (Paper No. 13, filed June 10, 2002) for                                                                                     
                    the arguments thereagainst.                                                                                                                           


                                                                                    22                                                                                    





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007