Appeal No. 2003-1374
Application No. 09/591,947
electrical energizing means associated therewith. Compare the
Answer, page 4 and the final Office action dated August 13, 2002,
pages 2-3, with the Brief in its entirety. Nor do the appellants
dispute the examiner’s finding that Prescott teaches employing the
claimed elongated array of semiconductor light sources and
electrical energizing means in a catheter similar to the one
described in Hayes. Compare the Answer, page 4 and the final
Office action dated August 13, 2002, page 3, with the Brief in its
entirety.
The dispositive question is, therefore, whether it would have
been obvious to employ the elongated array of semiconductor light
sources and electrical energizing means taught in Prescott as the
light sources and energizing means of the catheter described in
Hayes. On this record, we answer this question in the affirmative.
We note that the appellants do not dispute the examiner’s
finding that Prescott teaches that semiconductor light sources are
interchangeable with optical fiber light sources for the purpose of
delivering energy to targeted tissue in the catheter art. Compare
the Answer, pages 4-5, with the Brief in its entirety. The
appellants also do not dispute the examiner’s finding that Hayes’
optical fiber light sources are used for such purpose. Compare the
Answer, page 4 and the final Office action dated August 13, 2002,
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007