Appeal No. 2003-1502 Page 2
Application No. 09/365,860
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a device for retaining a prosthesis within a
body passage. An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of
exemplary claim 1, which has been reproduced below.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Kwan-Gett 5,151,105 Sep. 29, 1992
Inoue (Inoue ‘671) 5,676,671 Oct. 14, 1997
Inoue (Inoue ‘179) 5,976,179 Nov. 2, 1999
Claims 1, 2, 5 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being
anticipated by Inuoe ‘179 or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Inoue ‘179.
Claim 52 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Inuoe
‘671 or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Inoue
‘671.
Claims 1 and 2 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by
Kwan-Gett.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the Answer
(Paper No. 16) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007