Appeal No. 2003-1171
Application 09/809,648
Representative claim 1 reads as follows:
1. A trocar, comprising:
a. a body assembly;
b. a cannula assembly attached to the body assembly to
define a bore therethrough; and
c. an obturator assembly for sliding engagement in the bore,
which obturator assembly comprises: (i) a shaft having a distal
end for insertion into a patient, where the distal end of the
obturator has a tip which is non-conical and which has an upper
face and a lower face which taper from the shaft to form a V-
shaped distal end of the tip; and (ii) wing elements which are
located between the upper and lower faces proximate the distal
end of the obturator which are spaced approximately 180 degrees
from one another.
THE PRIOR ART
The references relied on by the examiner to support the
final rejection are:
Danks et al. (Danks) 5,545,150 Aug. 13, 1996
Wolf et al. (Wolf) 5,810,863 Sep. 22, 1998
Dunlap et al. (Dunlap) 5,941,852 Aug. 24, 1999
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1 and 3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Danks.
Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Danks in view of Wolf.
Claims 1, 2 and 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Dunlap.
Attention is directed to the main and reply briefs (Paper
Nos. 6 and 9) and to the answer (Paper No. 7) for the respective
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007