Appeal No. 2004-2249
Application No. 09/820,159
lines 19-23; Figure 1.) Further details of this appealed
subject matter are recited in representative claims 1 and 6
reproduced below:
1. A method for creating a separation of
posterior cortical vitreous in an eye from an eye
retina consisting of the steps [sic] of introducing
plasmin into the vitreous humor so as to create a
separation of the cortical vitreous from the retina
without removal of the vitreous humor from the eye.
6. The method as defined in claim 1 wherein said
introducing step further [sic] consists of the step of
using a sustained release device to introduce plasmin
into the vitreous humor of the eye.
The examiner relies on the following prior art references
as evidence of unpatentability:
Zaffaroni et al. 4,135,514 Jan. 23, 1979
(Zaffaroni)
Trese et al. 5,304,118 Apr. 19, 1994
(Trese)
Claims 1 and 5 on appeal stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as anticipated by Trese. (Answer at 3.) In addition,
claim 2 on appeal stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Trese. (Id. at 3-4.) Further, claim 6 on
appeal stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Trese in view of Zaffaroni. (Id. at 3.)
We affirm these rejections. Because we are in complete
agreement with the examiner’s factual findings and legal
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007