Appeal No. 2005-0980 3
Application No. 09/818,228
4. The nasopharyngeal catheter of claim 1 wherein the nasal catheter further
comprises a radio-opaque stripe.
7. The nasopharyngeal catheter of claim 1 wherein the nasal catheter further
comprises a hydrophilic coating.
9. The nasopharyngeal catheter of claim 1 further comprising a humidifier controlling
the humidity of the gas delivered through the nasal catheter.
PRIOR ART
The prior art references relied upon by the examiner are:
Spofford et al. (Spofford) 5,297,546 Mar. 29, 1994
Daniell et al. (Daniell) 6,050,260 Apr. 18, 2000
(Filed Dec. 1, 1997)
Brain 6,055,984 May 2, 2000
(Filed Nov. 5, 1997)
Bowden et al. (Bowden) 6,374,827 B1 Apr. 23, 2002
(Filed Oct. 5, 1999)
Lethi 6,394,093 B1 May 28, 2002
(Filed May 13, 1999)
REJECTIONS
The appealed claims stand rejected as follows:
1) Claims 1, 2, 6, 8, 11 through 15, 20, 23 and 28 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over the disclosure of Lethi1;
2) Claims 3 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the combined
disclosures of Lethi and Bowden;
1 Claim 23 is included in this statement of rejection since it is readily apparent from the examiner’s
Answer and the appellant’s Brief that the rejection of claim 23 is not withdrawn even though it is
inadvertently omitted in the statement of rejection set forth in the Answer. See the Answer, page 7 and
the Brief, pages 7-8.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007