Appeal No. 2005-1002
Application No. 09/991,247
osteoinductive, osteogenic, or other fusion enhancing material”
(column 5, line 66, through column 6, line 5).
To remedy the foregoing deficiency in Michelson ‘973, the
examiner turns to Boyce ‘187.
Boyce ‘187 discloses a number of osteoimplants including a
cylinder or dowel 70 similar in type to those disclosed by
Michelson ‘973 for insertion between adjacent vertebrae (see
Figures 1d and 2b; column 1, lines 26 through 30; and column 14,
line 6, through column 15, line 5). To manufacture the implants,
Boyce ‘187 expressly contemplates a machinable composite of
cortical bone particles (see column 4, lines 26 through 52) and
biocompatible components such as bioabsorbable materials (see
column 7, line 55, through column 12, line 10). Boyce ‘187 lists
a number of advantages afforded by such osteoimplants including
load-bearing strength, the presence of pores which permit
revascularization and incorporation by the host, an osteogenic
quality which promotes new host bone tissue formation, and easy
fabrication of osteoimplants having different sizes and/or shapes
(see, for example, column 2, lines 7 through 33).
The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a
secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure
of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention
must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references.
Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007