Appeal No. 2005-1675 Page 7
Application No. 09/523,503
shows referencing to the distal femur, e.g. the non-prominent condyle, the
prominent condyle, and the trochlear region, and this is reaffirmed when
Whiteside states that "A saw blade 190 having saw teeth 192 is placed against
cutting guide surface 83 (not shown) on the femoral side of the guide plate 82
and a rough cut of each of the two distal femoral condyles is made, one cut on
each femoral side of guide plate 82.'' (see col. 9, lines 57-61), thus in order to
make the cut the guide 82 must be referencing to the condyles as shown in
Figure 19.
In our view, the method steps of claim 8 are readable on Whiteside as follows:
(1) installing a fixture onto the distal femur which references the non-prominent condyle
or trochlear region (as shown in Figure 19, the cutting guide 80 (i.e., fixture) is installed
onto the distal femur and references the non-prominent condyle or trochlear region by
the positioning of the guideplate 82); and
(2) resecting the femur in accordance with the reference made in (1) (as shown in
Figure 19, after the cutting guide 80 is positioned onto the distal femur the femur is cut
(i.e., resectioned) in accordance with the positioning of the guideplate 82).
For the reasons set forth above by the examiner and this panel, claim 8 is
anticipation by Whiteside. Accordingly, the decision of the examiner to reject claim 8
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Whiteside is affirmed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007