Appeal No. 2006-1891 Παγε 4
Application No. 09/874,218
appellants' opinion while a foam scaffold may be retained in the fixation component, the
foam scaffold does not partially encapsulate the fixation component.
We don't find this argument persuasive because Gresser clearly discloses that
the foam coating may surround or coat the implant device or fixation device (paragraph
0072). In this regard it is apparent the examiner regards the fixation component to be
the threads 42 depicted in Fig. 4a.
With respect to the rejection of claim 14 as anticipated by Gresser, appellants
argue that Gresser fails to disclose reinforcing means.
We agree. In our view, Gresser's buffer component can not be considered a
reinforcement component because although it protects the device from acidic
degradation (paragraphs 0043 to 0047), it does not reinforce the structure of the device.
Therefore, we will not sustain this rejection as it is directed to claim 14.
We turn next to the examiner's rejection of claims 1 to 14 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(e) as being anticipated by Melican.
The examiner finds:
Melican et al. discloses in Figures 1-5 and paragraphs 10-12,22-31,36,41-
42,46-51, and 59-63 multiple embodiments of a resorbable tissue scaffold
implant comprising a open cell porous foam tissue scaffold component 12,
a partially encapsulated fixation component, and reinforcement
components. Reinforcement may be accomplished by reinforcement
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007