Appeal 2007-0811
Application 10/128,997
the narrow veins. We regard this as an express teaching or suggestion in the
prior art for the use of the tapered flexible tip on the lead in Warman. We
also regard the tip 24 disclosed by Williams as teaching a tapered tip for the
same purpose.
Appellants argue that there is no teaching in Warman for the lumens
to be isodiametric as claimed in claim 3. On the contrary, we believe that
the diameter of the outside of the lead of Warman is shown as uniform and
Figure 2 is a typical cross section of the lead. We believe that the Examiner
is correct in concluding that there is no evidence to assume that the lumens
are not isodiametric. We find that the Examiner has shown Warman
discloses isodiametric lumens by a preponderance of the evidence.
With respect to the argued 120 degrees limitation of claims 7 and 20
the Examiner states that it would have been obvious to arrange the
electrodes in various formations, including being 120 degrees apart, in order
to insure proper and efficient contact. Answer, page 6. We agree. It is
apparent to us that the exact angle between the contacts is based partly upon
anatomy, which is well known, and partly upon the geometry of the biased
portion of the lead. One of ordinary skill would have found the 120 degree
separation to have been obvious, inasmuch as the prior art clearly recognizes
the importance of contact, and not only contact, but contact at the correct
location. The level of skill with respect to an implantation pacemaker is
quite high, both with respect to training and education and consequences of
failure of the device. Thus, the exact angle between the electrodes is well
within the skill in this art.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013