Appeal 2007-1998
Application 09/997,829
2. Claim 106 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over
the combination of Myer, Choi and Michal.
3. Claims 108-111 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over the combination of Myer, Choi, and Wijay.
4. Claims 108-110 and 112 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over the combination of Myer, Choi and Becker.
5. Claims 118 and 119 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over the combination of Myer, Choi, and Banas.
We reverse.
DISCUSSION
Claims 103-105, 107, and 113-117 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) as unpatentable over the combination of Myer and Choi.
Claim 103 is drawn to an implantable drug eluting device. Claims
104, 105, 107, and 113-117 depend directly or indirectly from claim 103.
The device of claim 103 has a compressed undeployed diameter and an
expanded deployed diameter. The device comprises three elements:
1. a radially expandable stent comprising a generally cylindrical wall
surface and having a hollow bore extending longitudinally therethrough,
wherein the generally cylindrical wall surface comprises a plurality of lateral
openings in the wall surface;
2. a coating comprising a polymer and a therapeutic substance
disposed on the wall surface of the stent; and
3. a tubular outer layer comprising expanded, sintered PTFE tape
wound about the outer surface of said stent.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013