Appeal 2007-2026
Application 10/131,772
The figure shows an enlargement of the cell labeled “C” by Appellants, with
the Examiner’s notation of relatively wide and relatively narrow portions.
We agree with the Examiner that cell “C” is bonate. According to the
Specification a cell is bonate if it “has relatively wide end portions joined by
a connecting portion which is, at least in part, relatively narrow”
(Specification 6). As demonstrated by the Examiner’s annotated drawing
above, cell “C” meets this definition.
To summarize, we agree with the Examiner that at least cell “A” of
Ehr’s stent has the general shape of an “I” and is oriented at an oblique angle
to the longitudinal axis of the stent. Because every cell “A” contacts every
other cell “A,” we agree with the Examiner that every cell “A” abuts every
other cell “A.” We therefore agree with the Examiner that Ehr’s stent
anticipates claim 37. Moreover, because all of the cells of Ehr’s stent are
bonate and interconnected, we also agree with the Examiner that Ehr’s stent
anticipates claims 38 and 39. We therefore affirm the Examiner’s
anticipation rejection of claims 37-39.
4. OBVIOUSNESS -- CLAIMS 37-41
Claims 37-41 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious
over Fischell ‘516 and Savin (Answer 4-5).
The Examiner asserts that “Fischell [‘516] discloses a stent consisting
entirely of interconnected, I-shaped, bonate cell structures[, but] does not
disclose that the bonate structures are disposed at an oblique angle” (id. at
5). To meet this deficiency the Examiner cites Savin as disclosing a stent
that can be deployed using a tapered balloon, in a stepped fashion, or by
opening only one end, leaving the other end to act as a filter (id.)
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013