Appeal 2007-2026
Application 10/131,772
(Reply Br. 7-8). Appellants argue that because the geometry of the Fischell
‘971 stent is consistent from end to end, deploying it in a tapered fashion
will result in one end of the stent covering a greater amount of vessel wall
than the other end (id. at 8). Thus, Appellants argue, “[i]t is not obvious that
it is desirable to cover a greater amount of the vessel wall or to have this
difference in vessel wall coverage. In addition it is not obvious that the
difference in vessel wall coverage would result in a successful outcome”
(id.).
We do not find this argument persuasive. As discussed supra,
Fischell ‘971 discloses that in addition to being useful when placed into
arteries, the stent “could also be applied to other types of vessels of the
human body such as bronchial tubes in the lung or the bile duct in the liver”
(Fischell ‘971, col. 4, ll. 32-36). Savin disclose that their stent delivery
system “may be used to deliver stents to, for example, coronary arteries,
peripheral arteries (e.g., popliteal artery) and visceral arteries, veins, and to
the biliary tree, the urinary tract, and the gastro-intestinal tract” (Savin, col.
6, ll. 27-34).
Given the variety of suitable locations and broad applicability for both
the Fischell ‘971 stent and the Savin delivery system, we agree with the
Examiner that one of ordinary skill would have reasonably expected that the
delivery system of Savin would be useful in deploying the Fischell ‘971
stent in a tapered configuration, resulting in a stent having I shaped bonate
cells oriented obliquely, relative to the longitudinal axis of the stent. We
therefore affirm the Examiner’s rejection of claims 33-36 over Fischell ‘971
and Savin.
15
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013