Appeal 2007-2563
Application 10/058,640
taught by Dinh to produce a stent that provides variable rigidity and
longitudinal flexibility” (Answer 7).
DISCUSSION
Anticipation by Dang
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 10, 11, 13, and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as anticipated by Dang (Answer 3).
Claim 1 is drawn to a stent having “serpentine bands” and “wishbone
connectors, each . . . having an elongate portion which . . . does not overlap
longitudinally with . . . the two serpentine bands” and which has “two legs”
at the proximal and distal ends of the elongate portion. The Examiner finds
that both elements are described in Dang’s stent (Answer 3-4; Findings of
Fact 6, 7). Fig. 2 from Dang is reproduced below.
Fig. 2 of Dang has been marked-up to show the correspondence between the
structural elements of Dang’s stent and the stent of claim 1.
We agree with Examiner’s findings that Dang’s W-shaped elements
satisfy the limitation recited in claims 1 and 5 of “serpentine bands”
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013