Appeal 2007-2563
Application 10/058,640
(Answer 3; Findings of Fact 6). However, we do not agree with the
Examiner (Answer 3-4; Findings of Fact 7) that the tie member described in
Dang meets the limitations of the wishbone connector as recited in appealed
claims 1 and 10.
Dang’s tie member (labeled as “elongate portion”) is shown in Fig. 2
(above) as connecting to the “apex” and inward facing loop of the W-shaped
or serpentine element (Dang, col. 2, ll. 62-67, col. 5, ll. 20-28, and Figs.
2 and 7; Findings of Fact 3, 5). For the tie member to meet the limitation in
claims 1 and 10 of a “wishbone connector . . . having two legs extending
therefrom to . . . the serpentine bands,” it is necessary to find that a portion
of the loop serves as the leg of the wishbone connector. This is shown in our
marked-up copy of Fig. 2 (above) where the tie member with legs
(“wishbone connector”) is filled in with black and the W-shaped element
(“serpentine band”) is filled in with grey. We have interpreted the phrase
“does not overlap longitudinally” to mean that the wishbone connector legs
do not extend into or have a part in common with the serpentine bands. As
the figure shows, in order for the tie member to be described as having
“legs,” the legs must be formed from the loop of the W-shaped element.
That is, the legs coincide with the W-shaped element that comprises the
stent’s serpentine band. Thus, the claim limitation of “does not overlap” is
not satisfied by Dang’s stent because the tie member’s legs have a part
which extends into and is in common with the “serpentine” struts.
Anticipation requires that every element and limitation of the claimed
invention must be found in a single prior art reference, arranged as in the
claim. Karsten Mfg. Corp. v. Cleveland Golf Co., 242 F.3d 1376, 1383, 58
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013