Wisselink, Willem

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Dec 19, 2019

12342996 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Dec. 19, 2019)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
12/342,996 12/23/2008 Willem Wisselink 12730/429 (PA-6360-RFB) 3683
48003 7590 12/19/2019
BGL/Cook - Chicago
PO BOX 10395
CHICAGO, IL 60610
EXAMINER
WEISBERG, AMY REGINA
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3649
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
12/19/2019 PAPER
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________

Ex parte WILLEM WISSELINK

Appeal 2018-004497
Application 12/342,996
Technology Center 3700
____________

Before MICHAEL J. FITZPATRICK, MICHELLE R. OSINSKI, and
JEREMY M. PLENZLER, Administrative Patent Judges.

FITZPATRICK, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

Appellant1 appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s
final decision rejecting claims 1–24, which constitute all of the pending
claims. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We reverse.

1 Appellant is the “applicant” under 37 C.F.R. § 1.42(a) and identifies Cook
Medical Technologies LLC as the sole real party in interest. Appeal Br. 2.
Appeal 2018-004497
Application 12/342,996

2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The Specification
The Specification’s disclosure “relates to delivery systems for
implanting endoluminal devices within the human or animal body for
treatment of endovascular disease.” Spec. ¶2. In particular, it “relates to
delivery systems having a novel catheter system to cannulate a contralateral
portion of an endoluminal device.” Id.
The Claims
Claims 1–24 are rejected. Final Act. 1. Claims 1, 10, 18, and 20 are
independent. Claim 1 is illustrative and reproduced below.
1. An endovascular delivery system comprising:
a delivery device for delivering a prosthesis to a body
vessel, the delivery device comprising a sheath;
a bifurcated prosthesis disposed in the sheath of the
delivery device and having a main body, a first limb and a
second limb, each limb having a lumen;
a snare catheter, pre-loaded with the bifurcated prosthesis
in the sheath, and having a proximal end, a distal end, a lumen
therebetween, and a snare opening system between the
proximal end and the distal end;
a snare mechanism disposed within the snare catheter
that is capable of forming a loop external to the snare catheter
and having at least one free end exiting the snare catheter distal
end;
where at least a portion of the snare catheter is positioned
external to and adjacent to the bifurcated prosthesis and at least
a portion of the snare catheter is positioned within the lumen of
one of the limbs, and both portions are enclosed within the
sheath.
Appeal Br. 33.
Appeal 2018-004497
Application 12/342,996

3
The Examiner’s Rejections
The rejections before us are:
1. claims 1–3, 5, 7–12, 14, 16–18, and 20, under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(e), as anticipated by Saeed2 (Final Act. 7);
2. claims 4, 6, 13 and 15, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), as
unpatentable over Saeed and Konya3 (id. at 16–17);
3. claim 19, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), as unpatentable over Saeed
(id. at 18); and
4. claims 21–24, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), as unpatentable over
Saeed and Ouriel4 (id. at 19).
Oral Hearing
An oral hearing was held December 5, 2019. A transcript of the
hearing will be entered in due course.
DISCUSSION
Claim 1 recites, among other things:
a snare catheter, pre-loaded with the bifurcated prosthesis
in the sheath, . . . where at least a portion of the snare catheter is
positioned external to and adjacent to the bifurcated prosthesis
and at least a portion of the snare catheter is positioned within
the lumen of one of the limbs [of the bifurcated prosthesis], and
both portions are enclosed within the sheath.
Appeal Br. 33.
Each of the remaining independent claims includes similar claim
language. See id. at 35 (regarding claim 10), 36 (regarding claim 18), and
37 (regarding claim 20).

2 US 2008/0208309 Al, published Aug. 28, 2008 (“Saeed”).
3 US 6,517,550 B1, issued Feb. 11, 2003 (“Konya”).
4 US 6,641,606 B2, issued Nov. 4, 2003 (“Ouriel”).
Appeal 2018-004497
Application 12/342,996

4
Relying on Figure 1 of Saeed, the Examiner found that Saeed teaches
“a snare catheter (40), loaded within the bifurcated prosthesis in the sheath.”
Final Act. 7 (citing Saeed Fig.1). Relying on Figure 7a, the Examiner found
that Saeed also teaches “the limitation where both portions, that is the
portion of the snare catheter external and within the lumen of one of the
limbs, are enclosed within the sheath.” Id. at 8 (citing Saeed Fig. 7a).
Appellant argues that “neither [Figure 7a] nor any other or the
accompanying text support the Examiner’s argument that the escort catheter
is disposed within a limb of the prosthesis in a preloaded state and prior to
delivery.” Appeal Br. 31. Appellant explains:
Figure 7a according to Saeed shows the escort catheter and the
third guide wire are moved into the cuff [i.e., limb] after the
[sheath] portion 33a covering the tip of the escort catheter has
been released. This is not a disclosure of both portions of the
escort catheter enclosed within the sheath in the preloaded state
or any portion disposed within a limb in the preloaded state.
Id. Appellant’s characterization of Saeed is correct.
Saeed explains that “[o]nce the first component 19 is properly
positioned, the first releasable portion 33a of the restraining device shown as
the sheath 30, is released as shown in FIGS. 6–7.” Saeed ¶73; see also id.
¶65 (first component 19 refers to the trunk 14 and cuff 22 of bifurcated
prosthesis 12). “Release of the first releasable portion 33a expands the trunk
14 and the cuff 22 in the aorta, and also releases the distal end of the escort
catheter 40 from its engagement under the first releasable portion 33a of the
fabric sheath 30.” Id. ¶73. Thereafter, “the escort catheter 40 is . . .
translated along the pre-positioned second guide wire 36 extending into the
now expanded cuff 22 as depicted in FIG. 7.” Id. ¶74.
Appeal 2018-004497
Application 12/342,996

5
Accordingly, Saeed does teach that its escort catheter is preloaded
with its bifurcated prosthesis in a sheath and also teaches that a portion of
the escort catheter may be advanced into the cuff. However, Saeed teaches
the latter only after the sheath has been removed from the portion of the
catheter to be advanced into the cuff. Thus, Saeed does not teach any
portion of the escort catheter both positioned within the cuff and enclosed
within a sheath. In other words, not all of the claim limitations are ever met
by Saeed’s device simultaneously.
This deficiency is fatal to all of the rejections, which we accordingly
reverse.
SUMMARY
Claims
Rejected
35 U.S.C. § Reference(s)/Basis Affirmed Reversed
1–3, 5, 7–
12, 14, 16–
18, 20
§ 102(e) Saeed 1–3, 5, 7–12,
14, 16–18,
20
4, 6, 13, 15 § 103(a) Saeed, Konya 4, 6, 13, 15
19 § 103(a) Saeed 19
21–24 § 103(a) Saeed, Ouriel 21–24
Overall
Outcome
1–24

REVERSED