Ex Parte Lashinski et alDownload PDFPatent Trials and Appeals BoardMay 9, 201913648190 - (D) (P.T.A.B. May. 9, 2019) Copy Citation UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE 13/648,190 10/09/2012 20995 7590 05/13/2019 KNOBBE MARTENS OLSON & BEAR LLP 2040 MAIN STREET FOURTEENTH FLOOR IRVINE, CA 92614 FIRST NAMED INVENTOR Randall T. Lashinski 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 ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. PDLB.003A3C2 2138 EXAMINER GANESAN, SUBA ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3774 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 05/13/2019 ELECTRONIC 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. Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the following e-mail address(es): j ayna.cartee@knobbe.com efiling@knobbe.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte RANDALL T. LASHINSKI and GORDON B. BISHOP Appeal2018-002540 1 Application 13/648, 1902 Technology Center 3700 Before JAMES T. MOORE, MEREDITH C. PETRA VICK, and ALYSSA A. FINAMORE, Administrative Patent Judges. FINAMORE, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134(a), Appellant appeals from the Examiner's decision to reject claims 12, 16, and 28-33. We have jurisdiction under § 6(b ). We reverse. 1 We reference herein the Specification filed October 9, 2012 ("Spec."), Final Office Action mailed June 22, 2016 ("Final Act."), Appeal Brief filed June 19, 2017 ("Appeal Br."), Examiner's Answer mailed November 2, 2017 ("Ans."), and Reply Brief filed January 2, 2018 ("Reply Br."). 2 Direct Flow Medical, Inc. is the real party in interest. Appeal Br. 3. Appeal2018-002540 Application 13/648,190 SUBJECT MATTER ON APPEAL The invention "relates to medical methods and devices, and, in particular, to methods and devices for percutaneously implanting a stentless valve having a formed in place support structure." Spec. ,r 2. Claim 12 is the sole independent claim on appeal and representative of the claimed subject matter. We reproduced independent claim 12 below, emphasizing the limitation at issue. 12. A prosthetic valve comprising: a tubular elastic stent having a distal end and a proximal end with a passage extending from the distal end to the proximal end of the elastic stent, a valve positioned within the passage; and an annular sealing structure positioned on an edge of an exterior of the elastic stent at the distal end, the sealing structure comprising an inflatable cuff that is in fluid communication with an inflation channel, the inflation channel including a one way check valve. Appeal Br., Claims App. ( emphasis added). REJECTIONS The Examiner rejects the claims on appeal as follows: claims 12, 16, and 30 under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as unpatentable over Salahieh3 and Rogers4; and claims 28, 29, and 31-33 under 35 U.S.C. § I03(a) as unpatentable over Salahieh, Rogers, and Ashworth. 5 3 US 2005/0137687 Al, pub. June 23, 2005. 4 US 5,697,968, iss. Dec. 16, 1997. 5 US 6,471,723 Bl, pub. Oct. 29, 2002. 2 Appeal2018-002540 Application 13/648,190 ANALYSIS Independent claim 12 recites "an annular sealing structure positioned on an edge of an exterior of the elastic stent at the distal end." Appeal Br., Claims App. ( emphasis added). Appellant argues Salahieh does not disclose this limitation. Reply Br. 2-3. Appellant also argues there is no motivation to modify Salahieh's disclosure to result in the recited seal configuration. Appeal Br. 5-7. Appellant's arguments are persuasive. According to the Examiner, "Salahieh includes an annular seal 200 near the distal end ([F]ig. 158, lower ring 200), however, this seal does not appear to be positioned on an edge of the exterior of the elastic stent at the distal end. " 6 Final Act. 3. The Examiner further finds "Salahieh teaches that alternative [seal] configurations will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art (para. 109), suggesting that modifications to the depicted annular seals would have been contemplated by an ordinary worker in the art." Id. The Examiner then determines it would have been obvious to "position an annular seal 200 on an edge of the exterior of the elastic stent at the distal end as an obvious alternate placement of the seal in order to anchor the distal edge of the stent to prevent leakage around the distal end." Id. 6 Appellant represents that "Salahieh does not teach 'an annular sealing structure positioned on an edge of an exterior of the elastic stent at the distal end."' Appeal Br. 5. The Examiner finds such. Final Act. 3. A direct comparison of Figures 15B and 15C leads us to question this finding and Appellant's representation. Although normally sectional views require hatching (see 37 CPR§ 1.84(h)(3)); perspective views do not. We question whether the bottom of Figure 15B illustrates the bottom thickness of the stent with the same lines the Examiner and the Appellant deem to be a gap between the edge and seal 200. Those same lines appear in Figure 15C and do not appear to delineate a gap. If prosecution of this application continues, the Examiner should explore the issue in the first instance. 3 Appeal2018-002540 Application 13/648,190 Although Salahieh suggests alternative seal configurations, we agree with Appellant that the Final Office Action does not expressly identify a known seal configuration having a seal positioned on an edge of the distal end of the stent, as recited in the disputed limitation. Appeal Br. 5---6. To the extent the rejection's reasoning is based upon the prevention of leakage at the distal end of the stent, we agree with Appellant that such reasoning is rather conclusory, insufficiently supported, and appears to us to be hindsight-based. Appeal Br. 7. As Salahieh does not disclose leakage at the distal end, the rejection does not provide a sufficient association between leakage and the recited seal configuration. For these reasons, the rejection has not demonstrated persuasively that it would have been obvious to modify Salahieh's disclosure to result in the seal configuration recited in the disputed limitation, absent the teaching found in Appellant's Specification. Alternatively, in support of the rejection, the Examiner finds Figure 15B of Salahieh discloses the disputed limitation. Ans. 7-8. In making this finding, the Examiner interprets the limitation to include "an annular sealing structure positioned within a margin of the edge of the distal end." Id. at 7. According to the Examiner, the Specification does not provide any special technical definition for the term "edge," and the broadest reasonable interpretation of the limitation includes the embodiment described in Figure 16A and paragraph 1897 of Appellant's Specification. Id. at 6-7. 7 Paragraph 189 of the Specification corresponds to paragraph 191 of the publication of the present application, namely US 2013/0041458 Al, published February 14, 2013, to which the Examiner refers. 4 Appeal2018-002540 Application 13/648,190 Appellant argues the Examiner's interpretation is incorrect because it is based on a particular embodiment in the Specification. Reply Br. 2-3. We agree. When construing claims, the PTO applies to the verbiage of the proposed claims the broadest reasonable meaning of the words in their ordinary usage as they would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, taking into account whatever enlightenment by way of definitions or otherwise that may be afforded by the written description contained in applicant's specification. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Although we interpret claims in view of the specification, we must not unnecessarily import limitations from the specification into the claims. E-Pass Techs., Inc. v. 3Com Corp., 343 F.3d 1364, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2003). Claim terms are to be given their ordinary meaning, absent any indication that their use in a particular context changes their meaning. Chef Am., Inc. v. Lamb-Weston, Inc., 358 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2004). If the specification does not assign or suggest a particular definition to a claim term, it is appropriate to consult a general dictionary definition of the word for guidance in determining the ordinary and customary meaning of the claim term as viewed by a person of ordinary skill in the art. Comaper Corp. v. Antee, Inc., 596 F.3d 1343, 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2010). As the Examiner correctly finds, Appellant's Specification does not define the term "edge." Ans. 8. Accordingly, we tum to the ordinary and customary meaning of "edge," which is "the line or area farthest away from the middle." Edge Definition, American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language ( 5th ed. 2011 ). This interpretation is consistent with the use of the term "edge" in the Specification, and there is no indication that the term has 5 Appeal2018-002540 Application 13/648,190 a different meaning in the context of Appellant's Specification. In particular, the description of the embodiment of Figure 16A in paragraph 189, on which the rejection relies to support the claim interpretation, does not use the term "edge" to describe the position of the cuff, i.e., sealing structure, on the stent and does not provide a reason to deviate from the term's ordinary and customary meaning. Consequently, the rejection's interpretation of the disputed limitation to include an annular sealing structure positioned within a margin of the edge of the distal end of the stent ignores the ordinary and customary meaning of the term "edge" and improperly imports a description of the embodiment shown in Figure 16A of the Specification. Giving the disputed limitation its broadest reasonable interpretation, the limitation requires an annular sealing structure positioned farthest away from the middle of an exterior of the elastic stent at the distal end. As noted above, it is unclear from Figure 15B if seal 200 is, in fact, spaced at all from the distal end of the stent. However, the Office bears the burden of establishing the case of obviousness. The Answer's finding that Figure 15B of Salahieh discloses the disputed limitation is based on an improper interpretation, and the rejection has not shown persuasively that Salahieh discloses the limitation. In view of the foregoing, we do not sustain the rejection of independent claim 12 and claims 16 and 30 depending therefrom. The rejection of claims 28, 29, and 31-33 also suffers from the deficiencies discussed above (Final Act. 4--5), and we similarly do not sustain the rejection of these claims. 6 Appeal2018-002540 Application 13/648,190 DECISION The decision to reject claims 12, 16, and 28-33 is reversed. REVERSED 7 Application/Control No. Applicant(s)/Patent Under Patent Appeal No. 13/648, 190 2018-002540 Notice of References Cited Examiner Art Unit Page 1 of 1 3774 U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS * Document Number Date Name Classification Country Code-Number-Kind Code MM-YYYY A US- B US- C US- D US- E US- F US- G US- H US- I US- J US- K US- L US- M US- FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS * Document Number Date Country Name Classification Country Code-Number-Kind Code MM-YYYY N 0 p Q R s T NON-PATENT DOCUMENTS * Include as applicable: Author, Title Date, Publisher, Edition or Volume, Pertinent Pages) The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, u Boston New York, Page 568 V w X *A copy of this reference 1s not being furnished with this Office action. (See MPEP § 707.05(a).) Dates in MM-YYYY format are publication dates. Classifications may be US or foreign. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office PT0-892 (Rev. 01-2001) Notice of References Cited Part of Paper No. ~ ' ~ ~ ~ , . ~ ~ 1 t {! \ -"'., ~ ·~ § § § ~ ~ ,,..., L Ol J I*IF1__,Hr _.._ -~- I EDITION Houghton. 1\tfifflin Harcourt BOSTON NE\iV YORK Words are induded in this dktlonary on the basis of their tisage. Viords that a.re known to have currentt,.,,.deJrwxkregistrations are show.n with an lcnitia.t capital and are a!soidentUied as trademarks, No· investigation has been madc of common-law trademark tights fa any w:ord. l:>ecau~e such. inve.sttgatjJ:m. is impracticable, 'Ihe indusfon of any word inthL~ dictionary' is not, hc1".'cve.t, an expressto11 of tile ptthl~her', opinion as to whether i}.f not it is subjec~t to proprietary rights. Indeed, no definition in thisdicticnary is to be regarde&a;,· affecting·thev;;Jh:hty of·any tradem;irJ,;. }\_niexic211 flei~ttag~ .and the e~gle Jo.gy any means, dectronic or mtcha,,lcal, lnducHng pho;:oc.opylng ,ind 1t,cordi11g, or hy any information .storage or :retrieval system without the prior written permiBsiOn of Bm,ghtcm Mifflh, Harcburt unless such. copying is exinestily permitted by federal copyrightl,l'w. A.ddn:5s. inqufries to: Refeh~i1ee permissions, Houghton Mi11lin Har,.ourt, 222 BerkdeyS'tr,;et, Boston, MA 02116. The Amerkan llerltage dictionary of the Englii;hfang,uage, - ·· 5th ed. p.cnL Prevlou;; ed.; 2000. ISBN 978-0-547-04101-8 l. English la11guage- Dictionaries. PE1628.A623 201 l. 2011001}777 34 367 B 9 Hl-QGV-1B 17 1615 14 §~·-·t .. k~s-:J,e (3l:d~f:.1f:-);-Gerttucl£ Cal).')line- .-190t~?-~:2003~ ATnertcs~J.-s·,·i:im-'- n:·.;t~ "Vho_-lli t9-26 b~,:.~ th,J:·fix:~r\.~"'fJm"i_n.t,S -s~tin1 fhe·: En§l.fah (_JJi'.it:nd, doir:1e·so-:in J4ll<.HJ.t,S: and 3J r.n-1..t1ut,:1s. ~~.;.:i.f~:i~~~.:~ .0-dt!s.f:~) .1ill..-andent dl)· Of ~:.es6pou1µ.1ia.-0-n_ -th?- site: f:f p.r~S~l~day Urf.a: h1 :>fftH-httast -~ltukey: -A _tr~aJor -Ch,.'i~t_i~? -L-en~e.r. n~t;;:r the th.itd- -_crntu.ry -AD:,, it -l,~3 rul{,d- ~-l ·v~r1c.u.s: tit)1e.s by· th-:; Romans. _·.Byr.,ru.1~ tin·~$; .:..-~.rah.5,_:a;J- shoypinr~ _~u-i.:.l (::_tI_tcr~in,m~~:t _:anrl servJng_:a pr~arilr :~a1hur_- b2.ri ·_are~. [-After f:'4:~re _ _-Cit}'.· l;{ft o~t ,the. -l'~:e·~s,; F}or~ti1;~r~--1.itk of 3 .l9.9 l h..;r<:.:,k by Amerk~:1 writer ),Jf:! Gru:reau.] =-~"dx~::t _ ~.ff'!'?t{ _fr. --1:._ ·Th~--{">:C,Cttrr,enc·: (;f .z:r:e.a~e1· _,~pe.'-Cl~s- d.ivf~t1~ih~ -_and hiol;g_kRi -~len~ty jJ\ ;}~ E~-~tDne than /n eith,2~· Gf_ tb_e ,itljaCt';l~i: _~C()1{1gr:a} ;.~nnJin~_mjiJ .. .:,s.- 2 .. A- ob.en~ {:)t 01h_c;r. liP~1istiC u..f:Cits_. ~~d~1,,~~ .... (t3h>r} ;1. ()ne that i;;jge!ri ::=u.~h ?S ;J. t-v9J ·fr1.r 1_rJJnm-ing_ th12 edg~ of a ·lin\,f1. ~~:d~}~; _ t,:-t~-~ n-. -~ tc,ul,. suCh as_ a c}}i·~:ek_ th"1~ h~ :a r;~rting:·c._t~?3. X7X".~~s:-.:; ... ~'i-.~v~s;~ (tjtwfa·-' )_· a:hi.1: -adge .. ·vva:ys.{- 1-vaz:l}. ad~:.- ·1.- V•/ith _ri1<: edge: :fo:ren1,.:-~t. 1-. Ori:~ _hf> w~f~-, .o:r ·to~i1ard tht': edg~. f-::.'S~:~~=- .. ~~:-'.~~::--th (~1_,tw---(rrth.'j, f\/I-oofria I:7C~7-1S4"9, Br:itish tVTikY:no.te-d fer ~-er ·;-e~Ji~tic r:.l!vdS, _;Sci~~i~ -as '.-~-:a_s(le_ RfiC.ktf1-nt ( 1~00\ whic4 brpk_c? ·a~f~1r: .fJ,'i-_Jn-r t-be prt""'FfH-e-nt CrDH"t~( s-ty.:.c-: ~<{~,h-~~J-f~jf'frig) n . ..Soilllth~ng. tltai: f{:,nn~ or- 3eJves Ets -an edg_{;·:-o_r- borde,: ~:s~~~J.:y :{e,te} ·~~{i_ -~...:_e~{'· ::"'f_ .. _est 'L .Ni2rVt,~s o_:: fr.rttil:ble: · 11ie _perforh!ers iv,e;z ,dgy a.~ th?)' :wai_tedf;Jr the. sho--!'? t<:-.bzgfn~· ?, _(iavh:,g .a _sb;,ip of bH:Jng ~dge:.un edg}' Vlit_ 3~ Daring.-pr2-yccative;; _or :trend~s"t~ti.ing;_ a;1_ {.;xhff,i_f.ian_ afi·;jgyj?~Otdg_r~'fJJ;s:: 1111. ,:;dg)'·-i]i~[!U: :-ecigt~ ... iy ttdv~_:-~-~---sflgl!~neS~ fl. ~~,1h fi!Jo eth (t:#1) n: •. 1, 1-:tir lett€t 0, u~d- in:(Jld-E.nglisJ1 an.d ()kl Sa:-:.:0:n 1mi,n.,uscr_ip~s to_ x~p.rest>nt-bo~h; 1b.e i;:Jkd_t%s.1~11ind ~th). pf-Connd { th) oi t'lode.rr,-~J:gHs.h 1}-.,j~-' r~nd i~ ffi-l"'cl:err~ I~~landk oi~~,::rgi-~phy t()· 1e1~et.en1_ :Lh.:: -voice 542 SI.1iHior1 y~-ars_- .:,_go. 2.~ Of o:r t¢l;1!lng: To i.t grcuii of fitsMli.~.d ~rfFbydkd ,~U3r:i.nc ?r_ganl,;;_i:?s ~_at_2re tfr<:_·t~lie_st k.r:ov:ro_·re:q.iajjls of r~1ufH.c:c:l\_u~:~ t~t~ ~Jnd dc1ie-· from b~tvN1en 560 d.nd · .5112 · 1:.1iHi::t:1. ye3_r.s_ agq.. i:Att'er !'f,e_._Ed1~ica1<µH Ell..; ip:.~irtthe.m 1\;,;;t;;_--?]ia. i,;,:hefe_ ilif: Jint .s.ui:'.h fossils \'ierc,- fOun~.J >{d,~-:l.~-~~: :~e~'f~-1::s~l) _ adJ. Fit ID ~ eatr;,_1.; ~51)eci.1Uy hy hu_.m::uis:- ~~l_bie roo'i_s;._ ~~ e£!ible--n·1-~hY~~on1 . .;~~ r~ . . Sor.:.1e~f11_:1g 11.t_Jo b~ -t:.,!ten; fi.Yorl: eilibl:lt sud:- c~S vegetabir.s.-and- m.cat_ fLatt:·LrrtJn eefibtJ,1:,; <_ T~tin edet.?.,JO eat;:_S~ ed- in App 1.) ~'i,biVi,ty, edl\.bie--nss~ ,,, ~';~,:::"';.H~t (eldffit!} it 1.- A :11;,· :or Ct)n1n1.m.:d. (Lr.tin-&l-id'i.n·n·<..11euft{· _pa5t1n1.n'.iripk tif-fid:c.e_re>·t_..::,. deda.re- :; 2--J f.t·.:.·, tx- -t-- dict.t_{\ tc spe---.ak::.s.ee deik-hi A_pp. I.] ~):::~t.~-.tu.re: -o:bs~n-'Utio:'ti tiu.H prdv-{dM'. the·_fo.r.n1-daifo:J for ·th&.-t;d{fi:ce of-evJh-tt_f.:1na-1y thtm)'. Uvlid.ile ~:nghc;l'! < (~id Fre~~tb < La-:.in. ae-Yltii.cfiiin :<. tu?d{f:-.~are~ to build ; etBdts, a bL(dcl.t:1g ·-1· .}ici.1rz, .:f)'d ,3{$,l,{y (edJ •. fV} tr,v, •riecl, -fy,lng, -fies fo mstruc, esp~ci(sffr "' as- tc,: -e4Coo:~a-~<:· irRf'f!~ict_-:.i_al, }nJ'Jrat i)t __ sp_ll-it'~:.l :i:1.1_\p:r~ve1:1~rlt. [i~d'i.d01_e EngHsh tdl~e-r: < qJd Ft:ench- e.difter < Late Latin. ~cthj_icr);:;;, to Lnstntct ()'P_ii·JtuiDy < latin~_:tz) b-u1.kl;·s~-e:13111.PrC;£,l-ed.tkf-i 1-€§'n. ~~~~~- .. sr::,~~}'.!.:.::~~l~ {{dtn-bli1·:·~,_ ---bi+r·t ~: -. t)0&)--A ._c~t,b'f t?a51.o:..':I1i :s~:otfanC_.{)n ti1'f: :Ff:rth:Df "F<;rfti.:.--Ori-g:i.r~;:.Jl:{ a sn.1cill ~-ertJe.z.i:enJ lli.ld€r tb:e -1>r-oa:cti:on of 0:;"~::1::~~'a!!'~~;;t:;1':,i~!,t~f ;,;;:n:,f'~,~~~I:;:: ;;~~-m, 1t ins .•i~i~~~:~!rl~f ~;~.~~J[f!(:;~~i~:,~~f J:!~:if fi£j\:n11~:~ and wa1:_~0t1.qur:.:.:y;;_l~ f!t ~{iui_.m~s fin~~ bY Vi~igotl1:~ ~_u1gatbns,.-C{u~d.- exs, Turk~- and ·Ru:~sians; Hdd by Greece. a_fter 1926., it .s,,.,a.~ re_s.tor~d- to Iurltey in- 1-923. , · ~~:~t~~·:·~{:-S'~}ed/1-~Jni ~~ tu!!j~:J-_;-ip-~)f i~ntral; N~\v- Jirs~y.Sriu~fn-;;;:·.st of Nt;h- Yurk Ci1:-?· ll·,,y~s :ui~ .-s~:: :nf ·_~11mn~vr Ed~son~; ~:fon}} 11zrk~.alK1--ra~,:ory: ~~'S~:s.i~~-~-~ Thomas Alv~ 1f;4?--.l9?tl .. A.rr1erk:i1~1j.nve.nrot ~Y~~v J?if~nt-tx1. m6re_._tha)::i _a _ _tl~ou!:!llnd inv~ntionS,. ~-:.~-l)J~.g them. the: rr~CrQpf~one (J.~J-?)r tht p.'~.._lncg;aph (J.373}, ·ff;UJash- fon,;_f:om Pmis .. -5. On~ th;.lt dnse!:y resemh~~s_ ai1. orJg-!:1-1aJ; a -ve.r:":.-iur..:_ 'l!I,:; boy·-~v,J . ; il smt~n-er edition of"hfa- f.:-df't~r.. [i\.:iiddk.E~e;H~:h ~(Jtcio·n, vers.~0::1, trans_h~t~_q;1 <_ I.a.tin i!di.tf~-1:--idit:iti;-:-.._ pobli.01.U.:it1} z:ri)~hfrb.On <. i:d:-tu-s,_pa~t p4~-tici_p!:e::of.ed_en.:>.:.):-J} 1•.1:1blt~.h) pr,~,clur,;-e;.- ~,;;::~_:f...nr:Ll ~~i_~ ~_&:i''"·~-i~t{§~: (edt:'-t~i-flt·d.?.1:j(). r_?,. vi. -sd_,,i ... tors .. ,at ... huge_ ( ,-1';jt7;~) An ~dit()r o~: ~>"lrite:r wh,:-, .coi'itd.burk~. u_) a pub_U,:atio.r:: but is not part Qf ,.b€ fiJ11-!(m€ st~ff. ~~~t-\t~~ ... ~"~·:-:'~_t _{~,i'~-t6~~,e:-?l}n. 1 ~ An :1r_tJde Jn_ a-_put;h,atic.n ~~~P~-·es;;l'ng_ the -op1nJon :of 1t.~ editors c.~ pubµshs~-..;. 2. __ A e-o-mmt-'3;t~u:1r on tet~)J_f?iDn ur r-adi.-li {~"f.ptcs.~i1.tg:thti-cpinfo~· f;f the .statitm er net\-'{{frk .-;:.· .aq}. 1-. ()f Gt:_~da:f.fng ti)· tll:_edit~r- o.i·.dt·U.ting; £in editr :3~e: if J_s1J.m ,~:dito.nat 2 .. T9·_pre~t~n;:_··~(il_ op_:tr.?.i.on in th:c: :g1il&e uf an o-bjt-:ttJve -rep.Jr-:. -ed'i~torr~~".ah,i/liattka1·_(-~-B'--z3.t-. ~h?n) n. --s,dti~tctri~a~~J":zer _N. ~':·~Ht(;s-§*f ::..~~~'; n. Th~ :~i>-:fH:"!;~o:h. plur,D p.r(nioL:.H ·used by 2.n editt"i.risJ.- !.,St: i_1_1 ex_pres;;H1.g -~he 9p~nJ.f)!} or pr~int of vt,t:}V of..! P-°:.11)ljc~tjqn's 1nanag{::- m,.:nt. {'~d~t~?~:_ §~> (;f;:~~;-f .~'i,: __ _pL -~H:ors ._5~1 t:~ief Tb~: eCity.i· having. ~na1_ rf:-- :_;:yfJnsi\:.:i"Jn.H_r_ig t~ the .Hi_bJ,;:-.,, the· 01~igin:al inhd=1:it:1ut1 t.VEJ".t'. rle_si::.end:\1tts. of E%~RL ~= .. ~-:.k~s-~1~~-t~: (~l'J,;i·:--1!'.:.la{')_ r:::. 1,, A_. uUIUJb~r :::if~- ::S,,::_hlifi.i.:: }teopfr: iil'habit: in§ :1ncieJit Morn~ 2.::I11e_ Sem:itic };n:r~:.-iJ:gf· -0-( t~ie .Edt\ni.it~s. :---:E-tt1orn:' it·ish adj. ~~r.·rr a:bbr. f~Stefrr Daylighr Tit.11? ~~)J:::..\_ {e 1d.-e'.'::.{-.:.:i3_.f) n: ·.A .. <.:ry~t:;illl!..·;;:_:a:u:id: C1:lI 11?~-2 0_ii~ -~hat_-il4t5: :;-:.~ z. ;;,.TI.on,gJ.helati_ng a_g .. :p.t.. 111e:·-~otidCopy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation