Appeal No. 98-2031
Application 08/794,154
42 through 49 and 51 through 57 have been canceled.
Appellants’ invention relates to goggles, such as those that may be used for swimming or
otherwise for isolation of the eyes of a user from the outside environment. As noted on page 3 of the
specification, lines 5-10, the invention more specifically addresses goggles having a sealing pad
associated with the frame of the goggles to form a substantially airtight seal between the frame and the
user’s face adjacent the sealing pad. The sealing pad is indicated as including a compliant and resiliently
deformable gelatinous elastomer which forms the airtight seal to the user’s face under slight to moderate
pressure. Independent claims 1 and 37 are representative of the subject matter on appeal and a copy
of those claims, as they appear in the Appendix to appellants’ brief, is attached to this decision.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the appealed claims
are:
Nishiyama 5,093,940 Mar. 10, 1992
Runckel 5,331,691 July 26, 1994
Chen 5,334,646 Aug. 2, 1994
Claims 1, 2, 37, 38, 40, 41, 50, 58 through 60, 64 and 65 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Runckel in view of Chen.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007