Appeal No. 2005-0485
Application No. 09/303,632
in view of IBM to provide a plurality of the Yanagisawa covers as
modified in view of Adair in a package to facilitate discarding
and replacing the covers as they become soiled or damaged.
Consequently, we shall sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of claim 21 as being unpatentable over
Yanagisawa in view of Adair and IBM.
We also shall sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
rejection of dependent claims 24 through 26 as being unpatentable
over Yanagisawa in view of Adair and IBM since the appellants
have not challenged such with any reasonable specificity, thereby
allowing these claims to stand or fall with parent claim 21 (see
In re Nielson, supra).
V. The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 22 and 23 as being
unpatentable over Yanagisawa in view of Adair, IBM and either
Okamura or Young
Claims 22 and 23 depend from claim 21 and recite adhesive
strip limitations similar to those discussed above in conjunction
with claims 33 and 34. The examiner’s application of either
Okamura or Young to meet these limitations is well founded for
the reasons expressed above.
12
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007