Ex Parte Pearson - Page 13



          Appeal No. 2006-1667                                                            
          Application No. 10/775,634                                                      
          than the cells at the ends (col. 5, lines 46-53; figure 16).2                   
          Hence, the pad still has a substantially convex overall shape,                  
          tapering from the central region toward the ends.  Thus, it                     
          reasonably appears that Pepe’s inflatable pad would maintain its                
          convex shape at least under the weight of a lightweight mattress                
          and a lightweight person such as an infant.                                     
               We therefore are not convinced of reversible error in the                  
          examiner’s rejection of claims 6 and 12.                                        
                                         Remand                                           
               We remand the application for the examiner and the appellant               
          to address on the record whether the combined disclosures of                    
          Gordon, Reeder and Pepe would have rendered obvious to one of                   
          ordinary skill in the art under 35 U.S.C. § 103 the subject                     
          matter of claims 1-3 and 7-9.                                                   
                                        DECISION                                          
               The rejection of claims 1-3, 7-9 and 13-18 under                           
          35 U.S.C. § 102(e) over Gordon is reversed as to claims 1-3                     
          and 7-9 and affirmed as to claims 13-18.  The rejections under                  
          35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 4, 5, 10 and 11 over Gordon in view of                
          Reeder, and claims 6 and 12 over Gordon in view of Pepe, are                    
                                                                                         
          2 Pepe states, regarding figure 16, that “[t]he cell upper surface is shown at  
          52 without any body weight thereon, and numeral 53 indicates the cell upper     
          surface contour when deflected downwardly by body weight” (col. 5, lines 47-    
          50).  Numeral 53 is omitted from figure 16.  It reasonably appears that         
          numeral 53 should correspond to the curve in figure 16 with less convexity      
                                           13                                             



Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013