Appeal No. 97-1979
Application 08/278,335
depend therefrom, as being anticipated by Astle.
Nor shall we sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103
rejection of claims 16 and 22, which depend from claim 14, as
being unpatentable over Astle in view of Holland.
The examiner cites Holland for its teachings that kites
can be provided with depending keels to attain desired
aerodynamic characteristics and that the various components of
a kite can be secured together by adhesive tape (see, for
example, column 8, lines 26 and 27; and column 10, lines 35
through 37). In short, these teachings do not overcome the
above noted deficiencies of Astle with respect to the subject
matter recited in parent claim 14.
We shall sustain, however, the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103
rejection of claims 17 through 20, which depend from claim 14,
as being unpatentable over Astle in view of Babbidge.
Babbidge discloses a lighter-than-air kite 10 filled with
a pressurized gas such as helium to lift the kite in the
absence of sufficient wind. The body of the kite is designed
to have enhanced thermal insulation and gas retention
properties. To this end, the “fabric” of the kite is an
envelope 11 made of
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007