Appeal No. 96-3886
Application 08/275,091
Appealed claim 26, a copy of which is appended to appellant’s
brief, is illustrative of the appealed subject matter.
The references of record relied upon by the examiner as
evidence of obviousness are:
Rose 3,745,998 Jul.
17, 1973
Johnson 1,531,268 Nov. 8,
1978
(Great Britain)
Claims 26 to 29 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Rose and Johnson. The examiner 2
considers that Rose generally discloses in Figure 12 the
claimed subject matter, with the exception of the use of a
plastic protective sleeve that is regionally connected to the
bladder 123, 124 during use (answer, page 3). However, the
examiner is of the view that it would have been obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art "to modify the casting device of
2In the final rejection, claims 26 to 29 were also
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as being
based on a disclosure that fails to comply with the written
description requirement of that paragraph, however, this
rejection has since been withdrawn. See page 2 of the answer.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007