Appeal No. 96-3886
Application 08/275,091
the shell structure itself as well as the
circumferential array of air cushions provided by
the inflated air bags 30 contribute to
immobilization of the injured limb . . . . [page 7,
lines 2-64.]
Turning now to the examiner’s rationale based on Rose as
the starting point of the rejection, a comparison of the
Figure 12 apparatus of Rose to the claimed subject matter
reveals that the Rose device lacks burr closure means coupled
with the sleeve 127 for continuously adjusting the internal
diameter of the sleeve to varying sizes of the cushion 123,
124 after the cushion has been evacuated, as called for in
each of the independent claims. Indeed, in that the outer
protective sleeve 127 and cushion of Rose combine to form a
seamless boot-like enclosure for the leg, and in that the
outer wall 124 of Rose’s cushion is bonded (col. 9, lines 45-
49) to the outer sleeve 127, presumably over its entire
interface surface, there would be no apparent need for
providing a separate closure means for continuously adjusting
the internal diameter of the outer sleeve 127 after the
cushion is evacuated. As to Johnson, while we appreciate that
this reference discloses shell-like members 12, 14 secured
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007