Appeal No. 96-4041
Application 08/264,704
portion of the conduit means that extends within the
enclosure.
In that appellant has not separately argued the rejection
of claim 7 apart from claim 5 from which it depends, we will
also sustain the rejection of this claim.
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 6, 8, 9 and
10. The examiner’s position that it would have been obvious
to one of ordinary skill in the art in light of the reference
teachings to dispose the conduit means at a position adjacent
to the patient’s face (claim 6), provide a first opening in
the form of a V-shaped split (claim 8), provide closure means5
in the form of a strip or release tape (claim 9), and/or add a
third port within the enclosure in communication with means
for delivering heated, humidified air to the enclosure (claim 6
10) is not well taken. In each instance, the examiner has
failed to indicate any teaching in the applied references or
5We note that the first opening of appellant’s Figure 3
embodiment is not V-shaped as shown wherein the flaps 28 are
flat, but rather only when said flaps are spread apart.
6In order to bring the drawings into compliance with 37
CFR § 1.83(a), this feature should be shown in the drawings.
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007