Appeal No. 1997-1765 Page 3
Application No. 08/324,927
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a protective cover
secured by differential pressure. An understanding of the
invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claims 1,
13 and 19 (the independent claims on appeal), which appear in
the appendix to the appellant's brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Herron et al. (Herron) 4,938,522 July 3,
1990
Robert 2 2,543,891 Oct. 12,
1984
(France)
Claims 1 to 3, 6 to 9, 11 to 13, 15, 18 to 20 and 24
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Herron in view of Robert.3
2In determining the teachings of Robert, we will rely on
the translation provided by the appellant attached to the
amendment filed on August 22, 1995 (Paper No. 5).
3The examiner mistakenly included canceled claims 17 and
23 in the statement of the rejection (answer, p. 4).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007