Appeal No. 98-2771
Application 08/428,863
collective teachings of the applied references, we consider
that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
the art to provide the flexible, semi-rigid platform of Gvoich
(as modified above) with a resilient pad on the upper surface
thereof so as to gain the advantages taught or suggested in
Mansfield, Oaks and Morozov. As for the dimensional
limitations set forth in claim 15, we consider that providing
a platform and pad in Gvoich (as modified) wherein the
thickness of the pad and platform are each “on the order of
1/4 inch” would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
the art given the teachings and suggestions of the applied
prior art references. Note particularly, the showing in
Figures 1 and 2 of Mansfield that the pad (14) and platform
(12) are generally of the same thickness, and the discussion
in Mansfield (col. 3, lines 44-48) concerning platforms (32,
34) made of fiberglass sheet having thicknesses of 3/16 inch
or 5/16 inch, both of which are “on the order of 1/4 inch.”
To summarize our decision, we note that 1) the examiner's
rejection of claims 1 through 3, 7 through 10 and 13 under
18
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007