Appeal No. 1999-0945
Application 08/786,665
to about 15 centimeters. The examiner has concluded however
that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
the art to construct the envelope (82) of Jarvis to be
anywhere in the range of up to about 15 centimeters, “where it
was used to package an appropriately sized article, or to
provide an article with more or less protection during
transportation of the article” (final rejection, page 2). As
for the recitations in the last eight lines of claim 11, the
examiner has concluded that although the applied reference to
Jarvis does not expressly teach the use of its cushion as
recited in that portion of appellant’s claim 11, the product
sought to be encompassed in claim 11 does not distinguish over
Jarvis. More specifically, the examiner urges
that such “functional language in claim 11 does not in fact
define any specific air pressure differential and certainly
does not define air pressure differentials not encompassed in
the prior art” (answer, penultimate page).
After our review of the teachings of Jarvis, even if we
were to accept the examiner’s conclusion that it would have
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007