Appeal No. 1999-2364
Application No. 08/562,816
(most of) the left side of the bag, and open at the top of the
bag, Chapuis’ Fig. 2 meets the recitations of claim 11 that
the top sheet and bottom sheet are connected at their bottom
and side edges and unconnected at their top edges.
Claim 11 recites that the bottom sheet has "a width of
about 50-75 inches, [and] a length of about 80-90 inches."
Chapuis does not disclose any dimensions, but the examiner
asserts that "[a] change in size is generally recognized as
being within the level of ordinary skill in the art," citing
In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 463, 105 USPQ 237, 240 (CCPA 1955)5
(answer, p.7).
Appellant contends on page 9 of the brief that "There is
absolutely no reason why one of ordinary skill in the art
would provide the dimensions set forth in claim 11 in Chapius
[sic]." We disagree. The sleeping bag shown in Fig. 2 of
Chapuis would obviously have to be of sufficient height and
width to comfortably accommodate the user. If the user were
taller than six feet, for example, in our view the bag would
5 In re Rose states that the size of an article "is not
ordinarily a matter of invention" (220 F.2d at 463, 105 USPQ
at 240).
13
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007