Appeal No. 1999-2365
Application 08/569,999
(8) Claims 12 and 26, Buchman in view of Prandina, Goldstein
and Russell;
(9) Claim 17, Buchman in view of Prandina and Shears;
(10) Claim 18, Buchman in view of Prandina and Scherer;
(11) Claim 19, Buchman in view of Prandina, Scherer and
Russell;
(12) Claim 21, Buchman in view of Prandina, Russell and
Haruvy.
Rejection (1)
The essence of this rejection, as stated on page 4
of the examiner's answer, is:
Prandina discloses the use of a blanket
assembly composed of "at least two
interconnectable blankets" (10, 11) wherein
each blanket has an "upper second covering
surface" and a "lower second covering
surface" (see Figures 1-5; column 1,
lines 52-66; and column 2, lines 1-26).
The skilled artisan would have found it
obvious to provide the emergency care
blanket of Buchman with a "second
rectangularly con- figured flexible
covering" having an "upper second covering
surface" and a "lower second covering
surface" in order to form a larger blanket
assembly to accommodate more than one user
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007