Appeal No. 1997-4430 Application 08/421,463 end of a shorter leg nesting behind the bulbous end of a longer leg to minimize the overall thickness of the folded pipe. As to claim 61, we find that the claimed replacement pipe product is not anticipated by the Laurent teaching. As can be discerned from the Laurent document, an initial cylindrical tube is provided with an elastic memory, which initial tube shape is subsequently returned to or regained from a deformed tube configuration (Figs. 1A, 1B, 1C, and 1D). This is not 4 the replacement tube product of claim 61 which requires a memory for a “reduced non-circular form”. The Obviousness Rejections We reverse the respective rejections of claims 39 through 41 and 65, and claim 66 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, for reasons set forth, infra. 4 We note that the teaching of Laurent is somewhat akin to the embodiment of appellant’s Figures 1 and 3 wherein a memory exists for a rounded tubular shape. 7Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007