Appeal No. 1999-0032 Page 5
Application No. 08/525,407
the outlet” to create an airstream therethrough, a motor for
rotating the blower, and a heater element in the housing to
heat the airstream.
Claim 20 stands rejected as being unpatentable over
Guibert, which is directed to providing a heated airstream to
the skin of a patient to produce hyperthermia. Guibert
discloses a horizontally aligned housing mounted on a support
and having an air inlet that is oriented perpendicularly to the
support surface, rather than toward the support surface, as is
required by the appellant’s claim 20. However, the examiner
makes no mention of this limitation, taking the position that
“the differences [sic] between . . . [Guibert] and the instant
invention is the location of an outlet . . . [and] it would be
within the ability of [the] ordinary skilled artisan to
reposition the [Guibert] device depending upon the installation
site” (Answer, page 4, emphasis added). As does the appellant,
we disagree with this reasoning. It is clear that the
inlet in the Guibert device is not “substantially oriented
toward the support surface,” which feature of his invention the
appellant has disclosed as being advantageous because it
minimizes the effect of the noise made by the device upon
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007