Appeal No. 1999-1491
Application No. 08/386,670
note that Ledesma does not design his pad to be age-specific
and therefore, it is likely that it would be used for a small
child as well as adults. In such a case, a transverse strap
would be an effective addition to the cushion for providing
restraint of the user. Contrary to appellant’s assertions, we
consider that it would have been well within the ordinary
skill of one in the art and therefore obvious to position the
strap in a location that does not impede the surgical process.
Furthermore, appellant's claim 1 does not recite specific
parameters for the positioning of the infant. In the final
analysis, it is our opinion that the examiner has established
a prima facie case of obviousness in the rejection of claim 1
as being obvious over Ledesma in view of Deck. We therefore
affirm the examiner's rejection of claim 1. Since claims 2,
3, 5 through 7 and 10 are grouped with claim 1 and therefore
fall with claim 1, we affirm the examiner's rejection of those
claims also.
11
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007