Appeal No. 2000-0583
Application No. 08/955,984
blowing the body portion as compared to the waist portions, as
recited in claim 14, would appear to us to result in reduced
waist and cone thicknesses in relation to the body thickness
(see Table 4). As the examiner has neither contested that the
recited method steps will result in relatively reduced waist
and cone thicknesses nor asserted that the Levy balloon
possesses such relatively reduced waist and cone thicknesses,
the examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case that
the Levy balloon is the same as the balloon recited in claim
14. Thus, we cannot sustain the examiner's rejection of claim
14, or claim 15 which depends from claim 14, as being
anticipated by Levy.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 1-5, 14, 15 and 27-30 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is
affirmed as to claims 1-5 and reversed as to claims 14, 15 and
27-30. The examiner's decision to reject claims 27-30 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
21
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007