Appeal No. 2000-1486 Page 9
Application No. 08/968,871
in Figures 1 and 2, or a legging 5 as shown in Figures 3 and
4. Homewood teaches that a loop 6 may be attached to one end
of the legging 5 in order to retain the legging in place.
After the scope and content of the prior art are
determined, the differences between the prior art and the
claims at issue are to be ascertained. Graham v. John Deere
Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17-18, 148 USPQ 459, 467 (1966).
Based on our analysis and review of Lennon and claim 21,
it is our opinion that the differences are: (1) a loop member
for limiting movement of the body member upon the user's
appendage, (2) the tubular body member being formed of buoyant
material comprised of foam material shaped for having thin
marginal portions adjacent the one end and adjacent the loop
member, (3) a cover material of elasticized fabric, and (4)
the tubular body member being in the form of a generally
closed oval in cross-section when in repose.
With regard to the first three differences noted above,
the examiner determined (answer, pp. 3-4) that each of these
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007