Page 7
Appeal No. 2001-1368
Application No. 09/130,904
cushion material (the load-bearing member) both filling the
space defined by the cover (the pocket means) and engaging the
wearer’s hand throughout the space defined by the cover as
required by the claim. Indeed, Eberbach’s objective of
preventing the direct application of pressure to the median
nerve (see column 1, lines 9 through 30) teaches away from a
cushion material which would engage the wearer’s hand
throughout the space defined by the cover.
As Lewis’ disclosure of a hand bandage having elastic
hems around its finger and wrist openings does not cure the
foregoing deficiencies of Eberbach, the examiner’s conclusion
that the combined teachings of these references would have
suggested the subject matter recited in claim 1 is unsound.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of claim 1 as being unpatentable over
Eberbach in view of Lewis.
SUMMARY
The decision of the examiner to reject claim 1 is
reversed.
REVERSED
Harrison E. McCandlish, Senior )
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007