Appeal No. 2001-2205
Application 09/228,987
Appellant’s flexible material wrap is “for controlling the
positioning of a patient’s limb and for restricting swelling and
the pooling of fluids in the limb resulting from surgery.” To
that end, the elongated strip of stretchable, elastic material is
“adapted to be wrapped about the limb to constrict its size and
to restrict swelling and pooling of fluids in the limb.” The
pressure sensitive surface of the strip and the tab on the strip
having a hook surface are engageable for “maintaining it (the
strip) in a stretched, restricting position about a patient’s
limb.” A “limb” in the context of appellant’s application is
obviously an arm or leg of a human patient and is clearly of a
relatively small size (i.e., diameter and circumference) as
compared to the torso of a patient.
When we look to the abdominal wrap of Hubbard, we find a
device that is sized to be applied around a patient’s torso and
to apply a constricting force thereto, i.e., a device about
forty-eight inches in length. Contrary to the examiner’s
conclusion, because of its relatively large size and specific
manner of construction, we do not believe that the abdominal wrap
of Hubbard is “adapted to be wrapped about a limb to constrict
its size and capable of restricting swelling and pooling of
13
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007