Appeal No. 2001-2205
Application 09/228,987
of Hubbard would include a pressure sensitive surface of the
strip and a tab on the strip having a hook surface which are
engageable for maintaining the strip in a stretched, restricting
position about a patient’s limb, as in claim 11 on appeal.
Again we find that the examiner’s assertion that the applied
patent “inherently discloses every functional limitation recited
in the claims” is without foundation in the applied prior art
reference and that the examiner has not otherwise established
that the natural result flowing from following the teachings of
the Hubbard patent would be an apparatus like that claimed by
appellant and which is capable of functioning in the manner
defined in appellant’s claim 11 on appeal. Thus, we will not
sustain the examiner’s rejection of claim 11 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by Hubbard.2
In rejecting claims 1 through 5 and 15 through 17 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) based on Johnson, the examiner urges that this
patent discloses a pliable wrap (10) for a limb, a surgical wrap
2 Like appellant (reply brief, page 5), it is our view that
U.S. Patent No. 4,573,482 to J. Webster Williams, Jr. is perhaps
the most pertinent of the patents of record in this application.
15
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007