Appeal No. 2002-2319 Page 11
Application No. 09/129,197
member 11 formed of a sheet of fabric having two-way stretch characteristics and
having a width slightly greater than the circumference of the arm and cast to be
accommodated to provide overlapping edges on which hook and loop pile fasteners are
mounted and a puppet-like head 14 joined to the tubular member 11. The puppet-like
head 14 incorporates upper and lower lip portions 15, 16 of a size to accommodate the
fingers and thumb respectively of the user and an appropriate shaping insert 28 is
provided to maintain the desired head contour (column 4, lines 52-60). Ackley teaches
the tubular member 11 is of a length to extend around the elbow and onto the upper
arm to a point close to the armpit of the intended wearer so as to envelop any arm cast
normally encountered, including those in which the cast 19 extends onto the upper arm
(column 4, lines 15-20).
Appellant argues that Ackley’s sling is not applied to an arm but rather to an arm
and cast assemblage and consequently is not concerned with alleviating pressure
points when a patient’s arm is directly supported in the sling (brief, page 11), that the
puppet head 14 cannot limit relative movement of the panel towards the elbow end
because, in Figure 2, Ackley shows the filler 28 being spaced from the patient’s fingers
and hand (brief, page 12) and that Ackley nowhere teaches or suggests that the stretch
characteristic of the material, coupled with a closed aft end and member engaging a
portion of the hand, does or should limit relative movement of the panel towards the
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007