Appeal No. 2003-0220 Page 5
Application No. 09/478,871
Even considering, arguendo, Wessels to be analogous art, we find ourselves in
agreement with the appellant that the rejections are defective and cannot be sustained.
Our reasoning follows, with claim 1 being representative.
lino is exactly the type of prior art airbag over which the appellant believes his
invention to be an improvement, in that it is comprised of a pair of superimposed
circular panels fastened together along their outer edges. Therefore, lino lacks the
twelve-sided polygonal shape specified in the appellant’s claim 1 for the face and rear
panels.
Wessels is directed to an apparatus for drawing circular cups from non-circular
blanks obtained from sheets of metal. Wessels teaches that “[t]he blanks may be
hexagonal, or square or substantially hexagonal or substantially square so as to provide
better utilization of the overall area of the metal sheet” from which they are stamped to
reduce the amount of waste as compared to the prior art practice of using circular
blanks (column 1, lines 37-41). Another reason Wessels uses the disclosed shapes is
to improve upon the manner in which the blank is stretched during the drawing
operation (column 1, lines 42-55). The two shapes disclosed in the drawings
are a square (Figure 4) and a six-sided polygon (Figure 15). A twelve-sided polygon is
not shown or discussed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007