Appeal No. 2003-1439
Application No. 09/896,112
sides of a horse, and held in place on a horse with a strap, and
having a plurality of ice pockets on each side. Consequently the
fact that the preamble is nonlimiting misses the point.
In order for a reference to be anticipatory, it must
disclose, either explicitly or implicitly, every element of the
claim. See, In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1326, 231 USPQ 136, 138
(Fed. Cir. 1986). As the Thomas reference does not disclose
sizing the apparatus to fit a horse’s back and sides, the strap to
secure the main panel to a horse, nor a plurality of pockets on
each of the side panels, we are constrained to reverse this
rejection.
II. The Rejection of Claims 3-6, 8-11, and 15 under 35
U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable over Thomas in view of
Brink, further in view of Thielemann
The examiner has found that Thomas discloses the invention
substantially as claimed, including hook and loop fasteners. The
examiner has found that positioning the ice pockets to rest
adjacent to particular muscles would have been obvious since
rearranging parts of an invention requires only routine skill in
the art (Final Rejection, page 3, lines 8-15).
The appellant contends that Thomas only discloses an
apparatus which can be moved from body part to body part, and, as
a consequence, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be led
to simply rearrange parts of these devices to rest adjacent
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007