Appeal No. 2004-0370
Application 09/083,086
The appellant argues that “Vujovic does not recognize
‘compressibility, gas volume and pressure’ as being important
factors for permitting rollover. In fact, Vujovic does not even
address ‘rollover’ as a factor affecting sleeper comfort” (brief,
page 5).3 The appellant also argues that “[n]either Polley nor
Vujovic nor Sullivan recognize[s] that ‘roll-over is important to
sleeping comfort, and that proper inflation of an air bag can
preclude on the back sleeping, while still permitting roll-over”
(brief, page 7). The appellant, however, acknowledges that “[i]f
a sleeper exerts enough effort, a forced rollover could occur”
(reply brief, page 2).
The appellant’s arguments are not persuasive because the
appellant’s claim 12 does not exclude the rollover from being a
forced rollover. As acknowledged by the appellant, with enough
effort a person wearing Vujovic’s anti-snoring nightshirt could
3 The appellant argues, based upon the English abstract of
Vujovic which the examiner relied upon in the final rejection,
that Vujovic equates hard materials and an inflatable bag (brief,
page 5). The English translation of Vujovic indicates that by
“solid materials” (claim 5) Vujovic means that the accessory pack
and the air tube are one piece (page 3), not that the accessory
pack can be a solid member which is not inflated.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007