Appeal No. 2004-1439 Page 2
Application No. 10/044,142
INTRODUCTION
Claim 25 is illustrative:
25. A collapsible structure comprising:
a panel having a foldable frame member having a folded and an unfolded
orientation, and a fabric material covering selected portions of the frame member; and
a pair of flotation devices connected to the panel;
wherein the fabric material extends in a flat planar configuration when the frame
member is in its unfolded orientation.
As evidence of unpatentability, the Examiner relies upon the following prior art
references:
Ivanovich et al. (Ivanovich) 5,163,461 Nov. 17, 1992
Price 5,676,168 Oct. 14, 1997
Claims 25-27, 29, 31, 32, 34, 36-38 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Ivanovich.1 Price is added to reject claim 28.2
The claims stand or fall together (Brief, p. 3). We select claim 25 to represent the
issues on appeal with respect to the rejection over Ivanovich. Claim 28 will reviewed
separately as it is rejected separately and argued separately.
Because Appellant has not convinced us of reversible error on the part of the
Examiner, we affirm. Our reasons follow.
1The inclusion of claim 35, a cancelled claim, in the Examiner’s statement of the rejection (Answer, p. 3) is
harmless error. Appellant correctly lists the claims subject to rejection in the Brief (Brief, pp. 1 and 3).
2The listing of Price twice in the Examiner’s statement of rejection is harmless error. Only one Price
reference was applied and Appellant correctly states the rejection in the Brief.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007