Appeal No. 2004-1747
Application No. 09/932,723
examiner, although Baxter discloses that it was known in the art
to construct inflatable bladders for package transport comprising
multi-ply layers of puncture resistant materials and plastics,
the reference does not expressly disclose the claimed arrangement
of impermeable inner and outer layers and a puncture resistant
middle layer. However, such a lack of express disclosure in
Baxter does not bring us in disagreement with the examiner that
the claimed bladder would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art. In our view, based on the state of the art
found in Baxter, the disclosure of Leidig is unnecessary in
establishing the obviousness of the claimed inflatable bladder.
The sole argument presented by appellant with respect to
Baxter is that some of the abrasion and puncture resistant
materials identified by Baxter, such as burlap, rayon fabric and
craft paper, are notoriously permeable. Therefore, appellant
concludes that "Baxter does not teach or suggest the use of an
impermeable outer layer in package transport" (page 5 of Brief,
first paragraph). However, the plastics, in general, and
polypropylene disclosed by Baxter are notoriously well-known to
be impermeable, at least to the unspecified degree claimed.
Furthermore, since appellant apparently concedes that the prior
art cited by the examiner teaches the use of impermeable inner
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007