Appeal No. 2005-0485
Application No. 09/303,632
and liquid/gas impermeability, manifestly suitable for
Yanagisawa’s objective of preventing keyboard contamination.
Accordingly, we shall sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of claim 32 as being unpatentable over
Yanagisawa in view of Adair.
We also shall sustain standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection
of dependent claims 35 and 36 as being unpatentable over
Yanagisawa in view of Adair since the appellants have not
challenged such with any reasonable specificity, thereby allowing
these claims to stand or fall with parent claim 32 (see In re
Nielson, 816 F.2d 1567, 1572, 2 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir.
1987)).
Claim 37 depends ultimately from claim 32 and requires the
sheet to be formed as an envelope with an elongated opening along
an elongated top edge portion. Adair’s laptop computer enclosure
embodies such a construction, and the examiner’s conclusion that
it would have been obvious in view of same to form Yanagisawa’s
cover with a like construction to allow the keyboard to be used
in a sterile environment is well taken.
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007