Appeal No. 2005-0878
Application No. 09/911,620
structure 3b of Eberl corresponds to appellant’s prosthesis and
clearly does not correspond to the claimed comfort pad (Brief,
page 6).
Appellant’s arguments are not persuasive. Eberl clearly
teaches a mastoprosthesis made of a soft synthetic member (i.e.,
synthetic material member 7), where the back side of the
mastoprosthesis is provided with a concavity which is filled with
a pad member (i.e., pad member 3b; see col. 1, ll. 6-9, 15-18,
39-43, and 45-52). Eberl teaches that this pad member 3b is
releasably connected to the synthetic material member by Velcro
strip fasteners to facilitate removal for washing or replacement
(col. 1, l. 65-col. 2, l. 15). Accordingly, Eberl teaches a
prosthesis having a front and rear surface, with the rear surface
capable of being positioned adjacent to a wearer’s body, a pad
having a shape “generally congruent” to the shape of the
prosthesis, and hook and loop means for removably attaching the
pad to the rear surface of the prosthesis (see Figure 3 of
Eberl).
For the foregoing reasons and those stated in the Answer, we
determine that the examiner has established that Eberl describes
every limitation found in claim 19 within the meaning of section
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007