Appeal 2006-1521
Application 09/815,877
1. Claims 34, 35 and 54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Dickerhoff.
2. Claims 35 and 56 are rejected under 35 U.S.C § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Berke in view of Dickerhoff.
Rather than reiterate the respective positions advocated by the
Appellants and by the Examiner concerning these rejections, we refer to the
Brief and Reply Brief and to the Answer respectively for a complete
exposition thereof.
OPINION
As a threshold matter, Appellants do not separately argue the
appealed claims. Accordingly, we choose independent claims 34 and 35 as
representative claims on which to render our decision.
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) REJECTION OVER DICKERHOFF
Claim 34 is directed to a method for controlling airflow through an
inflatable device having two or more inlet ports for admitting airflow into
the device including the following steps: “providing a plug,” “placing the
plug in an inlet port and retaining the plug in the inlet port” and “introducing
airflow into the device through another inlet port” such that “the plug
restrict[s] egress of the airflow through the other inlet port.”
Claim 35 is directed to an apparatus for warming a person including
the following structural features: “an inflatable cover for disposition on a
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007