Appeal No. 2006-1769
Application No. 09/784,292
more permanent connection between the strap member and the back
waist region. The appellants noted that in the embodiment of Figure 1
of Keuhn, Jr., in which both ends of the strap member are releasable,
the strap member is shown as having parallel waist and leg edges.
(Appellants’ brief, pp. 6-7).
We disagree with the appellants’ position. In the embodiment
of Figure 6, Keuhn, Jr. describes that the strap member (64) adjacent
the back waist section (29) can be formed merely from the backing
sheet (24) of the shell (62). In this case, there would be no need for a
“larger bond area” as argued by the appellants because the strap would
be simply an extension of the backing sheet such that there is no
bonding of the strap member to the shell. As such, the embodiment of
Figure 6 of Keuhn, Jr., which shows a curved area on the leg edge of
the strap member (64), would not necessarily require a larger bond
area as asserted by the appellants.
With regard to the teaching of elliptical or triangular strap
members in Sauer, the appellants argue that the waist and leg edges of
the strap members are only non-parallel when one end of the strap
member is permanently attached to the chassis, as is shown in Sauer.
As such, the appellants argue that Keuhn, Jr. and Sauer fail to disclose
or suggest any interchangeability between parallel and non-parallel
waist and leg edges of strap members when both ends of the strap
-10-
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007