Appeal 2007-1096
Application 10/872,181
35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Nelson in view of Pflueger (Answer 4).
Within each rejection, the claims stand or fall together because Appellants
have not separately argued any individual claims. We select claims 1 and 2,
respectively, as representative of each rejection for the purpose of deciding
this appeal. 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii). Claims 1 and 2 read as follows:
1. An apparatus for treating snoring caused by fluttering of the
uvula and soft palate, the apparatus comprising:
a stiffening member configured to be affixed and
substantially adjoined to a predetermined portion of the uvula
and soft palate;
at least one piercing post for affixing and adjoining said
stiffening member; and
a backing for each piercing post from the at least one
piercing post for keeping said stiffening member in place and
for providing a predetermined pressing force of said stiffening
member to the uvula and the soft palate.
2. The apparatus of claim 1 wherein said stiffening member
comprises a mesh-like material.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The claimed apparatus is for “treating snoring caused by fluttering of
the uvula and soft palate.” Claim 1 comprises three elements: 1) a
“stiffening member,” 2) “at least one piercing post,” and 3) a “backing for
each piercing post.”
The purpose of the claimed apparatus is to inhibit fluttering of the
uvula and/or soft palate (Specification 3: 30-31; 5: 11-13). To achieve this,
the Specification states that the “stiffening member” covers a portion of the
uvula and/or soft palate and is compressed against the uvula and/or soft
palate (id. at 6: 24-27). We interpret the stiffening member in the context of
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013