Appeal No. 97-0649
Application 29/031,122
At pages 6-7 of the answer, the examiner argues that the
stitching (seams) is a de minimis feature of the overall design,
in part because it could not be seen in the photograph of the
Natuzzi 474 sofa. However, it does not follow that just because
a feature is not visible on a reference design, it is a
de minimis feature of the claimed design. In the present case,
if we were to assume arguendo that the seams of the Natuzzi 474
sofa are not visible or difficult to see, that would increase the
difference in overall appearance between Natuzzi 474 and the
claimed design, since the application drawings, by which the
claimed invention is defined, show the seams quite plainly.
Accordingly, the examiner’s decision to reject the claim is
reversed.
REVERSED
IAN A. CALVERT )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
WILLIAM E. LYDDANE ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
JAMES M. MEISTER )
Administrative Patent Judge )
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007