Appeal No. 96-3549
Application 08/171,484
snaps 50A, Wilson (column 5, line 20) expressly sets forth at
least two preferably ?identical? male 50A or female 50B snap
elements, which as disclosed can alternatively engage mating
elements on the front and rear of the garment.
The rejection of claim 76 under 35 USC § 103
We sustain the rejection of claim 76 under 35 USC § 103.
Above, we found that claim 76 lacks novelty. Lack of novelty
is the ultimate of obviousness. See In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d
792, 794, 215 USPQ 569, 571 (CCPA 1982). Thus, claim 76 is
appropriately rejected under 35 USC § 103 as being unpatentable.
The rejection of claims 77 through 79 and 82
We do not sustain the rejection of these claims under 35 USC
§ 103.
This panel of the board fully appreciates the examiner’s
point of view on this obviousness issue as articulated in the
answer (Paper No. 14).
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007