Appeal No. 97-0374 Application 08/310,493 claimed invention over the display rack structure suggested by the applied prior art. See In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 555, 188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975). We further consider that this position is bolstered by the disclosure in Murphy (column 3, lines 18-30) wherein it is expressly noted that neither the specific shape nor the specific dimensions of the posts therein “are critical to the invention,” thus suggesting to those of ordinary skill in the art that other configurations of the posts, and by inference, the recesses which receive those posts, would be acceptable and well within the skill of the art. The only restriction on the shape of the posts in Murphy is that they must be of uniform cross section throughout so as to facilitate their formation by a continuous extrusion process. A triangular shape, as well as a square or a round shape would clearly permit such a formation process. Based on the foregoing, the examiner's rejection of claims 6 and 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 relying on the teachings 6Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007