Appeal No. 2000-1665
Application 08/752,529
exchangeable, by merchandising personnel as the facts and
circumstances to be displayed change from time to time.
Claims 1 and 23 are representative of the subject matter
on appeal and a copy of those claims can be found in the
Appendix to appellant's brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner as evidence of obviousness of the claimed subject
matter are:
Thalenfeld et al. (Thalenfeld) 4,718,626 Jan. 12, 1988
Petrou 5,628,858 May 13, 1997
(filed May 18,
1995)
As indicated in the seven rejections set forth on pages
4-9 of the examiner’s answer, the claims before us on appeal
stand provisionally rejected under the judicially created
doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as being
unpatentable over various claims of copending Application No.
08/940,859 taken further in view of Thalenfeld and Petrou, or
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007