Appeal No. 2001-2512
Application No. 09/248,742
or backpack. In addition, the appellant has not submitted any
evidence to establish that the Rettenberger chair would fall over
if a backpack were attached. It is well established that arguments
of counsel can not take the place of evidence. Pearson at 495 F.2d
1405; 181 USPQ at 646.
In view of the foregoing, we will sustain the examiner’s
rejection of claim 16 as being unpatentable over Rettenberger in
view of Bradbury.
We turn next to the examiner’s rejection of claims 17 and 18
over Rettenberger in view of Bradbury and Amato. Appellant, in
response to this rejection, argues that it would not be obvious to
combine the Rettenberger chair with the Bradbury back pack because
Bradbury teaches a lawn chair style folding chair and Rettenberger
discloses a three frame folding chair and it would not be obvious
to transfer the structure of one chair type to the other. The
appellant also argues that were the back pack disclosed in Bradbury
put on the back of the Rettenberger chair, the Rettenberger chair
would fall backward.
We will sustain this rejection for the same reasons as stated
above for the rejection of claim 16 over Rettenberger in view of
Bradbury.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007