Appeal 2006-1417
Application 09/326,405
requisite nexus between the asserted commercial success and window
systems within the scope of the appealed claims. Ex parte Remark,
15 USPQ2d 1498, 1502 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1990).
Furthermore, we agree with the Examiner that the Declaration
evidence fails to establish that any commercial success was due to the merits
of the claimed invention rather than other activities on the part of the present
assignee, e.g., advertising, sales campaigns, and associations with
established customers. See Cable Elec. Prod. Inc. v. Genmark, Inc.,
770 F.2d 1015, 1026-27, 226 USPQ 881, 888 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Accordingly, it is our judgment that Appellant’s evidence of
nonobviousness, including the Declaration evidence of commercial success,
does not outweigh the evidence of obviousness presented by the Examiner.
In re Rynkiewicz, 390 F.2d 742, 746, 156 USPQ 462, 465 (CCPA 1968).
In conclusion, based on the foregoing and the reasons well stated by
the Examiner, the Examiner’s decision rejecting the appealed claims is
affirmed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007