Appeal 2006-2139
Application 10/292,221
in the Brief (filed August 4, 2005) and Reply Brief (filed December 12,
2005).
ISSUE
Appellant argues that Meyers does not anticipate claim 1 because
Meyers fails to disclose a “free-form line drawing that a user can, through
the exercise of imagination and creativity, interpret and supplement to
construct an image that incorporates but is not determined by the free-form
line drawing” (Br. 4). In particular, Appellant contends that Meyers does
not meet that limitation because the objective of Meyers is to reproduce a
single, previously determined image. Id.
Accordingly, the issue before us in this appeal is whether the partial
sketch on each of the leaves of Meyers’ book is a “free-form line drawing
that a user can, through the exercise of imagination and creativity, interpret
and supplement to construct an image that incorporates but is not determined
by the free-form line drawing” as called for in claim 1.
FINDINGS OF FACT
In the preferred embodiment of Appellant’s workbook, each sheet
embodies a free-form line drawing, such as line drawings 22, 24, 26 (Figs. 3
and 4) in the form of a scribble or squiggle. In using the workbook, the user
is encouraged to use creativity and imagination to interpret the drawing and,
based on the interpretation, to supplement the drawing to construct a
complete picture (Specification 4).
Meyers discloses a book comprising a plurality of leaves 5 bound
together by wire fasteners 6, for example. Each leaf is provided with a
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013