Appeal No. 96-0005
Application 07/722,599
(without any change in structure whatsoever) by an operator
seated on the deck panels 66 in a forwardly facing position
adjacent the smaller watercraft’s steering wheel (see Figs. 11
and 12). Similarly, in the embodiment of Figs. 11-15 of the
Japanese publication, an operator sitting in either of the
seating compartments 7 on the larger unpowered watercraft 25
clearly has the capability of reaching and operating the controls
4 of the smaller powered watercraft 1. Stated differently, the7
watercrafts of Metcalf and the Japanese publication would not
undergo a metamorphosis to new watercrafts simply because the
smaller watercrafts were operated by a person seated on the
larger unpowered watercrafts in a forwardly facing position
adjacent the smaller water crafts’ steering mechanism. See In re
Pearson, 494 F.2d 1399, 1403, 181 USPQ 641, 644 (CCPA 1974) and
Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647, 1648 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1987).
7In making the determinations that Metcalf and the
Japanese publication have such capability we note that, while
patent drawings are not drawn to scale, they may nevertheless be
used to establish relative sizes and relationships between the
various components which are clearly depicted therein. See,
e.g., Vas-Cath Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d 1555, 1565, 19 USPQ2d
1111, 1118 (Fed. Cir. 1991), In re Mraz, 455 F.2d 1069, 1072, 173
USPQ 25, 27 (CCPA 1972), In re Heinle, 342 F.2d 1001, 1007, 145
USPQ 131, 136 (CCPA 1965) and In re Wolfensperger, 302 F.2d 950,
959, 133 USPQ 537, 544 (CCPA 1962).
-8-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007