Ex parte DAVIS et al. - Page 8

          Appeal No. 96-3643                                                          
          Application No. 29/008,022                                                  

                    that they would be considered by “the eye of                      
                    an ordinary observer”, Gorham, 81 U.S. (14                        
                    Wall.) at 528. [Emphasis ours.]                                   
               Here, we are of the opinion that the differences in                    
          appearance of the throat block, the relative bulk of the frames             
          and the overall general proportions of the appellants’ design               
          produces an overall visual effect which is not suggested by                 
          tennis racquet “C” of the Bell Catalog.  Perhaps each of the                
          differences noted by the examiner by itself is a minor                      
          difference, but taken together the net result is a distinctly               
          different appearance.  See In re Laverne, 356 F.2d 1003, 1007,              
          148 USPQ 674, 677 (CCPA 1966).                                              


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007