Ex parte KACHMAR - Page 5

          Appeal No. 97-3204                                                          
          Application 29/024,652                                                      

               (4) The relatively thick cross-sectional shape of the                  
               claimed design as opposed to the substan-                              
          tially                     flat, trapezoidal shape of the                   
               Even assuming, arguendo, Love to be a Rosen reference, we              
          find ourselves in agreement with the appellant that differ-                 
          ences exist between the claimed design and that of Love which               
          are of such magnitude as to be beyond de minimis, causing the               
          visual appearance of the claimed device to be patentably                    
          distinguished from that of the reference.  Of particular note               
          in this regard is the presence of peripheral bindings (10)                  
          around the edges of the Love seat pad, which not only cause a               
          pattern to be visible where the claimed design has none (top                
          views), but presents a folded shoulder (10) and a trapezoidal               
          cross-section (Figure 5) where that of the claimed design is                
          shoulderless and rectangular.  The rounded corners of Love as               
          compared to the rectangular one of the claimed design also                  
          figure in our conclusion that the overall visual appearance of              
          the claimed design differs from that of Love                                


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007