Appeal No. 95-3852
Application 07/885,945
considered optionally designed as one-sided. As such, we
consider that it would have been obvious to the artisan as to
which side to choose to include or eliminate. In light of this
teaching, we disagree with appellant’s characterization that
Shiba is not a Rosen-type reference since the resulting design is
a something in existence, the design characteristics of which are
basically the same as the claimed design.
This conclusion, however, does not lead us to further
conclude that the design claim on appeal would have been obvious
to the artisan within 35 U.S.C. § 103. Shiba’s showing of a
single-sided shutter does indicate that the bottom portion of the
remaining side of the shutter does gently rise in an angle,
reorients parallel to the main portion of the shutter side, and
finishes with the rounded ends (Figures 7 and 8) in the manner
claimed.
Significant to us is that the appealed claim has a T-shaped
crosspiece whereas the teachings and showings in Shiba indicate
that a corresponding crosspiece member is essentially L-shaped.
Compare figures 3, 5 and 7 of the disclosed/claimed design with
figures 7 and 8 of Shiba. Shiba’s figure 8 shows shutter slide
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007