Appeal No. 96-2779
Application 08/151,944
We will also sustain the standing § 103 rejection of
claims 10-13 since appellant states on page 5 of the brief
that these dependent claims stand or fall with claim 9.
Turning to independent claim 3, this claim does not
require that the messages be impressed by rolling. Rather,
claim 3 calls for the steps of smoothing the compliant ground
to establish a path of smoothed compliant ground, and
impressing the messages into the compliant ground at regularly
spaced intervals along the path of smoothed compliant ground.
Appellant argues that in Brown the messages are not impressed
in the sand at regularly spaced intervals. This argument is
not well taken. In our opinion, the method of using Brown’s
sandals would inherently result in messages being impressed in
the sand at regularly spaced intervals, since the length of a
person’s stride is consistent from stride to stride during
normal walking. We appreciate that our views in this respect
differ from those of appellant as expressed on page 1 of the
reply brief.
Appellant also argues that the applied references do not
teach smoothing the ground to establish a smooth path prior to
impressing the message. However, appellant’s specification
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007