Appeal No. 97-2313
Application 29/024,479
following design claim. 2
The ornamental design for SIDE, UPPER AND
SOLE PERIPHERY OF A SPRING SHOE as shown
and described.
As per the amendment filed May 12, 1995 (Paper No. 6),
appellant describes Figures 1 through 3 and Figures 4 through
6 as portraying first and second embodiments, respectively,
for the SIDE, UPPER AND SOLE PERIPHERY OF A SPRING SHOE. 3
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner has applied the
documents listed below:
Loederer et al 20,967 Dec. 05,
1896
(Loederer)
Miller 2,383,877 Aug. 28, 1945
Sink 4,241,524 Dec. 30,
1980
Weber 4,566,206 Jan. 28, 1986
Gelli 4 310,571 Apr. 05, 1989
2As originally filed, the claim was for “The ornamental design for Shoe
With Spring as shown and described”.
3The drawing figures were originally described by appellant in the
specification as showing views of first and second embodiments of a “Shoe With
Spring”.
4This document was first cited in the answer and applied in a new
ground of rejection. A copy of a translation of this document is appended
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007