Appeal No. 97-3411
Application No. 29/029,284
Appellants conclude that the obviousness rejection is improper
because the combined designs would have suggested only components
of the claimed design, and not its overall appearance (Brief,
page 6 and Reply Brief, page 3).
Reference is made to the briefs and the answers for further
detailed positions of the appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record before us,
and we will reverse the obviousness rejection.
An initial inspection of the perspective view of the Amerock
937-CW2 pull design reveals a pull that is substantially similar
in appearance to the claimed design. In this perspective view
the top of the gripping surface appears to be of uniform width,
and slightly angled towards the ends of the pull. The legs of
the pull also appear to have a round shape. Without the benefit
of other views, we are not able to determine the bottom nor the
side appearances of the Amerock pull. In the absence of such
views, we will turn to the sample Amerock pull for a
determination of the appearance of the pull from other views.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007