Appeal No. 97-3411
Application No. 29/029,284
After inspection of the sample pull, we agree with the
appellants that the Amerock pull has a substantially thick
triangular cross section because of the V-shaped area on the
bottom side of the gripping portion, and has a wider profile at
the ends than in the middle. We also agree with the appellants
that the Amerock pull has two short oblong legs.
We agree with the examiner that the top, side and
perspective views of the Forms + Surfaces drawing show a pull
with a flat upper surface, a flat lower surface, and rounded
corners. We do not, however, agree with the examiner (Answer,
page 5) that the limited views of the Forms + Surfaces pull show
round legs. The “circular tubes” referred to in the Forms +
Surfaces description could be limited to the clearly illustrated
rounded corners of the pull. In the side view, the other side of
each of the two legs could just as easily be straight edges.
Only a bottom view of the Forms + Surfaces pull would reveal
whether the legs are completely round.
As indicated supra, the examiner has reached the conclusion
that modification of the Amerock reference pull design in light
of the Forms + Surfaces reference pull design is proper because
“the appearance of features shown in one would suggest the
application of those features to the other” (Answer, page 4). We
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007