Appeal No. 98-0964
Application 08/557,436
features not covered by the design patent, and more
specifically that there is nothing in the ‘506 application
which matured into the design patent to clearly indicate the
presence of aft, middle and forward seating surfaces, a
footwell associated with each of the seating surfaces, or
first and second hatch surfaces, as now set forth in
independent claim 23 of the present utility application. In
the examiner’s opinion, viewing the ‘506 application in a
vacuum, it is unclear exactly what utilitarian features have
been shown therein.
Appellant urges that the examiner’s rejection of the
appealed claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is in error because
the
present application claims priority from and is entitled to
the filing date of design application SN 29/020,506 (now the
‘473 design patent) which antedates the April 1994 sale of the
invention and clearly describes the now claimed invention “in
writing” as required by 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph. The
present utility application is denominated a "continuation-in-
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007