Appeal No. 95-2937
Application 29/057,491
agree with appellant that the examiner has either improperly dismissed without fair
comparison the visual impact of these features on the design as whole, or unreasonably
assumed that unseen portions of Dusseault are exactly or colorably similar to such
features.
Conclusion
In light of the foregoing, we will not sustain the examiner’s obviousness rejection of
the claimed ornamental design as being unpatentable over Dusseault.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
)
WILLIAM F. PATE, III )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
LAWRENCE J. STAAB )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
JERRY SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge )
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007