Appeal No. 97-1445 Page 9
Application No. 08/202,254
art" (brief, page 10). We have considered this argument but
do not find it persuasive. From our viewpoint, a curved
surface as disclosed by Kaplan on the curvilinear building
block does not appear very complicated or intricate. It
appears to us that one of ordinary skill in the art of
producing glazed masonry building blocks of any shape would
have been able to vary the glazing process as necessary to
apply the glaze composition to a surface of any contour,
including a curved contour, without undue experimentation, to
glaze the outer curvilinear surface of the building block
(102) of Kaplan. As the appellant has provided no evidence or
factual rationale to support the assertion that the
application of glaze to a curvilinear surface involves unique
problems and would thus not have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art, we are of the opinion that it would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of
producing masonry building blocks to apply a resinous glaze
composition to the exposed curvilinear surface of the Kaplan
building block.
The appellant further points out that claims 26 through
28 recite "at least two" curvilinear building block units and,
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007