Appeal No. 97-3824
Application 29/042,728
from appellant's drawings that the lower edges of the side
portions, like the upper edges thereof, are concave rather
than convex (Yewer's corresponding edges are straight).
Next, appellant correctly notes contends that Yewer lacks
a "back portion . . . with a width [i.e., vertical dimension]
greater than the width of the overlapping end portion[s]"
(Opening Brief at 4).
Finally, appellant gives the following description of
what the examiner refers to as the "rear tab" feature: "a
tightening strap disposed in a V-shaped configuration along
the back portion and stabilized in such a position by a
substantially centrally disposed sleeve" (Opening Brief at 3).
This description is inaccurate in two respects. First, it is
not apparent from the drawings that the centrally disposed
element in question is a sleeve. Second, the stabilizing
function is entitled to no weight because "a design patent
only protects the ornamental aspects of the design." OddzOn
Products Inc. v. Just Toys Inc., 122 F.3d 1396, 1404, 43
USPQ2d 1641, 1646 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Consequently, we would
characterize the feature in question as a V-shaped
configuration of the tightening strap on the outside of the
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007