Appeal No. 1998-0566
Application No. 08/396,005
considered the arguments regarding such matters as labor
intensity, expense, and beauty, but find them also not to be
persuasive.
The appellant also has argued throughout the Brief that
Kanzelberger does not disclose a “solid and unitary badge size
block of plastic,” as is required by claim 11. This element
is described on page 1 of the appellant’s specification as
“such as one which might be formed by injection molding.”
Other descriptive language that is applied in the
specification is “name plate 26" and “plastic plate 26" (page
6, for example, emphasis added). No indication is provided of
the thickness of the plate, except that it must be capable of
having a depressed area (28). As shown in Figures 2 and 3,
the Kanzelberger badge also utilizes a plastic element (24)
that is thick enough to accommodate a depressed area (between
edges 34 and 36 in Figure 2), which is provided with a
textured area (Figure 3). As was the case in the appellant’s
specification, element 24 is described in Kanzelberger as a
“plastic plate” (column 3, line 15, emphasis added). While
this plate is “very thin” (column 3, line 20), it nevertheless
is called a plate throughout the patent. Moreover, no
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007