Appeal No. 96-0674
Application 08/533,287
threading 148 on the nock and complimentary threading 157 on
the adapter. See, col. 7, lines 3-7.
It is the examiner's position (Answer, page 4) that it
would have been obvious to make the arms of the Zandberg
character posable as taught by Schleich in order to render the
toy element more versatile and add play value. Appellant, on
the other hand, argues (Brief, pages 3 and 4) that there is no
teaching, sugges-tion or motivation in the prior art of record
to confer bend-ability and posability to the handle portion of
the toothbrush taught by Zandberg.
We have carefully reviewed the collective teachings of
Zandberg, Schleich and Guest and find ourselves in agreement
with the appellant. The examiner's reference to "added play
value" sounds to us as though the examiner is assuming that
the article shown by Zandberg is a toy and has concluded that
the addition of posable arms to the Zandberg device would
simply add to the existing play value of the Zandberg "toy."
While we recognize that a child could use a toothbrush as a
play object, that does not make Zandberg's disclosed
toothbrush a toy. We see Zandberg's design not as a toy, but
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007