Appeal No. 98-1427
Application No. 08/511,310
Appellant’s invention pertains to an artificial snake or
eel-like fish bait. In the “BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION”
section of the specification (page 1), appellant lists prior
art patents and characterizes the prior art as evidencing an
abundance of artificial fish lures which have been
designed such that the lure moves through the water
in an undulating manner so as to simulate the
swimming movement of a worm, snake or eel
(specification, page 2).
A stated object of the present invention is to “provide an
artificial fish bait which provides simulated appearance and
action to that of a live bait in order to effectively lure or
attract fish” (specification, page 3). A further
understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading
of claim 1, a copy of which appears in the APPENDIX to the
reply brief (Paper No. 11).
As evidence of anticipation, the examiner has applied the
document specified below:
Pond 5,136,801 Aug. 11,
1992
The following rejection is before us for review.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007