Appeal No. 98-2946
Application 08/291,596
delamination while not adversely affecting the board
performance -- and not because of any marketing
campaign on Surfco’s part. For example the three
most recent distributors that I have signed up to
market the Nose Guard protective tips for snowboards®
(whose declarations are being submitted separately)
have all indicated to me that the reason that they
decided to handle the product is because it solves
the delamination problem without adversely affecting
board performance, not because of marketing hype, or
any other reason.
The declarations of Vermillion, Bruggeman and Martin are
similar in content. Each declarant is the owner of a company
which markets winter sports equipment, including snowboards.
Each decided to start selling Nose Guard snowboard protective®
tips because they solve the nose delamination problem, and
there is a need in the maketplace for such a product.
Vermillion states that “there is nothing on the market [other
than Nose Guard ] that I am aware of that can properly solve®
the delamination problem” (para. 3), and according to Martin,
“Although my company has been selling equipment for snowboards
since 1988 I have not seen any other product that is capable
of preventing delamination” (para. 3). Bruggeman agrees with
appellant that prior attempts to solve the delamination
problem were not effective (para. 2):
I am familiar with prior attempts to solve the
delamination problem such as by utilizing aluminum,
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007