Appeal No. 99-1024
Application 29/062,504
alone or on the basic reference in view of modifications
suggested by secondary references. In re Rosen, supra. The
test for the proper combination of references to support a
rejection under §103 is whether they are so related that the
appearance of certain ornamental features in one would have
suggested the application of those features to the other. Id;
In re Glavas, 230 F.2d 447, 450, 109 USPQ 50, 52 (CCPA 1956).
If, however, the combined teachings of the references suggest
only components of the claimed design but not its overall
appearance, a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is
inappropriate. In re Cho, 813 F.2d 378, 382, 1 USPQ2d 1662,
1663-64 (Fed. Cir. 1987).
According to the examiner, the claimed design is
unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 because
[t]he Winston patent reference 4,966,365
discloses an exercise weight in figures 2, 5, 6, 7,
and 8, which is similar in overall appearance to the
claimed design. The only difference is that on the
claimed design the grommet has been omitted, and a
buckle has been added to secure the strap.
The Winston patent reference 4,966,365 is
further cited for its’ showing of a prior art weight
in figures 1, 3, and 4. In the prior art drawings,
the Winston patent reference shows that it is
conventional to provide the weight with a buckle for
the strap, and to have omitted the grommet from the
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007