Appeal No. 2000-0224 Page 7
Application No. 29/081,424
refill system for a suggestion to provide a short extension with a straight cut termination on the
pipe of Stokes.
As regards the combination of references in design cases, the question is not whether
the references sought to be combined are in analogous arts in the mechanical sense, but
whether they are so related that the appearance of certain ornamental features in one would
suggest the application of those features to the other. Thus, if the problem is merely one of
giving an attractive appearance to a surface, it is immaterial whether the surface in question is
that of wall paper, an oven door, or a piece of crockery. On the other hand, when the
proposed combination of references involves material modifications of the basic form of one
article in view of the other, the nature of the articles involved is a definite factor in determining
whether the proposed change involves invention. The art from which a patent is drawn does
not necessarily preclude its citation as a reference but "it does reflect on the question of
remoteness of suggestion between what it discloses and what the applicant discloses." In re
Glavas, 230 F.2d 447, 450-451, 109 USPQ 50, 52-53 (CCPA 1956).
In this instance, while we recognize that the elbow piece 12 of Richards, like both of
the pipes 31 of Stokes and the appellant's design, is an L-shaped pipe having one longer leg
and a shorter leg connected by a curved bend portion, we find ourselves in agreement with the
appellant that the elbow piece 12 of Richards' automatic swimming pool water refill system is
not so related to the fuel lifting pipes of Stokes as to have suggested modification of either of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007