Appeal No. 1998-2173
Application No. 08/829,620
the claimed design. We do not view the differences between
the claimed design and the applied prior art to be “de
minimis.”
Since the applied prior art fails to teach or suggest the
aesthetic features of the claimed design, we will not sustain
the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection based on Bird and
Olsen.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
IRWIN CHARLES COHEN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JOHN P. McQUADE ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
JOHN F. GONZALES )
Administrative Patent Judge )
vsh
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007