Appeal No. 2000-0206 Page 8
Application No. 08/699,328
In our view, both the R67 sign and the R61-36 sign are
inherently mounted on a post and thus each anticipate claims 6,
15 and 16. To the extent that the R67 sign and the R61-36 sign
are not inherently mounted on a post, it would have been obvious
at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary
skill in the art to mount either the R67 sign or the R61-36 sign
to a post since it was old and well known in the art to mount
regulatory traffic signs on posts.
The limitation that the secondary traffic symbol provides
secondary traffic information unrelated to the first traffic
symbol and to the first traffic information provided by the first
traffic symbol is met, in our view, by both the R67 sign and the
R61-36 sign. In that regard, the bottom turn arrow in the R67
sign provides traffic information that a car in that lane must
turn left while the upper turn arrow in the R67 sign provides the
unrelated traffic information that a car in the lane approaching
the sign from the opposite direction must turn left, much like
the unrelated information provided in the embodiment of the
appellant's invention shown in Figure 2. Likewise, the symbol on
the right in the R61-36 sign provides traffic information that a
car in the right lane must turn right while the symbol on the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007