Appeal No. 2001-0595
Application No. 09/079,293
In the present case, the mere arrangement and content of
the printed matter on the placard does not appear to provide
any new and unobvious functional relationship between the
printed matter and the placard. The only functional
relationship that we see between the above-noted printed
matter and the placard of appellant's claimed apparatus is
that the placard acts to support or carry the printed matter.
This is of course the same relationship that exists between
the printed matter and the placard in Callahan as modified by
Stevens. The fact that the content or substance of the
printed matter placed upon the placard in Callahan as modified
may be different than that placed on appellant's placard does
not alter the fact that the substrate merely supports the
printed matter thereon. Since we discern no new and unobvious
functional relationship between the printed matter claimed by
appellant and the placard, we are led to the conclusion that
such printed matter is not entitled to patentable weight when
considered in light of the teachings of the applied prior art.
Mere support by the substrate for the printed matter is simply
not the kind of functional relationship necessary for
patentability. See In re Gulack, supra.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007