Appeal No. 2001-0961
Application No. 08/108,133
The examiner relies on the following references:
LaPine Scientific Company Catalogue, 1965, Octrahedron in Cube
(item no. Z-9074), page 8, and Cone, Parabolic Section and Sphere
(item no. Z-9081), page 13.
The design claim stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over the first cited item from the LaPine
catalogue in view of the second cited item from the catalogue.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant or the
examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal,
the rejection advanced by the examiner and the evidence of
obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support for the
rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into
consideration, in reaching our decision, the appellant’s
arguments set forth in the briefs along with the examiner’s
rationale in support of the rejection and arguments in rebuttal
set forth in the examiner’s answer.
It is our view, after consideration of the record before us,
that the evidence relied upon and the level of skill of the
designer in this particular art would not have suggested to the
-2–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007