Appeal No. 2001-2512 Application No. 09/248,742 or backpack. In addition, the appellant has not submitted any evidence to establish that the Rettenberger chair would fall over if a backpack were attached. It is well established that arguments of counsel can not take the place of evidence. Pearson at 495 F.2d 1405; 181 USPQ at 646. In view of the foregoing, we will sustain the examiner’s rejection of claim 16 as being unpatentable over Rettenberger in view of Bradbury. We turn next to the examiner’s rejection of claims 17 and 18 over Rettenberger in view of Bradbury and Amato. Appellant, in response to this rejection, argues that it would not be obvious to combine the Rettenberger chair with the Bradbury back pack because Bradbury teaches a lawn chair style folding chair and Rettenberger discloses a three frame folding chair and it would not be obvious to transfer the structure of one chair type to the other. The appellant also argues that were the back pack disclosed in Bradbury put on the back of the Rettenberger chair, the Rettenberger chair would fall backward. We will sustain this rejection for the same reasons as stated above for the rejection of claim 16 over Rettenberger in view of Bradbury. 8Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007