Appeal No. 2002-0357
Application 09/433,988
Speck (Speck ‘529)1 5,588,529 Dec. 31, 1996
Speck (Speck ‘995)1 6,009,995 Jan. 4, 2000
Softball Sales 93, p. 35, Mizuno #MTB Bag (Mizuno)2
The items relied on by the appellant as evidence of non-
obviousness are:
The 37 CFR § 1.132 Declaration of Michael W. Speck made
of record on October 2, 2000 (Paper No. 7)
The 37 CFR § 1.132 Declaration of Jay Strange made of
record on October 2, 2000 (Paper No. 7)
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1 through 40 stand rejected under the judicially
created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as claiming
obvious variations of the inventions set forth in claims 1
through 9 of the Speck ‘995 patent and claims 1 through 5 of the
Speck ‘529 patent.
Claims 1 through 13, 15 through 20 and 22 through 40 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Mizuno in view of Shyr and any one of Gerch ‘748, Gerch ‘154 or
Plough.
1 The record indicates that the instant application is a
continuation of the Speck patents.
2 The information disclosure statement filed March 27, 2000
(Paper No. 4) indicates that the Mizuno item is from a 1993 sales
catalog and expressly admits it to be prior art.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007