Appeal No. 2002-1378
Application No. 09/196,938
the artificial tree also including a garland representing foliage which extends from rod to rod and
between the rods. Claim 16, like claim 1, defines an artificial tree having a “bubble trunk”, but does
not require that the plurality of rods mounted on the trunk be spaced along “substantially the entire
height” of the trunk as does claim 1. Claim 20, the broadest of the three independent claims, does
not require that the tube which represents the trunk of the tree be constructed as a “bubble trunk” in
the manner defined in claims 1 and 16.
With the understanding that the three independent claims are of significantly different scope,
only claim 1 is reproduced below to highlight appellants’ invention in the most detail:
1. A display representing a tree and having a bubble trunk, comprising:
a hollow tube representing the trunk of the tree, said hollow tube configured to hold a liquid
therein;
a base for holding the hollow tube in a substantially vertical position on a surface so that the
hollow tube has a height;
an air supply means located in the hollow tube for supplying air to the hollow tube;
a plurality of rods mounted on the hollow tube and extending outwardly therefrom spaced
along substantially the entire height of the tube to represent tree branches; and
a garland representing foliage secured to a selected plurality of rods to extend from rod to
rod of the selected plurality of rods and between such rods in a manner to give the appearance of a
tree having foliage.
Prior art references relied upon by the examiner on appeal are:
Hamlett 5,085,900 Feb. 4, 1992
Burnett 5,349,771 Sept. 27, 1994
Burnett Des. 390, 157 Feb. 3, 1998
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007