Appeal No. 2004-0152
Application No. 29/149,571
OPINION
In reaching our conclusion on the obviousness issue raised
in this appeal, this panel of the board has carefully considered
appellant’s specification, design claim, and drawing figures, the
applied reference designs, and the respective viewpoints of
appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of our review, we
make the determination which follows.
We do not sustain the rejection of appellants’ design claim
for the reasons set forth below.
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 171, one may obtain a design patent
for "any new, original and ornamental design for an article of
manufacture." To obtain such a patent, however, one must satisfy
the patentability requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 103. See In re
Borden, 90 F.3d 1570, 1574, 39 USPQ2d 1524, 1526 (Fed. Cir.
1996). In the design patent context, the ultimate inquiry under
section 103 is whether the claimed design would have been obvious
to a designer of ordinary skill who designs articles of the type
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007