Appeal No. 2004-0190 Page 10
Application No. 09/479,531
The examiner further proposes to add to the Owen game, in view of the
teachings of Burkart, a device for measuring distances which comprises a base having
a retractable measuring line and a semi-circular base having indicia thereon, with the
line measuring values in three dimensions. Owen discloses a protractor for plotting
courses and distances (Figures 7 and 8), which does not include the capability of
measuring in three dimensions, for that is not necessary in the Owen game. Burkart
discloses an apparatus for plotting and measuring courses on maps, but the examiner
has not explained how this device meets the terms of claim 17, how it is to be integrated
into the Owens game, or what purpose it would serve with its three dimensional
capability. Also not present is support for the examiner’s conclusion that it would have
been obvious to modify Owens by replacing the disclosed protractor with that of Burkart
“in order [to have the players] gain proficiency in using a protractor which is used by
navigators or ships” (Answer, page 8).
For the foregoing reasons, it is our conclusion that the combined teachings of
Owen, Berstrom and Burkart fail to establish a prima facie case of obviousness with
regard to the subject matter of claim 17, and we will not sustain this rejection.
We reach the same conclusion with regard to the rejection of claim 27 on the
basis of Whitehurst and Stevens. Claim 27 adds to claim 26 the requirement that each
guide be formed of a planar material, which the examiner admits is lacking in
Whitehurst, upon which the Section 102 rejection of claim 26 was predicated. However,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007