Appeal No. 2004-0356
Application 09/811,993
prima facie case of obviousness and has not engaged in hindsight
reconstruction based on appellant’s disclosure and claims. While
it is true that Boggess alone does not disclose an attention-
attracting, lighted display device for mounting on a supermarket
display shelf so that the display normally cantilevers
transversely into the shopping aisle, we share the examiner’s
view that one of ordinary skill in the art would have derived
ample suggestion and motivation from the collective teachings of
the applied patents, and particularly the illuminated display
apparatus seen in Sernovitz, for enhancing the attention grabbing
ability of the advertising display apparatus of Boggess by
providing the display apparatus of Boggess with lighting mounted
on or in the carrier frame (16) which can be seen by customers
approaching the display apparatus from either direction along the
aisle and thereby focus attention on a featured item at an even
earlier time, e.g., as the customer enters the shopping aisle,
especially when the lighting on the display device is flashing or
blinking on and off as suggested in Sernovitz. We consider that
one of ordinary skill in the art would have immediately
recognized that such a combination of features would more
effectively fulfill the desires in Boggess of a) directing
customer attention to a featured item at a location on a shelf
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007