Appeal No. 2004-1452
Application No. 29/138,830
embodiment) at the time of filing this application, as supported
by the original figures (Figure 1 as the first embodiment; Figure
2 as the second embodiment). For example, declarant states that
the original application clearly describes the surfaces and
profiles of the shapes of the indented ends and gaskets in
Figures 1, 2, 5 and 6, as well as the number of concentric
outlines shown in Figures 3 and 7 (Wagner Declaration, ¶¶ 7 and
8; see Exhibit D). We agree with the declarant that it would
have been reasonable to the designer of ordinary skill in the
duct art that three flanges were represented in the original
drawings, and these flanges would have reasonably appeared as
three concentric outlines in a top view. We also agree with the
declarant that the surfaces and profiles of the indented ends and
gaskets in amended Figures 1-8 would have been readily apparent
from original Figures 1-2. Furthermore, declarant states that
the rounded edge profile of the shortest flange, as contrasted
with the edge profiles of the intermediate and longest flanges,
would have been apparent due to the appearance of the profiles
and surfaces shown in original Figures 1 and 2 (Wagner
Declaration, ¶¶ 9-10). A designer of ordinary skill in the duct
art, with knowledge of conventional technical drawing practice,
would have recognized, upon rotation of original Figure 1 (as
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007