Ex Parte Moreau - Page 11




              Appeal No. 2005-0211                                                                    11               
              Application No. 10/264,717                                                                               


              fastening system for easy placement and removal of indicia on the body of a puppet,                      
              thereby providing greater versatility.  See Price (column 1, lines 7-47).                                
                                                     Rejection (10)                                                    
                     This rejection, based upon Natiw and Maiden-Nesset, is affirmed.                                  
                     The claim at issue requires that the leg member terminate in a shoe having tieable                
              laces.                                                                                                   
                     Appellant’s position with regard to this rejection is much the same as her position               
              regarding rejection (7).  To the extent that appellant relies upon any differences in intended           
              use between the puppet doll of Natiw and the Maiden-Nesset doll, we note that intended                   
              use forms no part of the product claim at issue.  Thus, appellant’s argument is not                      
              germane to the subject matter of the claim.                                                              
                     Be that as it may, we agree with the examiner that motivation for the combination                 
              can be found in Maiden-Nesset’s suggestion to equip a doll with shoes having tieable                     
              laces to enhance its value as an educational vehicle.  As previously noted, Natiw discloses              
              that her doll can be modified by adding items of clothing thereto.                                       
                                                      Rejection 11                                                     
                     This rejection is also affirmed.                                                                  
                     The claim at issue is an amalgam of elements, all of which having been discussed                  
              above.  Accordingly, the reasoning which we have applied above with respect to rejections                
              (2), (4), (6), (7) and (8) in particular, apply with equal force to the instant rejection.               








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007