Appeal No. 2005-0878
Application No. 09/911,620
the tendency to collapse; Answer, page 4) have not been
established as relevant to the swimsuit construction taught by
Brickman.
For the foregoing reasons, we determine that the examiner
has not established a prima facie case of obviousness in view of
the reference evidence. Therefore we reverse the examiner’s
rejection of claims 1-5, 7-8, 10-18, 21 and 22 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) over Brickman in view of Eberl.
C. Summary
The rejection of claim 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over
Eberl is affirmed. The rejection of claim 20 under section
102(b) over Eberl is reversed. The rejection of claims 1-5, 7-8,
10-18, 21 and 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Brickman in view
of Eberl is reversed. Therefore the decision of the examiner is
affirmed-in-part.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007