Appeal No. 2005-1815
Application No. 10/057,719
shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of
these claims.
II. The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 3, 13, 20, 23, 26
and 30 as being unpatentable over Boyd in view of Browne and
Hageman
Hageman discloses a conventional golf hole cup 5 (see
Figure 1) modified to include an interior recess 20 that defines
an upper lip 35 which acts to retain an advertisement insert 30
(see Figure 2). The insert 30 is a strip of flexible plastic
that is formed into a partial cylinder and inserted into the cup
wherein it springs into the recess and is held by the lip.
The examiner’s application of Hageman does not cure the
above noted shortcomings of Boyd and Browne relative to the
subject matter recited in independent claims 1, 22, 25 and 29, or
in independent claim 20 which also requires a one-piece, seamless
cup sleeve. Hence, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of claim 20, and dependent claims 3, 13, 23,
26 and 30, as being unpatentable over Boyd in view of Browne and
Hageman.
III. The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 8, 24 and 28 as
being unpatentable over Crocker in view of Browne
Claims 8, 24 and 28 depend from claims 1, 22 and 25,
respectively.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007