The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for
publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
___________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
___________
Ex parte NEW WORLD PASTA COMPANY
____________
Appeal No. 2005-1466
Reexamination No. 90/006,515
_____________
ON BRIEF
_____________
Before GARRIS, FRANKFORT, and NAPPI, Administrative Patent Judges.
GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge.
ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
This is in response to a request, filed January 30, 2006, for rehearing of our decision,
mailed November 30, 2005, wherein we sustained the examiner’s § 102(b) rejection of the
design claim on appeal as being anticipated by D’Apuzzo.
In the subject request, appellant reiterates the position advanced in the brief and reply
brief which is, in essence, that the pasta design shown in Figure 1 of D’Apuzzo is inadequate to
establish a prima facie case of anticipation for the appealed claim to an ornamental design for
pasta. For example, on page 3 of the request, appellant presents the following argument:
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007