Appeal No. 2003-1234
Application 09/755,519
"opinion," but, because weighed against a very strong prima facie
case of obviousness, it did not carry the day (RBr2). It is also
argued (RBr2) that there is no commentary in praise of the stamp
per se, but only praise of the note-taking method using the
stamp, such as the comments "[a] handy way to take notes ...,"
"a timesaver," "... efficiency, neatness and ingenuity to the
classroom," and "[c]lever and useful indeed--I'm surprised my
colleagues or myself never thought of it!"
Analysis
Bissonet recognizes that "[t]here are numerous occasions in
which one has to repeatedly write down or print the same data,
such as his or her own identification" (col. 1, lines 6-8) and
provides a printing stamp and inking pad to be carried along and
used to readily stamp predetermined data (col. 1, lines 16-20).
We agree with appellant that Bissonet does not disclose or
suggest the combined action of writing and stamping during a
lecture, as found by the examiner. Although the detachable stamp
in Figs. 16 and 17 could be used during a lecture, there is no
teaching or suggestion of doing so. Thus, the statement of the
rejection is based on incorrect findings of the content of
Bissonet. The basic teaching of Bissonet is that a stamp may be
used in place of repeatedly writing down or printing the same
data, which is, of course, the well known purpose of stamps.
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007