Appeal No. 2006-0288
Application 10/611,765
(answer, pages 4-5 and 7-8). While the design of the compartmentalized plate disclosed by
Brownell resembles a “pyramid,” there is no graphical or other communication on the plate
per se to the effect that the same in fact represents any manner of “food guide pyramid,” and
Brownell provides no such disclosure. The examiner has provided no other evidence or
explanation establishing that the compartmentalized plate of Brownell would have been
recognized as a graphical reminder of such pyramid.
Thus, in the absence of an explanation or evidence in the record establishing that the
compartmentalized plate disclosed by Brownell would have reasonably suggested “a graphical
diet reminder” to one of ordinary skill in this art, we find that even if this person would have
combined the teachings of Buj and Brownell, the result would have been a compartmentalized
plate with accompanying eating utensils wherein each piece has a toy figure thereon, which does
not meet the subject limitation of the appealed claims. See Uniroyal, Inc. v. Rudkin-Wiley Corp.,
837 F.2d 1044, 1050-54, 5 USPQ2d 1434, 1438-41 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
The examiner’s decision is reversed.
Reversed
- 4 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007