Appeal No. 2006-1395 Παγε 7
Application No. 10/687,875
on the tubular casing. The examiner has relied on Block or Moseley for the teaching of
the graphic display on the cover.
We will not sustain this rejection because claim 20 contains the same language as
claim 19 regarding a protective bat barrel cover for a baseball or softball bat in the
preamble and the body of the claim and thus we are of the opinion that the preamble of
claim 20 breathes life and meaning into the claim in the same manner as discussed
above for claim 19. As stated above, Zills and Millis are not analogous art to the subject
matter of claim 20. In addition, Moseley relates to a sanitary cover for a shopping cart
handle and Block relates to a combination postcard/container insulator for a beverage
container and as such are neither in the field of baseball or softball bat covers nor are
they pertinent to the problem of protecting a baseball or softball bat, they too are not
analogous art.
In summary:
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007