Appeal No. 2006-1451
Application No. 08/802,472
the activity of the sport so named. The photographs in Gossard, to the extent they are
the equivalent of trading cards, which we note are a highly ubiquitous embodiment of
sports photographs, would be used by spectators during the play of the sport by the
players represented on the cards to serve as memory joggers for the spectator, both of
the visual form of the player, and of the statistics generally on the opposite side of such
trading card photographs. Further, as the examiner noted in the rejection of claim 5, the
activity of collecting itself is a hobby or sport. We note that Gossard shows the
container being made of separably joinable pieces in Figs. 2, 5, 6 and 8. We further
note that the breadth of the claims allows the pieces to not have to be totally separable
such that there is no remaining connection, but only that the pieces be separable in
some manner, which opening of the container accomplishes.
Therefore, we find the appellant's arguments as to claims 28, 30 and 31 to be
unpersuasive. Accordingly, we sustain the examiner’s rejection of claims 28, 30 and 31
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being unpatentable as anticipated by Gossard.
To summarize, the above conclusions, we sustain the rejections of claims 5, 9,
11, 13, 20, 22, 28, 30 and 31 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being unpatentable as
anticipated over Gossard.
Claims 8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 18, 29, 51, 53, 55 and 57 rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable as obvious over Gossard.
As to claims 8 and 12, these claims are dependent from claim 5 and specify that
the icon is a golf ball and a tennis ball respectively. We note that Gossard describes
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007