Appeal No. 2006-1513 Παγε 7
Application No. 10/068,574
printing of the photographs. Accordingly, we are not persuaded
by appellants’ assertion (brief, page 6) that Tryon is totally
silent on the concept of screen printing. The rejection of claim
28 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is affirmed.
We turn next to claim 29, which depends from claim 28.
Appellants assert (brief, page 6) that the claim recites that the
photograph contains corrections to allow the photograph to be
screen printed, and argue that Tryon does not teach this because
Tryon discloses trimming off excess material. The examiner’s
position (final rejection, page 3) is that “Tryon does not
disclose the photographs containing corrections, but it would
have been obvious to employ corrections in the photos to make the
decoy as realistic as possible.”
From our review of Tryon, we find that when the photographs
are taken of a bird for use in the decoy, the photographs taken
are used to make the layouts, which are printed. From the
disclosure of making layouts from the photographs, we find that
the making of layouts is silent as to whether the layouts are
made from selecting photographs from among the group of
photographs taken, or whether photographs, or portions thereof,
are combined by a correction process. As a result, we would have
to resort to speculation to find that Tryon teaches or suggests
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007