Appeal 2007-1365
Reexamination Control 90/006,595
Patent 6,289,548
least about 0.5" in depth, said patterned synthetic sponge simulating a
natural sea sponge when creating faux paint finishes therewith.
(Br., Claims Appdx.).
The Examiner has set forth three (3) prior art rejections. The
rejections are as follows:
i) Claims 1, 5-8 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Australia Published Patent
Application 1,405 (the “Australian application”).
ii. Claims 1-3, 5-10, 12-17, 19 and 20 rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Wakat, U.S. Patent
5,713,095 (“Wakat”) in view of the Australian application.
iii. Claims 4, 11 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Wakat and the Australian
application and further in view of Moilanen, U.S. Patent
2,994,899 (“Moilanen”).
Patentee (Capoccia) generally contends that the prior art references
fail to describe making a synthetic sponge mimic a natural sponge. (Br. at
10). Patentee contends that the prior art references teach “cutting” a pattern
on a sponge or roller and do not describe a tearing action, which would
create Patentee’s claimed ragged, torn edge pattern that helps simulate a
natural sea sponge paint finish. (Br. at 10-11). Additionally, Patentee states
that the prior art references fail to recognize that the depth of the pattern is
important. (Br. at 11-12).
The Examiner found that the Australian application teaches that any
desired pattern character may be formed on the face of a sponge by
removing portions of the face. (Ans. at 3). The Examiner further found that
one of ordinary skill in the art would understand how to modify the pattern
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013