Appeal 2007-1677
Application 10/121,491
combination of Francis with Siero would not provide a continuous sight line
on the longitudinal edge as required by claim 1 on appeal (Br. 7-8; Reply Br.
3). Appellant contends that a checkered pattern on the top surface of flat
paper would not accomplish the intended function of the claimed invention
(Reply Br. 3).
Appellant contends that there is no motivation to combine the
teachings of Siero and Francis, as the combination would not lead to a useful
article and would be “nonsensical” (Br. 8).
The Examiner contends that Siero discloses a masking material
comprising an elongated body having longitudinally extending edges on
opposite top sides of a longitudinally extending body portion with at least
two differently colored portions and an adhesive for attaching the material to
an article, where the material is constructed so that a color contrast along
one longitudinal edge provides a continuous sight line (Answer 4).
The Examiner contends that the combination of Siero and Francis is
proper since both references are directed towards masking materials used to
mark off areas for painting, while Francis teaches that foam masking
material in the shape of an elongate body was known in the painting industry
(Answer 5).
Accordingly, the issues presented in the record of this appeal are as
follows: (1) does Siero disclose or suggest an elongate body masking
material, where the body has longitudinally extending edges on opposite
sides of a longitudinally extending body portion, at least two differently
colored portions, and an adhesive for attaching the material to an article,
where the material is constructed so that a color contrast along one
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013