Appeal 2007-1917
Application 10/222,660
Appellant’s invention. In either case, once the fastening member is attached to the
frame or to the sign it becomes a part of the frame or the sign.
Further, the Appellant argues that Boeniger discloses a single ridge (rail-like
protrusion 5) extending around the entire back of the frame, which is not a plurality
of spaced apart fasteners, as claimed (Appeal Br. 13). The Appellant
misunderstands the disclosure of Boeniger. As shown in Figures 4 and 5, Boeniger
discloses a complete display frame 12, with a plurality of spaced apart frame
elements 1, each having individual rail-like protrusions 5, where the frame
elements are spaced about the perimeter of the back of frame 12 and attached to the
frame 12 by clamping fasteners 13-16 (Finding of Fact 1). As such, Boeniger does
not disclose a single ridge as argued by the Appellant. (Finding of Fact 2).
The Appellant further argues that the holes (eyes 8) in Boeniger’s sign do
not interengage with the ridge, but instead require additional springs (Appeal
Br. 13). We do not see where claim 1 recites that part of the fastener
“interengages” with another part of the fastener. Rather, claim 1 recites “said
fasteners having at least a part thereof permanently affixed to one of said signage
and said support structure, said fasteners being engaged and disengaged by hand
without a tool.” We find that Boeniger’s eyes 8 are permanently affixed to the
reproduction 7 (or signage) (Finding of Fact 3). Further, we find that the claimed
fasteners are not limited to two pieces and that Boeniger’s fasteners (i.e., rail-like
protrusion 5, spring 6, and eye 8) can be engaged and disengaged by hand without
a tool by merely hooking one of the spring 6 around the protrusion 5 and the other
end of the spring 6 through the eye 8 (Finding of Fact 4). Accordingly, we find
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013