Appeal 2007-2096
Application 10/611,765
been obvious to modify Buj’s dolphin to obtain a hollow statuette of a
dolphin with a removable top with the motivation to provide a separate
compartment that can provide storage space (id. 5).
Appellant contends there is no motivation to combine the references
and there would be no expectation of success in doing so (Br. 7). Appellant
contends Buj’s plate is used to encourage children to eat and learn to eat, and
thus is directed to very young children (id. 7-8). Appellant contends that
even if a graphical diet reminder was added to Buj’s plate, a young child
reluctant to eat would not understand such reminder, pointing to
Strandberg’s use of cartoon images to represent types of food in the food
triangle; the figures and food names in English and Hebrew on Frucher’s
Passover Seder plate; and the food instruction cards for the compartments of
Brenkus’ plate (id. 8-12). Appellant contends the graphical diet reminders
on these plates are directed to persons older than small children and thus
there is no motivation to combine the references or to modify Buj’s plate
intended for small children with such graphical diet reminders (id.).
Appellant contends with respect to the limitation the creature likeness is that
of a pig in claim 16, there is no motivation to substitute a pig for Buj’s
dolphin because there is no disclosure linking the dolphin with obesity and
the purpose of the pig is to connote obesity (id. 12-13).
Appellant contends with respect to claims 17 and 18, that Gruneisen
III’s basketball is not a creature and is used with a tall drink container, not a
shallow container, and while shown with “the top hemisphere . . . ‘removed
for ease of illustration,’” the two hemispheres appear to be molded together
do not provide a bottom and a removable top (id. 13-14).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013