Appeal 2007-2096
Application 10/611,765
The issues in this appeal are whether the Examiner has carried the
burden of establishing a prima facie case in each of the grounds of rejection
advanced on appeal.
The plain language of claim 1, considered in light of the disclosure in
the Specification, specifies any dinnerware article comprising at least any
manner of shallow container, such as a plate or bowl, having an upper
surface which has affixed a raised likeness of any manner of creature and
any manner of graphical diet reminder. Claim 16, dependent on claim 1,
specifies the “likeness resembles a pig” in any fashion. Claims 17 and 18,
dependent on claim 1, require that the “likeness” is “hollow” in a manner
“adapted to contain at least one pill,” with claim 18 further specifying the
“likeness” has “a removable top.” See, e.g., In re Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech.
Ctr., 367 F.3d 1359, 1364, 70 USPQ2d 1827, 1830 (Fed. Cir. 2004); In re
Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-055, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027 (Fed. Cir. 1997);
In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321-22, 13 USPQ2d 1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989).
We agree with the Examiner’s findings of fact to which we add the
following: We find Buj would have disclosed to one of ordinary skill in this
art a plate “to facilitate the feeding of children” which can have any
ornamental or toy figure mounted thereon and is visually attractive (Buj,
e.g., col. 1, ll. 5-13 and 52-53, col. 1, l. 67, to col. 2, l. 3, col. 2, ll. 24-31,
and col. 2, l. 51, to col. 3, l. 13). We find Strandberg would have disclosed
to one of ordinary skill in this art a plate with foods of the well known food
pyramid graphically represented by cartoon characters which would be
visually attractive to children. We find Frucher would have disclosed to one
of ordinary skill in this art a plate with graphical representations of Passover
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013