Appeal 2007-2111
Application 09/921,204
1 contrary to the teachings of Kapp to reinforce the Kapp box with corrugated
2 cardboard.
3 ISSUES
4 With respect to the rejection of claims 1 and 11 under 35 U.S.C.
5 § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ford in view of Zimmerman and
6 Jenniches, the issue is whether the combined teachings and suggestions of
7 the prior art would have suggested all of the limitations of claims 1 and 11.
8 With regard to the rejection of claim 11 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
9 being unpatentable over Kapp in view of Zimmerman, the issue is whether
10 the combined teachings and suggestions of the prior art would have
11 suggested all of the limitations of claim 11.
12
13 FINDINGS OF FACT
14 We find that the following enumerated findings are supported by at
15 least a preponderance of the evidence. Ethicon, Inc. v. Quigg, 849 F.2d
16 1422, 1427, 7 USPQ2d 1152, 1156 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (explaining the general
17 evidentiary standard for proceedings before the Office).
18 1. Appellant invented a method of advertising and a
19 shipping/packaging container product. (Specification 3.)
20 2. The method includes (id.) the steps of
21 providing a shipping/packaging container product, such as a
22 carton; providing on a first predetermined area of said
23 shipping/packaging container product a first advertisement of a
24 first party owning said shipping/packaging container product;
25 and providing on a second predetermined area of said
26 shipping/packaging container product a second advertisement
27 of a second party separate and distinct from said first party.
28
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013