Appeal 2007-2111
Application 09/921,204
1 manufacturer on the narrow sides, we find that the manufacturer will
2 advertise the product on the front of the package and leave the sides of the
3 product for advertisements from other manufacturers. From the description
4 of having the manufacturer's advertisement on one portion of the package
5 and the advertisement of another manufacturer on another predetermined
6 area of the package, we find that an artisan would have been motivated to
7 place advertisements of the manufacturer of the rings and other
8 manufacturers on the package of Ford.
9 We are not persuaded by Appellant's assertion (Br. 13-14 and Reply
10 Br. 2) that Ford does not disclose an advertisement on an outer surface of the
11 carton. As illustrated in Fig. 1 of Ford, and as found in fact 9, the box
12 illustrates the number, size, and type of rings in the box. As noted by the
13 Examiner (Answer 5) Ford indicates (p. 1, ll. 17-25) that when stacked on
14 the shelf, the descriptive matter on the box is exposed. From the description
15 in Ford that the descriptive matter is exposed, and the description (fact 6)
16 that when rings are removed, the number of remaining rings is displayed on
17 the box, we find that the descriptive matter in the box is an advertisement to
18 customers of how many rings are in the box and for sale. In any event, as
19 we found, supra, Jenniches suggests having an advertisement from a
20 manufacturer on one portion of the carton and an advertisement from
21 another manufacturer on another portion of the carton.
22 Nor are we persuaded by Appellant's contention (Br. 15) that the
23 combination of Ford and Zimmerman fails to disclose a first advertisement
24 and a second advertisement because Jenniches suggests the first and second
25 advertisements from different manufacturers.
13
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013