|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 30 2012 @ 12:02 PM EDT |
The most important statement is the claim, and you (purposely?) ignored it, or
perhaps that is what you were referring when you said :"the last one".
In that case, you are wrong. The last one is not needed to make it clear that
they are not claiming the design of a person. The person is shown with dotted
lines. That indicates that the person is not being claimed.
The foreman referred to "statements" in the design patent and you are
attacking him for it and saying there are no statements. The fact is, there are
statements.
Moreover, the statements matter.
If the statement were: We claim the ornamental design for a child's drawing
toy,then the etch-a-sketch would perhaps be disqualifying prior art to the Apple
tablet patent.
Since the statement refers instead to the ornamental design for an electronic
device, I would argue the etch-a-sketch is not disqualifying prior art and
apparently, neither was anything else.
I believe that when the foremen said they looked at the statement, he mean they
looked at the claim. In this case it was for a design for an electronic device.
The looked at the Samsung product in question and asked themselves, is it an
electronic device and does it look substantially the same as the claimed
ornamental design. If the answers to both questions is yes....[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|