Application of Ivar Jepson

SMITH, Judge.

This appeal presents two issues for determination: first we must decide, in light of the arguments presented to this court, the opinions of the Board of Appeals, and the record, whether the appealed claims1 stand rejected on 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 or 103; and second, whether the rejection may be sustained.

We hold on the first issue that the rejection is under the terms of 35 U.S.C. § 103 and on the second issue that it cannot be sustained.

The Invention and the Prior Art

The invention defined by the appealed claims is an oscillating water sprinkler for watering lawns. Claim 1, quoted by…