In re Lustig

Here, as in In re Lustig (P.A. 7672) 54 CCPA 840, 368 F. 2d 1019, 151 USPQ 643, decided concurrently, Lustig seeks a patent on

The ornamental design for a font of type or the like, substantially as shown.

Here, too, appellant’s application was rejected as being unpatentable over certain references.1

In affirming the examiner, the Board of Appeals stated:

The claim was rejected by the Examiner as being unpatentable over the * * * cited references. A description of the references and the application thereof to the subject matter involved may be found in the Examiner’s Answer.

We are not convinced by…