¶159 CCPA
¶2Sparrow & Sparrow, New York City, attorneys of record, for appellant; Maxwell E. Sparrow, Mark H. Sparrow, New York City, of counsel.
¶3S. Wm. Cochran, Washington, D. C., for the Commissioner of Patents; R. V. Lupo, Washington, D. C., of counsel.
¶4Before RICH, ALMOND, BALDWIN, and LANE, Judges.
¶6This appeal is from the decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals sustaining the examiner’s rejection of all of the claims in appellant’s application1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over certain references.2 The claimed subject matter is garden shears and the alleged novelty is the location of a “hang up hole” in a certain part of one or both of the blades. The prior art discloses shears with cutting blades provided with one or more holes which could be used to hang up the shears.
¶7After a thorough consideration of the references, the rejection, and appellant’s arguments, we are of the opinion that the board has not committed any error. Accordingly, the decision of the board is affirmed.
¶8Affirmed.