Appeal No. 2002-1071 Page 5
Application No. 09/369,312
two body sheets in which the angle layers incline in opposite directions) are wound by
two turns. The claim clearly requires that the two sheets in which the angle layers
incline in opposite directions are wound by 1.5 turns in a cross-sectional face of the golf
club shaft and the 1.5 turns of the first and second angle layers continue along an axis
of the shaft. The claim does not recite that the two sheets in which the angle layers
incline in opposite directions are wound by at least 1.5 turns in a cross-sectional face of
the golf club shaft and the at least 1.5 turns of the first and second angle layers
continue along an axis of the shaft. In our view, the phrase "by 1.5 turns in a cross-
sectional face of the golf club shaft" excludes other turns such as one turn, two turns,
2. 5 turns, etc. Furthermore, the phrase "the 1.5 turns of the first and second angle
layers continue along an axis of the shaft" requires that each of the first and second
angle layers have 1.5 turns at each position thereof along the axis of the shaft.
Accordingly, it is clear to us that the applied prior art does not teach or suggest a golf
shaft in which a first angle layer and a second angle layer are wound by 1.5 turns in a
cross-sectional face of the golf club shaft and the 1.5 turns of the first and second
angle layers continue along an axis of the shaft as recited in claim 1.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the examiner to reject claim 1,
and claims 2 to 5 dependent thereon, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007