Appeal No. 2002-1031
Application 09/129,883
addition, Table 2 shows that the cores of E1, E3 and E4 have
distortions under a load of 100 kg. of 4.02, 3.53 and 3.99,
respectively. The examiner should determine whether it would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide
the E1 and/or E4 golf balls of Higuchi with the Type II dimple
pattern of Yamagishi ‘563 (VR = 0.996), and/or whether it would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide
the E3 golf ball of Higuchi with either the Type I (VR = 1.014)
or Type II (VR = 0.996) dimple pattern of Yamagishi ‘563, it
being noted that these modifications would result in golf balls
having parameters that appear to satisfy all the requirements of
claim 4, as well as several claims that depend therefrom.
Consistent with the determinations made by the examiner in
the above matters, the examiner should take whatever action is
deemed appropriate with respect to the appealed claims.
Summary
The standing rejection of claims 3-15 as being unpatentable
over Yamagishi ‘413 in view of Yamagishi ‘563 is reversed.
The standing rejection of claim 16 as being unpatentable
over Hayashi in view of Yamagishi ‘563 is reversed.
This case is remanded to the examiner for action in the
15
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007