Appeal No. 2002-1904
Application No. 09/156,540
system includes an image analyzer 26 and monitor 28. Col. 4, ll. 1-6. Pairs of light
generators and sensors 34, 36 measure speed of the golf ball after impact. Id. at ll. 7-
23. The golfer repeats several trials, and the recorded images of the swings are
examined using image analyzer 26 and, along with calculated ball speed, displayed on
monitor 28. The most representative swing of the golfer from among the recorded
images is identified. Ball speed may be used to judge that the golfer hit the ball solidly.
Id. at ll. 28-56.
The relevant distance and angles at approximately the moment of impact with
the ball in a representative swing may be ascertained from a calibrated grid on the
display (Fig. 2) or may be measured internally by image analyzing software. The
dimensions are used to determine the optimum length and head-to-shaft angle for the
golfer for that particular club. Col. 4, l. 57 - col. 5, l. 24.
Instant claim 16 requires positioning high-speed video camera means near the
striking location to obtain video images of the first golf club, the golf ball, and the golfer
using the first golf club during the golfer’s swing at the golf ball in the striking location.
We note that appellants’ specification (p. 5, ll. 24-28) teaches that any type of high
speed video camera may be used, and that appellants have chosen not to rely for
patentability on the subject matter of dependent claims which set forth more specific
requirements of a high-speed video camera.
We find that Schmoll’s disclosure of video cameras capable of acquiring a series
of images as the golfer swings would have, at the least, suggested use of high-speed
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007