Appeal No. 2003-1451
Application No. 09/760,291
chip. Consequently, we disagree with the appellant’s position
that the Viste and Sasse references cannot be combined with the
Stuff disclosure.
The appellant further urges that one of ordinary skill would
not take the arcuate shape of Viste and modify it to be in
conformity with the USGA rules; one instead would select another
groove which was in compliance. (Appeal Brief, page 3, lines 8-
18). We disagree. The diagrams on page 85 include at least one
groove which is of a complex cross-section (the center groove has
rounded edges and almost vertical walls). Complex cross-sectional
grooves are consequently within the level of ordinary skill in the
art.
However, the appellant has argued that it is the orientation
of the grooves which would lead one of ordinary skill in the art
away from the combination, as the Viste and Sasse references
disclose only horizontal grooves for a different purpose (Appeal
Brief, page 3, lines 2-8).
We find this persuasive. The benefits outlined in Viste and
Sasse appear to be dependent on the horizontal nature of the
grooves, and there is no evidence of record that such benefit is
obtained in the vertical grooves of Stuff.
We therefore reverse this rejection.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007