|
|
Court OpinionsState LawsUS CodeUS Constitution |
Ex Parte Kusumoto et al - Page 7Legal Research Home > Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences > 2003 > Ex Parte Kusumoto et al - Page 7
Appeal No. 2003-1937
Application No. 09/522,296
disclosure is found in column 5, lines 17-25, regarding the
embodiment of Figure 3 in the Take patent. In the reply brief,
appellants further contend that the combinations posited by the
examiner are the result of hindsight reconstruction based on
appellants' own disclosure and not on any disclosure or
suggestion of the desirability of making such changes in the club
head structure of Mockridge found in the applied references
themselves.2
Having considered the applied patents to Mockridge, Take,
Helmstetter and Drajan, we share appellants' view that there is
no motivation, teaching or suggestion in the applied references,
whether considered individually or collectively, for the
examiner's proposed combinations thereof. In our opinion,
appellants have correctly assessed the teachings of Take, and
correctly concluded that this patent teaches away from a club
head construction like that claimed by appellants. We also agree
with appellants that the examiner has used impermissible
hindsight derived from appellants' own teachings in seeking to
2 We have understood appellants' many references to "Drajan
'033" in the brief and reply brief as being to Drajan '318, the
reference applied by the examiner in the rejections on appeal.
77
|