Appeal No. 98-1033
Application No. 08/574,330
The Rejection
Claims 4 and 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Easton in view of Gubbins and Carr.
The examiner’s rationale in rejecting the claims is found
on page 2 of the final rejection and reads as follows:
Easton discloses the claimed bat with the
exception of the longitudinal grooves. However, as
disclosed by Gubbins it is known in the art to
provide bats with a streaked surface for the
purposes espoused by the applicant. Furthermore, as
Carr teaches[,] it is known in the art to provide
such grip enhancing grooves directly on the bat
surface. It would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art to have provided Easton’s
bat with a streaked surface directly on the bat as
well for the reasons espoused by Gubbins and Carr.
Opinion
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007