Appeal No. 98-1033
Application No. 08/574,330
The key question, in our view, is what one of ordinary
skill in the art would have derived from Gubbins. On the one
hand, it appears that the examiner regards Gubbins as teaching
that the provision of longitudinal grooves alone would be
sufficient to bring about Gubbins objective of holding the
ball from lateral bounds which causes fouls. On the other
hand, appellant has taken the position that
[t]he intended purpose of the Gubbins sleeve is to
contact and hold the ball in order to reduce fouls,
and not to enhance the spin which is imparted to the
ball. The materials selected for the sleeve [of
Gubbins] are intended to be softer than the
underlying bat surface which is formed of wood. It
is submitted that, even at the time of the Gubbins
invention, it would have been possible to form
grooves in the surface of a wooden bat. However,
this would not have served the intended purpose of
the Gubbins invention. [Brief, page 5.]
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007