Appeal No. 1999-1987 Page 33
Application No. 08/400,129
person having ordinary skill in the art to have modified
McGuckin's device so that the connection between his tether
and ball is made in the manner suggested and taught by
Alexander's Figure 5 embodiment. Moreover, it is our view
that claim 27 is obvious from Alexander alone since claim 27
is anticipated by Alexander under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). In 8
that regard, claim 27 reads on Alexander as follows: Batting
practice apparatus for repeated, rotationally-swinging
presentation of a simulated ball to a
8A disclosure that anticipates under 35 U.S.C. § 102 also
renders the claim unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103, for
"anticipation is the epitome of obviousness." See page 7,
supra.
Page: Previous 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007