Ex parte KRASKA - Page 8




          Appeal No. 1997-3513                                                        
          Application No. 08/263,700                                                  

          n.1).  The teachings in the three references simply do not                  
          indicate to one of ordinary skill how to improve the                        
          parameters, the optimization of which the examiner has                      
          indicated would have been obvious.  Accordingly, it is our                  
          determination that it would not have been obvious from the                  
          applied prior art to utilize a ball of the claimed hardness                 
          with the claimed smoothness upon its exterior surface.                      

























                                          8                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007