Appeal No. 1999-0515 Page 11
Application No. 08/620,256
Nowak. Second, Nowak does not disclose any particular surface
appearance on the balls. Third, there would appear to be no
reason or advantage to be achieved by giving any of the balls
disclosed by Nowak the surface appearance of the seamed ball
that is typically pitched in a baseball (or softball) game.
From our perspective, the only suggestion for doing so is found
in the luxury of the hindsight accorded one who first viewed
the appellant’s disclosure. This, of course, is not the proper
basis for a rejection under Section 103. See In re Fritch,
972 F.2d 1260, 1266, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
It therefore is our opinion that the combined teachings of
the applied references fail to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness with regard to the subject matter recited in either
of the independent claims, and therefore we will not sustain
the Section 103 rejection.
SUMMARY
Neither of the rejections is sustained.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007