Appeal No. 2001-2635
Application 09/168,083
In the examiner’s view, Murphy discloses a golf ball having
a cover including a pattern comprising pigment (col. 4, line 24)
and metal particles made of aluminum (col. 5, lines 1-2). Murphy
additionally notes (col. 4, lines 26-28) that the size and
quantity of particles applied to the surface of the golf ball can
vary depending upon the reflective property desired. In column 4,
lines 29-32, the patentee indicates that the size of particles
can vary from very small to large, but generally will be in the
range from 0.002” x 0.002” x 0.00045” in thickness to 0.125”
square, with a thickness of 0.002”. Recognizing that the size of
the metal particles disclosed in Murphy is nothing like the size
of the flattened metal particles set forth in appellants’
independent claim 9 on appeal, the examiner contends that varying
the size of the metal particles does not provide a patentable
distinction, since Murphy discloses that particle size may vary
depending upon desired properties. More specifically, the
examiner urges that where general parameters are set forth in the
prior art it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable
ranges by routine experimentation, citing In re Aller, 105 USPQ
233 (answer, pages 3-4).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007