Appeal No. 2002-0970
Application 09/181,814
Molitor still would not provide a reasonable basis for the
examiner’s position on the inherency issue. Molitor’s
deficiencies in this regard are perhaps best highlighted by the
examiner’s observation that any attempt by the appellants to show
that the Molitor ball does not inherently possess the claimed
secondary natural frequency characteristics “would be difficult
since the frequency at which a ball would vibrate depends on
numerous variables such as the size of the hollow [core],
thickness of the skin, materials, temperature, club face, how the
ball is hit, condition of the ball and etc.” (answer, page 4).
While the asserted effect of at least some of these variables on
the secondary natural frequency of a ball is questionable, it is
beyond dispute the secondary natural frequency of a ball or any
other object is a function of a number of different variables.
In short, Molitor simply does not provide the factual basis
necessary to support a reasonable finding that the ball disclosed
therein has a construction which would inherently possess the
secondary natural frequency characteristics set forth in claims 1
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007