Appeal No. 2002-1924 Page 6
Application No. 09/102,342
Claim 18
Claim 18 reads as follows:
A golf ball comprising:
a molded core; and
a cover having a Shore D hardness of at least 65, wherein the cover is
comprised of at least one high acid ionomer resin comprising a copolymer of
greater than 16% by weight of an alpha, beta-unsaturated carboxylic acid, and
an alpha-olefin of which about 10% to about 90% of the carboxyl groups of the
copolymer are neutralized with a metal cation;
wherein the golf ball has a Riehle compression of 47 or greater.
The argument presented by the appellants does not convince us that the subject
matter of claim 18 is novel for the reasons that follow.
First, the appellants argue that even if Sullivan disclosed all the recited features
of the claims, it would not anticipate any claim since it discloses an additional,
necessary feature not claimed in the present application (i.e., high levels of metal
stearates in the cover of the golf ball) and that it would be impermissible to remove that
feature. Sullivan's golf ball having formulation 35 does not include any metal stearates
in its cover (see Table 13). Moreover, the claims under appeal use "comprising"
language and thus do not exclude the claimed golf ball from having additional features
not claimed in the present application.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007