Appeal No. 2002-1031
Application 09/129,883
having a surface formed with a plurality of dimples. According
to appellants, the product of the Shore D hardnesses of the inner
and outer cover layers (which is indicative of the spin rate of
the ball) and certain particulars of the dimple pattern are
selected to improve the flight distance performance of the ball.
A further understanding of the invention can be derived from a
reading of independent claims 4 and 16, respective copies of
which appear in the appendix to appellants’ main brief.
The Applied References
The references relied upon by the examiner as evidence of
obviousness are:
Yamagishi et al. (Yamagishi ‘413) 5,695,413 Dec. 9, 1997
Yamagishi et al. (Yamagishi ‘563) 5,779,563 Jul. 14, 1998
Hayashi et al. (Hayashi) 5,816,942 Oct. 6, 1998
The Rejections
Claims 3-15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Yamagishi ‘413 in view of Yamagishi ‘563.
Claim 16 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Hayashi in view of Yamagishi ‘563.
Reference is made to appellants’ main and reply briefs
(Paper Nos. 20 and 23) and to the examiner’s answer (Paper No.
21) for the respective positions of appellants and the examiner
regarding the merits of these rejections.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007