Appeal No. 2002-1031
Application 09/129,883
takes the position, however, that it would have been obvious to
one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of appellants’
invention to modify the ball of Yamagishi ‘413 such that the
product of Shore D hardness of the inner and outer cover layers
is in the range of 1500-3000, and such that dimples are provided
on the ball arranged in the Type II dimple pattern taught
Yamagishi ‘563. According to the examiner, a golf ball as taught
by Yamagishi ‘413, modified in the manner set forth above, would
have properties that fall within the parameters for a golf ball
as set forth in claim 4, which is all that is required to
establish the obviousness of the subject matter of that claim.
As to the rejection of claim 16 as being unpatentable over
Hayashi in view of Yamagishi ‘563, the examiner finds (answer,
page 5) that Hayashi discloses a golf ball comprising a core
having a distortion of 2.8 to 3.0 mm under an applied load of 100
kg., an outer cover layer having a Shore D hardness in a range of
30-70, and an inner cover layer having a Shore D hardness in a
range of 33-534. The examiner also finds that in Hayashi “[the]
products of the Shore D hardness of an inner cover layer
4It appears that the examiner finds correspondence between
the enclosure layer of Hayashi surrounding the center core of the
ball and the “inner cover layer” of claim 16.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007