Appeal No. 2003-0017 Page 14
Application No. 09/326,996
marker) the modified tool of Piazza would still lack the second golf ball marker holding
portion for depositing a golf ball marker on and retrieving a golf ball marker from the
ground. In that regard, it is our view that the examiner's determination (answer, p. 4)
that Piazza's "pump is obviously capable of storing and retrieving a golf ball marker"
lacks sufficient evidentiary and technical basis. Accordingly, it is our determination that
Piazza's pump is not inherently capable of storing and retrieving a golf ball marker. As
such, the above-noted modification of Piazza does not arrive at the subject matter of
claim 7.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the examiner to reject claim 7,
and claims 2, 11, 21 and 22 dependent thereon, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
Claims 8 to 10
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 8 to 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Piazza in view of Erickson and Pruitt.
We have also reviewed the reference to Pruitt additionally applied in the rejection
of dependent claims 8 to 10 but find nothing therein which makes up for the
deficiencies of Piazza and Erickson discussed above with respect to parent claim 7.
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007