Appeal No. 2003-0918 Page 4
Application No. 09/395,659
presenting evidence that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to arrive at the
claimed invention. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed.
Cir. 1988) and In re Lintner, 458 F.2d 1013, 1016, 173 USPQ 560, 562 (CCPA 1972).
With this as background, we analyze the prior art applied by the examiner in the
rejection of the claims on appeal.
Hoult's invention relates to a lacrosse stick. As shown in Figures 1 and 2, a
lacrosse stick 10 comprises a handle 12 which is rigidly attached to a shank 13 of a
hooked portion 14. The handle 12 is formed as shown in Figure 5 wherein a eight-
flatsided plastic tube 42 has inwardly extending longitudinal ribs 44 for strengthening
the tube 42 and for frictionally engaging a rod 46 which also strengthens the handle 12.
The rod is preferably round and made of wood but it may be made of any other suitable
material such as aluminum tubing or aluminum rod and the shape of the rod may be
changed if required. Hoult teaches (column 2, lines 54-57) that "[t]he shape of the
cross-section of the plastic tube 42 is optional although non-circular cross-section
improves a player's grip and makes for a rotation-resistant joint at the shank."
Kuebler's invention concerns a racket for tennis or the like games, having a
frame for receiving stringing, comprising a possibly hollow profile bar, as well as a
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007