Appeal No. 2003-0918 Page 8
Application No. 09/395,659
a rigid elongate member, having a length and a longitudinal axis,
comprising a plurality of ridges and trenches which extend along substantially the
entire length of said elongated member and which are substantially parallel to
said longitudinal axis; and
a lacrosse stick head, comprising a means for fixing said rigid elongate
member to said lacrosse stick head.
In the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 before us in this appeal, the
examiner concluded (answer, p. 3) that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art to have formed Hoult's handle in the manner taught by Kuebler (i.e., to
have provided the edges of Hoult's handle with longitudinal ribs as taught by Kuebler).
The appellants argue (brief, p. 4) that this rejection of claim 1 is in error because
Kuebler provides the longitudinal ribs to hold his handle covering in place, which is
contrary to the purpose and benefits of the claimed invention.
In our view, the combined teachings of Hoult and Kuebler would have made it
obvious at the time the invention was made to a person of ordinary skill in the art to
have provided the edges of Hoult's handle with longitudinal ribs as taught by Kuebler so
that the information relating to the position of Hoult's lacrosse stick can still be felt, even
when using heavy gloves.2 The appellants' argument is not persuasive that any error in
the examiner's determination regarding the obviousness of the claimed subject matter
2 In our view, a heavy glove worn by a lacrosse player is the functional equivalent to the grip strip
found on the handle of a tennis racket.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007