Appeal No. 2003-1426 Page 2
Application No. 09/635,638
BACKGROUND
The appellants’ invention relates to a golf ball. An understanding of the invention
can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1, which appears in the appendix to
the Brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Moriyama et al. (Moriyama) 5,518,246 May 21, 1996
Melvin et al. (Melvin) 5,779,562 Jul. 14, 1998
Claims 1-3, 5-10, 13, 14, 16-21, 23-31 and 33 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Melvin in view of Moriyama.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the Answer
(Paper No. 19) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and
to the Brief (Paper No. 18) and Reply Brief (Paper No. 20) for the appellants’ arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellants’ specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner. As a consequence
of our review, we make the determinations which follow.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007