Appeal No. 2004-0099 Page 5
Application No. 09/388,663
decreasing the angle of loft by 7 degrees and increasing the angle of lie by 3 degrees in
order to meet the terms of the claim. The appellant argues in rebuttal that there is no
suggestion to modify the Davis club in the manner proposed by the examiner.
Even assuming, arguendo, that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art to modify the Davis irons by replacing the blade heads with metal wood
heads in view of the teachings set forth in column 1 of Kobayashi, we cannot agree with
the examiner that it would have been obvious in view of Muldoon to further modify the
Davis clubs by changing the loft and lie angles to those specified in claim 22. Muldoon
is directed to an apparatus for adjusting the loft and lie of a golf club by manipulating
the club shaft with respect to the head, that is, bending the shaft to change the loft and
lie angles. The purpose of the Muldoon methods and apparatus is “personalizing” the
club for a particular golfer by measuring the optimum loft and lie of a club for that golfer,
and then adjusting the shaft with respect to the head to meet these personalized needs
(column 2). There is no mention in Muldoon of the loft and lie angles recited in the
appellant’s claim 22, nor in our opinion is there any teaching that would have directed
one of ordinary skill in the art to decrease the loft in the Davis 3 iron from 24 degrees to
the “approximately 17 degrees” recited in claim 22, or to increase the lie from 58
degrees to “approximately 60 degrees.” If it is the examiner’s contention that the
obviousness is vested on the fact that this might possibly occur in practicing the
Muldoon invention with regard to a particular golfer, such a conclusion is mere
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007