Appeal No. 2004-0919 Page 10
Application No. 09/842,607
In our view, Saito does teach each and every element of the golf ball of
independent claim 25. Claim 25 reads on Saito as follows: A golf ball (Saito's golf ball
shown in Figure 2) comprising: a multi-layer core assembly including (i) a center core
component (Saito's center core 7), and (ii) a solid core layer disposed about said center
core component (Saito's outer core 8); and a multi-layer cover assembly formed about
said multi-layer core assembly, said multi-layer cover assembly comprising (i) an inner
cover layer disposed on said core layer (Saito's inner layer 10), and (ii) an outer cover
layer disposed on said inner cover layer (Saito's outer layer 11), wherein said multi-
layer core assembly exhibits a PGA compression of less than 85 (Saito's multi-layer
core assembly inherently exhibits a PGA compression of less than 85 for the reasons
set forth by the examiner on page 5 of the answer).
It is well settled that a prior art reference need not expressly disclose each
claimed element in order to anticipate the claimed invention. See Tyler Refrigeration v.
Kysor Indus. Corp., 777 F.2d 687, 689, 227 USPQ 845, 846-847 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Rather, if a claimed element is inherent in a prior art reference, then that element is
disclosed for purposes of finding anticipation. See Verdegaal Bros., Inc. v. Union Oil
Co., 814 F.2d at 631-33, 2 USPQ2d at 1052-54.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007