Appeal No. 2004-1225
Application No. 09/840,312
ball is from 80-100, the PGA compression for the cores would
inherently be less than the recommended range for the complete
golf ball. Appellants do not dispute this statement made by the
examiner.
We find, in column 10 at lines 1-19 of Wu, that the cores of
the golf balls of Wu can be solid, hollow, fluid filled, or semi-
solid filled, one-piece or multicomponent cores or wound.
Therefore, appellants’ statement that the golf ball of Wu is
restricted to a wound golf ball is incorrect. We again note that
a reference is not limited to its examples, but is available for
all that it fairly discloses and suggests. See In re Widmer,
supra. Hence, we are unpersuaded by appellants’ argument in this
regard.
We reiterate the examiner’s statement that it is known that
the recommended PGA compression for a complete golf ball is from
80-100. We also observe on page 2, beginning at line 13 of
appellants’ specification, it is disclosed that when a multi-
layer cover is employed, it is known that each cover layer
traditionally has a significantly different Shore D hardness than
an adjacent cover layer, in order to impart to the golf ball a
particular desired combination of spin and distance
characteristics. Hence, it is known to choose particular
properties to achieve particular results, and therefore, absent
evidence to the contrary, we determine that the skilled artisan
would have known to select the claimed PGA compression values of
the core (result effective variables) for achieving certain PGA
compression requirements. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456,
105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Furthermore, we also observe, in Isaac, that Example 2 shows
cores having a PGA compression of 68 in which no cracking
occurred. See column 3, lines 50-55. Hence, Isaac teaches
appellants’ claimed PGA compression value of a core.
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007