Appeal No. 2004-1399
Application No. 09/777,595
the art and preferred ball for controllability. (Cavallaro II,
column 1, lines 52-54, 59-61). Cavallaro II describes a wound
ball with a hard SURLYNŽ cover like applicant’s claimed
invention. (Cavallaro II, column 1, lines 57-58).
Saito also describes a conventional golf ball comprising a
core with an outer wound layer and a SURLYNŽ cover. (Saito,
column 7, lines 28-32). In light of Saito and Cavallaro II, it
would have been prima facie obvious to persons having ordinary
skill in the art to make a ball of Saito or Cavallaro comprising
a core with a wound layer for improved controllability. Again,
appellant has provided no objective evidence or nonobviousness
for our consideration.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, we sustain the examiner’s
final rejection of Claims 1-27 of Application No. 09/777,595
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over the combined teachings of Saito and
Cavallaro II.
The examiner’s decision is affirmed.
-6–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007