Appeal No. 2003-1272 Page 20
Application No. 10/039,338
inherent the missing descriptive matter must necessarily be present in the specification
such that one skilled in the art would recognize such a disclosure. We find that there is
nothing in the appellants' specification to suggest that shapes other than ribs/ridges that
each provide a line contact with the turf and thus prevent damage to the turf and do not
penetrate golf turf are necessarily a part of the disclosure. Indeed, as discussed above,
the specification clearly teaches that protrusions which provide a point or a circle (for a
truncated cone, for example) contact with the turf damage and penetrate golf turf. As
such, one skilled in the art would have understood from the appellants' original
disclosure that only a cleat having ribs/ridges which provide a series of line contacts
with the turf would be able to prevent damage to the turf and would not penetrate golf
turf. Thus, in light of the foregoing, the level of predictability in this field would have
been such that one skilled in the art would have been surprised to discover that
protrusions, traction members or traction elements other than ribs providing a line
contact (e.g., protrusions that provide a point or circle contact) could be designed in a
manner so that the protrusions do not damage the turf and would not penetrate golf turf.
For the reasons set forth above, the original disclosure does not support the
later-claimed, generic subject matter of claims 26 to 34.
CONCLUSION
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007