Appeal No. 2005-2393
Application No. 10/228,392
To remedy these deficiencies, the examiner relies on the
disclosures of Whitaker, Bayliss, Murtland and Pompa. We find
that Whitaker illustrates a set of golf clubs having shafts which
are progressively increased in length. See Figure 2 and column
3, lines 29-45. We find that Whitaker teaches (column 1, lines
24-30):
It is known in the golfing art to provide an array of
clubs for engaging in the game of golf. The clubs are
sequentially configured to provide differing ball striking
range potentials varying from longest distance to shortest
distance due to differences therebetween in shaft length and
club head face angle or “loft”.
It is also known that the ball striking distance range potential
increases as the shaft increases in length. See also Whitaker,
column 1, lines 30-42. We find that Whitaker teaches (column 1,
lines 60-67) that:
The effect of shaft flexibilities on golf shots is well
known. A more flexible shaft...will provide a greater ball
striking range potential than a more stiff shaft...when the
same swing or striking force is applied. However, it is
also known that a more flexible shaft will impart a
potential for poorer accuracy on a given golf shot when
compared to a similar shot made with a club having a stiffer
shaft.
The appellants also acknowledges at page 1 of the specification
that metal shafts are known to have characteristics, such as high
torsional stiffness, which yield accurate ball control and good
feel, but pooler distance, and that composite shafts are known to
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007