Appeal 2006-2155
Application 10/747,179
Claim 3
Claim 3 requires that the body is received on a tee.
The Appellant argues that “McKee surely does not disclose such a stationary
body actually received on a tee” (Br. 20). That argument is not persuasive because
McKee’s base (210) and tee (220) can be considered to correspond, respectively,
to the Appellant’s tee and body received on the tee (fig. 13C).
Claim 8
Claim 8 requires that the body portion comprises a recess shaped partially in
conformance with a shape of a tip of an American football.
The Appellant argues that “[n]o such recess having such configuration is
anywhere taught or suggested by McKee” (Br. 20). Such a recess is McKee’s
indentation 230 (fig. 13C).
Claim 10
Claim 10 requires that the body portion comprises a rearward facing
projection located slightly left of a centerline of the football when looking forward
from a rear of the football.
The Appellant argues that McKee does not disclose such a portion that gets
struck after a football is kicked as required by claim 1 from which claim 10
depends (Br. 21). That argument is not convincing because the rearward portion of
McKee’s first surface extends both to the right and left of the centerline and, as
indicated by figure 13C, is struck by a kicked football.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013