Appeal 2006-3098
Application 10/762,413
1 Examiner contends (Answer 3) that in Elson’s "inflatable balloon element 10
2 fails to be in a rod shape." The Examiner asserts that it is known to make
3 balloons in a cylindrical shape and that the intended use of the apparatus
4 does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from the prior art, and that
5 Elson's device is capable of being used as a training device.
6 We reverse.
7 ISSUE
8 Has Appellant shown that the Examiner has failed to establish a prima
9 facie case of obviousness of claim 11 as being unpatentable over Elson?
10 The issue turns on whether Elson is analogous art.
11
12 FINDINGS OF FACT
13 1. Appellant invented a golf training apparatus (Specification 2).
14 2. 85% of golfers swing the ball from outside to inside. Executing a
15 swing from outside to inside is called a slice. An exact direction of flight is
16 only obtained if the club is guided in a plane in the intended direction of the
17 flight of the ball (id.).
18 3. Elson is directed to an improved inflation valve mechanism for
19 balloons and similar low pressure inflation devices (col. 1, ll. 43-45).
20 4. As shown in Fig. 1, element 10 of Elson represents a conventional
21 inflatable balloon (col. 3, l. 25).
22 5. Tank 33 contains compressed helium (col. 4, l. 23).
23
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013