For the whole decision click here: o40211
Summary
The application relates to an exercise apparatus comprising a balance board arrangement that can be mounted on a separate ball and that a user can stand and balance upon. The board is defined in claim 1 as being substantially flat, although it is noted in the description that this term “substantially flat” could mean “slightly dished at the centre”. The examiner took the view that this gave a particular significance to the meaning of the term “significantly flat” beyond the normal purposive construction of the term, and, as a consequence, rendered the invention obvious in light of prior art patent literature. The Hearing Officer found that the general teaching of the description was to a board having a flat surface or a technically inconsequential departure from flatness. The inventive step argument fell away and the application was remitted to the examiner for grant.