FAIRHAVEN, Mass. – Acushnet Co. is chalking up another win in its long-running dispute with Callaway Golf over four golf ball patents after the U.S. Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences said they were invalid.

The dispute began more than five years ago over Acushnet Co.’s Titleist Pro V1 line of multilayered golf balls. Callaway alleged that the Pro V1 line infringed on four Callaway patents for multilayered golf balls. Acushnet responded by contending that the rival company’s patents were not valid.

Acushnet requested the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office reexamine each of the four patents on January 2006.

In a decision issued Wednesday, the Board of Appeals found nothing wrong with the PTO’s prior conclusion that the subject matter of the patents in question would have been “obvious,” meaning that advancements claimed in the patents would have been clear based on available information to a person skilled in golf-ball making, SouthCoastToday.com said.

Callaway can still appeal the patent office’s decision.

The decision from the patents office is separate from a patent infringement suit Callaway filed in February 2006, requesting $246 million in damages. In that court decision, which came in March 2010, a federal jury ruled Callaway’s patents were invalid.

Callaway has already appealed the verdict in the March 2010 jury trial, but the judge hearing the matter has yet to issue a ruling on Callaway's motions, SouthCoastToday.com said.

“Throughout this long-running dispute, Acushnet has always maintained that these patents are invalid and should never have been issued,” said Joe Nauman, Acushnet’s executive vice president corporate and legal. “The Board of Patent Appeals’ decision is one significant step closer to having that view finally and permanently confirmed by the court system.”

According to SouthCoastToday.com, a spokesman for Callaway said the Board of Patent Appeals, the administrative law body of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, did not have the authority to decide on the validity of the patents as the two companies had previously entered into an agreement that all legal proceeding related to patent disputes would be tried only in Delaware’s U.S. District Court.

“The validity of the patents is currently being considered independently in the only appropriate forum, the federal court in Delaware, so the decision from the patent office does not end the case in any way,” said Tim Buckman, senior director of global communications. “If necessary, we will appeal the decision to the Federal Circuit.”