Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 17/802,532

TABLE TENNIS RACKET INCLUDING FINGER SUPPORT PART

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 26, 2022
Examiner
KENNEDY, JOSHUA T
Art Unit
3784
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
6 (Non-Final)
51%
Grant Probability
Moderate
6-7
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 51% of resolved cases
51%
Career Allow Rate
689 granted / 1348 resolved
-18.9% vs TC avg
Strong +48% interview lift
Without
With
+48.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
1390
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
39.5%
-0.5% vs TC avg
§102
33.1%
-6.9% vs TC avg
§112
22.7%
-17.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1348 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claims 4-5 and 10-11 have been canceled. Claims 1-3 and 6-9 have been examined. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, filed 9/11/2025 with respect to the rejection(s) of the claims under 35 USC § 102have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are set forth below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huang (Chinese Patent 1432420 A). As to Claim 1, Yang discloses a table tennis racket comprising: a blade (1); a handle (2) being connected to one side of the blade and symmetrical alignment with the blade; a thumb support part (4) being installed on an upper surface of the blade and being formed with a three-dimensional protrusion part positioned and highly upward protruding on a thumb contact part of a flat surface of the blade on a left side adjacent to the handle, thereby increasing the range of angle adjustment, and naturally adjusting angle of the racket when switching between forehand and backhand (Par. 0018-0020; Figs 1 and 3). As to Claim 2, Yang discloses the table tennis racket of claim 1, wherein a groove (3) is formed between the thumb support part protruding from the flat surface of the blade and the handle (Par. 0018-0020; Figs 1 and 3). Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tillery (US Patent Application Publication 2014/0221133). As to Claim 3, Tillery discloses a table tennis racket comprising: a blade (1); a handle (2) being connected to one side of the blade; an index finger support part (3) being installed on an upper surface of the blade and being formed with a three-dimensional protrusion part positioned on an index finger contact part of a flat surface of the blade on a right side adjacent to the handle, extending and protruding more widely from the handle to an edge of the blade, thereby resolving interference with the blade (3; Fig 8 shows support part 3 protruding from the blade; Par. 0025 also discloses that the tabs are “incorporated into the substrate shape” (e.g. part of the blade)). Claims 6, 7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Siow (US Patent 7993222). As to Claim 6, Siow discloses a table tennis racket (Fig 3) comprising: a blade (U); a handle (V) being connected to one side of the blade; a middle finger, a ring finger, or a little finger support part (Y) being installed on a lower surface of the blade and being formed with a three-dimensional protrusion part positioned on a middle finger, a ring finger, or a little finger contact part of a flat surface of the blade on a front side adjacent to the handle and extending laterally and coupled parallel to the surface of the blade, thereby resolving interference with the middle finger (Col 2, Lines 51-61). As to Claim 7, Siow discloses the table tennis racket of claim 6, wherein a groove (at X formed by the vertically extending portion of the support part and the surface of the blade) is formed in the middle finger, the ring finger or the little support part protruding from the flat surface of the blade. As to Claim 9, Siow discloses the table tennis racket of claim 6, wherein an index finger is capable of being supported by the middle finger, the ring finger, or the little finger support part (Fig 3; Abstract; Examiner notes that any finger is actually capable of being supported by the support (Y) depending on how a user chooses to hold the racket). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siow in view of Yu (CN 201445753). As to Claim 8, Siow discloses the table tennis racket significantly as claimed, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the middle finger, the ring finger, or the little finger support part is formed on a covering attached to the flat surface of the blade (although coverings are universally known to be applied to a hitting surface of a table tennis racket). Yu teaches a similar table tennis racket having a finger support part (7) for gripping by a middle finger, ring finger, and little finger which is mounted to a covering (1) on a blade of the racket to provide an ergonomically placed gripping surface for the user. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the racket of Siow to include a covering and the support part be mounted thereon as taught by Yu to provide a racket with an enhanced grip for pen-style users. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA T KENNEDY whose telephone number is (571)272-8297. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7a-4:30p MST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, LoAn Jimenez can be reached on (571) 272-4966. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /JOSHUA T KENNEDY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784 10/10/2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 26, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 08, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jun 12, 2023
Response Filed
Jun 15, 2023
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 20, 2023
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 21, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 07, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jun 12, 2024
Response Filed
Jun 18, 2024
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Dec 20, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 30, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jun 14, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 14, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 11, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594453
WEIGHT-ADJUSTABLE DUMBBELL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589271
DEVICE FOR PERFORMING PHYSICAL EXERCISES, IN PARTICULAR FOR MOTOR REHABILITATION EXERCISES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582866
EXERCISE BENCH WITH SIDE PADS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576300
Assisted Planche Exercise Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576327
EXERCISE BENCH WITH INTEGRATED WEIGHT STORAGE UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

6-7
Expected OA Rounds
51%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+48.0%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1348 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month