DETAILED ACTION
New Non-Final Office Action
This new non-final Office action replaces the non-final Office action mailed on 1/29/2026.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 7 and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by PROSTOCKHOCKEY.COM, “Stick Personalization” https://www. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ir7NrUZqZhc&t=21s (cited on IDS) (hereafter Prostockhockey).
With respect to claim 7, Prostockhockey teaches a hockey stick (video), comprising: a shaft (video) extending between an upper end and a lower end, the shaft including an outer surface having a namebar (printed text area) configured for acceptance of a printed design (YOUR NAME), the namebar disposed at a location on the outer surface of the shaft, the shaft further including a gripping material covering (video) at least a portion of the outer surface excluding the location at which the namebar is disposed, wherein the namebar is free of the gripping material (video).
PNG
media_image1.png
970
1322
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 33, Prostockhockey teaches wherein the namebar has a rectangular shape (broadest reasonable interpretation) (video).
Claim(s) 7 and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by How to Apply Your Stick Bandits Sticker by StickBanditsHockey https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRGiEU2WTxA (hereafter StickBandits).
With respect to claim 7, StickBandits teaches a hockey stick (video; and description of this is how you properly apply your Stick Bandits sticker to your hockey stick), comprising: a shaft (video) extending between an upper end and a lower end, the shaft including an outer surface having a namebar (silver sticker) configured for acceptance of a printed design (BANDIT 15), the namebar disposed at a location on the outer surface of the shaft, the shaft further including a gripping material covering (white grip wrap) at least a portion of the outer surface excluding the location at which the namebar is disposed, wherein the namebar is free of the gripping material (video).
PNG
media_image2.png
962
1320
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 33, StickBandits teaches wherein the namebar has a rectangular shape (video).
Claim(s) 7 and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Personalizing sticks at Pro Stock Hockey! (hereafter Personalizing Sticks).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVHWVYi0HFk
With respect to claim 7, Personalizing Sticks teaches a hockey stick (video), comprising: a shaft (video) extending between an upper end and a lower end, the shaft including an outer surface having a namebar (printed text area) configured for acceptance of a printed design (ANDERSON 78), the namebar disposed at a location on the outer surface of the shaft, the shaft further including a gripping material covering (video) at least a portion of the outer surface excluding the location at which the namebar is disposed, wherein the namebar is free of the gripping material (video).
PNG
media_image3.png
964
1318
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 33, Personalizing Sticks teaches wherein the namebar has a rectangular shape (broadest reasonable interpretation) (video).
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(s) 30 and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prostockhockey or Personalizing Sticks as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of DE-10241295A1 (hereafter DE ‘295).
With respect to claims 30 and 32, Prostockhockey does not teach wherein the namebar is covered by a solvent based clear coat; and wherein the solvent-based clear coat has a specific hardness of approximately 80D.
However, DE ‘295 teaches a solvent based crystal-clear coating with a hardness of 80° Shore D (embodiment 4 of the machine translation).
At the time of filing the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to coat the namebar of Prostockhockey or Personalizing Sticks with the crystal-clear coating of DE ‘295 in order to protect the namebar from wear and/or damage while still allowing players to see the printed namebar.
Claim(s) 30-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over StickerBandits as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Majumdar et al. (US2004/0103974A1) (hereafter Majumdar).
With respect to claims 30-32, StickerBandits does not teach wherein the namebar is covered by a solvent based clear coat; wherein the solvent-based clear coat includes urethane as a component thereof; and wherein the solvent-based clear coat has a specific hardness of approximately 80D.
However, Majumdar teaches wherein the label/sticker is covered by a solvent based clear coat (figure 1; and paragraphs 26-28, 36, 42, 46, 48, 52, and 71); and wherein the solvent-based clear coat includes urethane as a component thereof (paragraphs 27, 36, 46, 48, and 71). Regarding the hardness of the solvent-based clear coat, it is the examiner position that the hardness of the two-component solvent-borne polyurethane system of Majumdar intrinsically has a specific hardness of approximately 80D. However, if the applicant can prove that the two-component solvent-borne polyurethane system of Majumdar does not have a hardness of approximately 80D, then it is the examiner’s position that it would have been obvious to employ a solvent-borne polyurethane with a hardness of approximately 80D in order to provide the desired protection. When the reference discloses all the limitations of a claim except a property or function, and the examiner cannot determine whether or not the reference inherently possesses properties which anticipate or render obvious the claimed invention but has basis for shifting the burden of proof to applicant as in In re Fitzgerald, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP § 2112- 2112.02.
Claim(s) 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prostockhockey or StickerBandits or Personalizing Sticks.
With respect to claim 34, StickerBandits or Prostockhockey or Personalizing Sticks do not explicitly teach wherein a lower edge of the namebar is disposed between 10 and 100 centimeters from one of the lower end and the upper end of the shaft.
However, is it the examiner position that the location of the namebar on the hockey stick is merely an obvious design choice. The artisan would have been motivated to position the namebar between 10 and 100 centimeters from one of the lower end and the upper end of the shaft in order to display the sticker at the player’s desired location.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KILEY SHAWN STONER whose telephone number is (571)272-1183. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday.
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, Keith Walker can be reached on 571-272-3458. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KILEY S STONER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights