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 .
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of applicants’ amendment filed April 27, 2026. Claims 1-25 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
Objections to claims 3, 15 and 17 have been withdrawn.
Rejections of claims 4-6, 8, 18 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph have been withdrawn.
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 14-17 and 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Criscuolo (US 3,668,296) in view of Addeo et al. (US 5,512,232).
Claims 1 and 15: Criscuolo discloses a drumhead for a percussion instrument (drum) and a percussion instrument with a shell (cylindrical body) having an upright portion and a drumhead affixed in a tensioned state over the upright portion of the shell (column 2 lines 5-10). The drumhead is shown in Fig. 4 to comprise at least one stretchable membrane (diaphragm section 31) having a striking portion for receiving a strike from a user, an outer peripheral portion, and a rigid frame (ring section 32) integrally fixed to the outer peripheral portion of the at least one membrane, where the frame comprises a hardened resin annular body (column 1 lines 66-72) in which the outer peripheral portion of the at least one membrane is contained (column 2 lines 61-69). The hardened resin annular body is shown in Fig. 4 to have an outer edge defining an outermost edge of the drumhead, and wherein the hardened resin annular body of the frame has a surface shape defined by a mold, as is recognized in the art (column 1 lines 66-71). This reference fails to disclose each side of the annular body to have a surface shape defined by a mold.
However Addeo et al. teaches an injection molding device, in which a resin is fed into a mold to produce a manufactured article and male half-mould is closed onto female half-mould (column 3 lines 6-27). Each side of the manufactured article then would have a surface shape defined by the mold.
Given the teachings of Addeo et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drumhead and percussion instrument disclosed in Criscuolo with providing each side of the annular body to have a surface shape defined by a mold. Doing so would allow “for high throughput rates (fast manufacturing cycles)” and “highly reproducible results to be achieved” as taught in Addeo et al. (column 1 lines 47-55).
Claims 2 and 16: Criscuolo modified by Addeo et al. discloses a drumhead and percussion instrument as stated above, where the hardened resin annular body of the frame is shown in Fig. 4 of Criscuolo to be composed of a resin material that is free of any other materials, except for the outer peripheral portion of the at least one membrane contained therein (column 2 lines 61-69).
Claims 3 and 17: Criscuolo modified by Addeo et al. discloses a drumhead and percussion instrument as stated above, where the rigid, annular body of the frame is disclosed in Criscuolo to have an inner circumference that is configured to fit over an outward-facing surface of a portion of the shell (drum cylinder) of a percussion instrument (column 2 lines 9-11).
Claims 14 and 23: Criscuolo modified by Addeo et al. discloses a drumhead as stated above, where the drumhead is disclosed in Criscuolo to be formed using heat and pressure (column 1 lines 68-72). The resin then comprises a heat-melt resin that hardens when cooled and would shrink at least slightly in size when cooled, as is recognized in the art.
Claim 24: Criscuolo discloses a method of making a drumhead for a percussion instrument (drum) shown in Fig. 4 to comprise at least one stretchable membrane (diaphragm section 31) having a striking portion for receiving a strike from a user, an outer peripheral portion, and a rigid outer frame (ring section 32) integrally fixed to the outer peripheral portion of the at least one membrane, via molding a hardened resin annular body in a mold (column 1 lines 66-72) in which the outer peripheral portion of the at least one membrane is contained (column 2 lines 61-69). The hardened resin annular body is shown in Fig. 4 to have an outer edge defining an outermost edge of the drumhead, and wherein the hardened resin annular body of the frame has a surface shape defined by a mold, as is recognized in the art (column 1 lines 66-71). This reference fails to disclose the mold to be an enclosed mold such that each side of the annular body has a surface shape defined by the mold.
However Addeo et al. teaches a method of injection molding, in which a resin is fed into an enclosed mold to produce a manufactured article and male half-mould is closed onto female half-mould (column 3 lines 6-27). Each side of the manufactured article then would have a surface shape defined by the mold.
Given the teachings of Addeo et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed in Criscuolo with providing the mold to be an enclosed mold such that each side of the annular body has a surface shape defined by the mold. Doing so would allow “for high throughput rates (fast manufacturing cycles)” and “highly reproducible results to be achieved” as taught in Addeo et al. (column 1 lines 47-55).
Claim 25: Criscuolo modified by Addeo et al. discloses a method as stated above, where the enclosed mold is shown in Addeo et al. to be an injection mold (column 2 lines 54-64).
Claims 4-6, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Criscuolo (US 3,668,296) modified by Addeo et al. (US 5,512,232) as applied to claims above, further in view of Ishimatsu (US 6,828,495 B2).
Claims 4 and 18: Criscuolo modified by Addeo et al. discloses a drumhead and percussion instrument as stated above, where the at least one membrane is shown in Fig. 4 of Criscuolo to extend partially into the resin annular body of the frame. These references fail to disclose the at least one membrane to extend into the resin annular body by length that is less than a shortest radial width of the frame.
However Ishimatsu teaches a drumhead and percussion instrument, where at least one membrane (drumhead 2) is shown in FIG. 1A to extend into an annular body of head frame (4) by length that is less than a shortest radial width of the frame.
Given the teachings of Ishimatsu, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drumhead and percussion instrument disclosed in Criscuolo as modified by Addeo et al. with providing the at least one membrane to extend into the resin annular body by length that is less than a shortest radial width of the frame. Doing so would reduce cost of manufacturing by requiring less woven fabric material to be incorporated into the drumhead, than that shown in Fig. 4 of Criscuolo (column 2 lines 55-59).
Claims 5 and 19: Criscuolo modified by Addeo et al. and Ishimatsu discloses a drumhead and percussion instrument as stated above, where the at least one membrane is shown in FIG. 1A of Ishimatsu to extend through a radially inward facing side surface of the annular body of the frame and is spaced apart from an upper surface side of the annular body of the frame.
Claim 6: Criscuolo modified by Addeo et al. discloses a drumhead as stated above, where the at least one membrane is shown in Fig. 4 of Criscuolo to extend into the resin annular body of the frame. These references fail to disclose the at least one membrane to extend through a radially inward facing side surface of the annular body of the frame, spaced apart from an upper surface side of the annular body of the frame.
However Ishimatsu teaches a drumhead, where at least one membrane (drumhead 2) is shown in FIG. 1A of Ishimatsu to extend through a radially inward facing side surface of an annular body of a frame (4) and is spaced apart from an upper surface side of the annular body of the frame.
Given the teachings of Ishimatsu, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drumhead disclosed in Criscuolo as modified by Addeo et al. with providing the at least one membrane to extend through a radially inward facing side surface of the annular body of the frame, spaced apart from an upper surface side of the annular body of the frame. Doing so would increase the amount of contact between a drum rim and the upper surface of the annular body of the frame, thereby allowing even pressure along the frame while maintaining a more consistent tuning of the drumhead.
Claims 9-11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Criscuolo (US 3,668,296) modified by Addeo et al. (US 5,512,232) as applied to claims above, further in view of May et al. (US 8,148,619 B1).
Claim 9: Criscuolo modified by Addeo et al. discloses a drumhead having a membrane as stated above, but fails to disclose the at least one membrane to be a first membrane and further including a second membrane, the first membrane being separable from the second membrane in the striking portion of the membranes.
However May et al. teaches a drumhead shown in FIG. 5 to include a first membrane (non-battered surface 40) and a second membrane (battered surface 42). The first membrane is separable from the second membrane in a striking portion of the membranes, represented by space (63).
Given the teachings of May et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drumhead and percussion instrument disclosed in Criscuolo as modified by Addeo et al. with providing the at least one membrane to be a first membrane and further including a second membrane, the first membrane being separable from the second membrane in the striking portion of the membranes. Doing so would “provide an improved device for damping resonating sounds emanating from a [struck] drumhead membrane that utilizes non-adhesive means to secure the damping device to the drumhead playing surface” as taught in May et al. (column 3 lines 34-38).
Claim 10: Criscuolo modified by Addeo et al. and May et al. discloses a drumhead as stated above, where the second membrane is shown in FIG. 5 of May et al. to be fixed to the rigid frame via the first membrane, while having less tension than the first membrane due to raised portions of the second membrane, and space (63) between the first and second membranes.
Claim 11: Criscuolo modified by Addeo et al. and May et al. discloses a drumhead as stated above, where the first membrane is shown in FIG. 5 of May et al. to be below the second membrane and the second membrane defines a striking surface in the striking portion of the second membrane. These references fail to disclose the second membrane to be below the first membrane and the first membrane to device a striking surface in the striking portion of the first membrane.
However it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the second membrane to be below the first membrane and the first membrane to device a striking surface in the striking portion of the first membrane instead of the first membrane to be below the second membrane and the second membrane to define the striking surface in the striking portion of the second membrane, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Doing so would provide a more traditional appearance of the drum due to the higher tensioned membrane being the visible membrane.
Claim 20: Criscuolo modified by Addeo et al. discloses a percussion instrument having a membrane as stated above, but fails to disclose the membrane to be a first membrane and further including a second membrane, the first membrane to be separable from the second membrane in the striking portion and the second membrane to be fixed to the rigid frame with less tension than the first membrane.
However May et al. teaches a drumhead shown in FIG. 5 to include a first membrane (non-battered surface 40) and a second membrane (battered surface 42). The first membrane is separable from the second membrane in a striking portion of the membranes, represented by space (63). The second membrane is shown to be fixed to the rigid frame via the first membrane, while having less tension than the first membrane due to raised portions of the second membrane, and space (63) between the first and second membranes.
Given the teachings of May et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drumhead and percussion instrument disclosed in Criscuolo as modified by Addeo et al. with providing the membrane to be a first membrane and further including a second membrane, the first membrane to be separable from the second membrane in the striking portion and the second membrane to be fixed to the rigid frame with less tension than the first membrane. Doing so would “provide an improved device for damping resonating sounds emanating from a [struck] drumhead membrane that utilizes non-adhesive means to secure the damping device to the drumhead playing surface” as taught in May et al. (column 3 lines 34-38).
Claims 12, 13, 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Criscuolo (US 3,668,296) modified by Addeo et al. (US 5,512,232) as applied to claims above, further in view of Yoshino et al. (US 6,756,535 B1).
Claims 12, 13, 21 and 22: Criscuolo modified by Addeo et al. discloses a drumhead as stated above, but fails to disclose the stretchable membrane to comprise a first membrane of an air permeable mesh material and a second membrane of an air permeable mesh material.
However Yoshino et al. teaches a drumhead where a first membrane (first net 56) if shown in FIG. 5 to be of an air permeable mesh material and a second membrane (second net 58) to be of an air permeable mesh material (column 5 lines 51-55).
Given the teachings of Yoshino et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drumhead and percussion instrument disclosed in Criscuolo as modified by Addeo et al. with providing the stretchable membrane to comprise a first membrane of an air permeable mesh material and a second membrane of an air permeable mesh material. Doing so would provide a drumhead “which is excellent in percussion feeling and in which the percussion sound is extremely quiet” as taught in Yoshino et al. (column 2 lines 3-5)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 7: Although the prior art (US 8,686,264 B2) teaches the annular body of a frame (hoop main body 41) to have an upper surface side and a lower surface side, a plurality of depressions (second accommodating part 45b) in the lower surface side that are depressed inward toward the upper surface side of the annular body of the frame, as shown in FIG. 2, the prior art does not teach nor suggest a plurality of first depressions in the upper surface side that are depressed inward toward the lower surface side of the annular body, and the frame being integrally fixed to the outer peripheral portion of at least one membrane. The combinations of the claimed limitations are novel and found to be allowable over prior art. The cited references taken singly or in combination do not anticipate nor make obvious applicant's claimed invention.
Claim 8 depend from claim 7 and therefore inherit all allowed claim limitations.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on April 28, 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of U.S. Patent No. 10,043,499 B2 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER UHLIR whose telephone number is (571)270-3091. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-4.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached at 571-270-3614. 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.
/Christopher Uhlir/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619 July 20, 2026
Prosecution Insights