DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 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 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. Internet/E-mail Communication In order to permit communication regarding the instant application via email, Applicant is invited to file form PTO/SB/439 (Authorization for Internet Communications) or include the following statement in a separately filed document (see MPEP 502.03 II): Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with the undersigned and practitioners in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 and 37 CFR 1.34 concerning any subject matter of this application by video conferencing, instant messaging, or electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file. If such authorization is provided, please include an email address in the remarks of a filed response. The examiner’s e-mail address is Christopher.Legendre@uspto.gov. Restriction Applicant's election with traverse of Species 1 in the reply filed on 18 December 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal was made with the following arguments/remarks: -“ The claimed invention is the same regardless of the type of sports stick used as all the sports sticks noted include some type of handle where the invention is used/secured. As shown in the figures, particularly Figure 8 (hockey stick) and Figure 9 (tennis racket) as alternative examples, the claimed invention connects to the handle of the sports stick .” - in response, the Office respectfully notes that a species restriction is based on the disclosure, not the claims (see MPEP 806.04(a)); in any case, par. [0033] states “’Sports stick’ refers to a baseball bat, softball bat, tennis racket, racquet ball paddle, pickle ball handle, hockey stick, or a lacrosse stick, and any other similar stick with a handle used in sports” - accordingly, the term “sports stick” refers to distinct implements having different designs and uses; -“ Regardless of the examples of sports sticks disclosed in paragraph 0033, patent claims are to be given their broadest reasonable interpretation. M.P.E.P. § 2111. The claimed phrase ‘A sports stick device’ is not limited to the examples detailed in the specification and should be given its broadest possible interpretation, i.e. any sports stick .” - in response, the Office respectfully notes that a species restriction is based on the disclosure, not the claims (see MPEP 806.04(a))(note: a species restriction limits the focus of prosecution to a single disclosed invention); - “Applicant disagrees with the Examiner's restriction requirement for each type of sports stick, which would impermissibly require Applicant to file a separate divisional application for each of the disclosed sport stick examples in paragraph 0033 merely due to search parameters. Under the criteria of the restriction requirement, it is unclear if Applicant would be able to file divisional applications for sports sticks that were not specifically listed in the specification.” - in response, the Office respectfully refers to MPEP 802 stating “Two or more independent and distinct inventions may not be claimed in one national application, except that more than one species of an invention, not to exceed a reasonable number, may be specifically claimed in different claims in one national application, provided the application also includes an allowable claim generic to all the claimed species and all the claims to species in excess of one are written in dependent form ( § 1.75 ) or otherwise include all the limitations of the generic claim” (emphasis added); -“ This is in improper as the Examiner is permitted to use prior art for any sports stick giving the broadest interpretation of the claimed phrase ‘sports stick device’, not solely baseball/softball bats (as one species). Each sports stick is a variant of each other as each stick has a handle or stick portion where the invention is expanded and applied to. The end of the tennis racket, baseball bat, or hockey stick (as examples) is not critical to the invention. It is where the invention is applied on the sports stick. ” - in response, the Office respectfully notes that any “variant” relationship is irrelevant as to the propriety of the species restriction in light of the resulting examination burden (note: if the instant remark/argument is intended to mean that all of the identified species are obvious variants of each other, then Applicant should clearly admit on the record that this is the case. If such admission is provided, then the restriction would be withdrawn, and if the examiner finds one of the species unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 over the other species). The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL Claim Objections Claims 2, 8, 15, 19, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 2 , line 1, --at least one-- should be added before “flexible band” (to imbue proper antecedent basis practice and/or number agreement). In claim 8 , line 1, --at least one-- should be added before “flexible band” (to imbue proper antecedent basis practice and/or number agreement). In claim 15 , 2 nd line from bottom, “a” (before “sports stick”) should be changed to --the-- (to imbue proper antecedent basis practice). In claim 19 , line 2, --the-- should be added before “sports stick” (for grammatical purposes). In claim 20 , line 2, “a plurality of flexible bands” should be changed to --the flexible band is one of a plurality of flexible bands that-- (to imbue proper antecedent basis practice). Appropriate correction is required. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in this Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in this Office action. There are no limitations deemed to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. In claim 17 , the limitation recited as “the surface [of the sports stick]” renders the claim indefinite since it lacks antecedent basis (see MPEP 2173.05(e)). In claim 17 , the limitation recited as “a wrap pre-installed on the handle and partially on the surface of the sports stick” renders the claim indefinite since it implies that “handle” is distinct from “sports stick”, and whereas the antecedent limitation “a handle of the sports stick” (claim 15) establishes that “handle” forms part of “sports stick”. To overcome this rejection, the Office suggests changing “the surface” to --another portion-- (or the like). In claim 18 , the limitation recited as “the wrap” renders the claim indefinite since it lacks antecedent basis (see MPEP 2173.05(e)). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Steel, Jr. et al. (US 2020/0078648 - hereafter referred to as Steel). In reference to claim 1 Steel discloses: A sports stick device (i.e., bat 10) , comprising: at least one flexible band (452; “The plurality of annular bodies 452 are formed of a resilient material that can be the same as the resilient material used to form the tubular body 52.” - see par. [0055]) ; wherein: the at least one flexible band is circular (i.e., annular) with an opening (454) in the middle; and the at least one flexible band is stretched (inherent to the securement via resiliency described by “The resiliency of the annular bodies 452 allows for the user to securely readily position one or more of the annular bodies in any location about the handle portion 16 including longitudinally spacing the annular bodies with respect to the knob 28 of the bat 10 and with respect to each other.” - see par. [0063]) outwardly and placed over one end of a sports stick onto at least a portion of a prepositioned wrap (26) on the sports stick. In reference to claim 2 Steel discloses: The sports stick device as recited in Claim 1, wherein the flexible band (452) is relaxed to create a press fit (inherent to the securement via resiliency described in par. [0063]) on the wrap. In reference to claim 3 Steel discloses: The sports stick device as recited in Claim 1, wherein the sports stick is one of the following: baseball bat (note: the bat 10 can be used to hit a baseball) , softball bat (note: the bat 10 can be used to hit a softball) , tennis racket, racquet ball paddle, pickle ball handle, hockey stick, or a lacrosse stick. In reference to claim 4 Steel discloses: The sports stick device as recited in Claim 1, wherein the at least one flexible band (452) includes a digit (“The peripheral outer surface 458 of the annular body 452 can also be formed of a single color, two or more colors, or can include any form of the graphical and/or alphanumeric indicia 70” - see par. [0061]) . In reference to claim 5 Steel discloses: The sports stick device as recited in Claim 1, wherein the at least one flexible band (452) includes a plurality of colors (“The peripheral outer surface 458 of the annular body 452 can also be formed of a single color, two or more colors, or can include any form of the graphical and/or alphanumeric indicia 70” - see par. [0061]) . In reference to claim 6 Steel discloses: The sports stick device as recited in Claim 1, wherein the at least one flexible band (452) includes a chamfered or beveled edge (see Figure 18F) . In reference to claim 7 Steel discloses: A sports stick device, comprising: a bat (10) , wherein the bat has a handle (16) , knob (28) , and barrel (18) ; at least one flexible band (452; “The plurality of annular bodies 452 are formed of a resilient material that can be the same as the resilient material used to form the tubular body 52.” - see par. [0055]) with an opening (454) in the middle of the flexible band; a wrap (26) adhered the handle of the bat, starting at (see Figure 1) a first end of the handle by the knob, extending down (see Figure 1) the handle of the bat towards the second end of the handle before the barrel; and positioning (“The resiliency of the annular bodies 452 allows for the user to securely readily position one or more of the annular bodies in any location about the handle portion 16 including longitudinally spacing the annular bodies with respect to the knob 28 of the bat 10 and with respect to each other.” - see par. [0063]) the at least one flexible band onto at least a portion of the wrap at the second end of the handle. In reference to claim 8 Steel discloses: The sports stick device as recited in Claim 7, wherein the flexible band (452) is relaxed to create a press fit (inherent to the securement via resiliency described in par. [0063]) on the wrap (26) . In reference to claim 9 Steel discloses: The sports stick device as recited in Claim 7, wherein the bat (10) is a baseball bat (note: the bat 10 can be used to hit a baseball) . In reference to claim 10 Steel discloses: The sports stick device as recited in Claim 7, wherein the bat (10) is a softball bat (note: the bat 10 can be used to hit a softball) . In reference to claim 11 Steel discloses: The sports stick device as recited in Claim 7, wherein the at least one flexible band (452) includes a digit (“The peripheral outer surface 458 of the annular body 452 can also be formed of a single color, two or more colors, or can include any form of the graphical and/or alphanumeric indicia 70” - see par. [0061]) . In reference to claim 12 Steel discloses: The sports stick device as recited in Claim 7, wherein the digits of the at least one flexible band (452) spell a message (i.e., an alphanumeric indicia 70 is a type of message) or word. In reference to claim 13 Steel discloses: The sports stick device as recited in Claim 7, wherein the at least one flexible band (452) includes a plurality of colors (“The peripheral outer surface 458 of the annular body 452 can also be formed of a single color, two or more colors, or can include any form of the graphical and/or alphanumeric indicia 70” - see par. [0061]) . In reference to claim 14 Steel discloses: The sports stick device as recited in Claim 7, wherein the at least one flexible band (452) includes a chamfered or beveled edge (see Figure 18F) . In reference to claim 15 Steel discloses: A method of installing a flexible band (452) on a sports stick (10) , comprising (note: the following steps of expanding , routing , and relaxing are inherent to the securement process described by “The resiliency of the annular bodies 452 allows for the user to securely readily position one or more of the annular bodies in any location about the handle portion 16 including longitudinally spacing the annular bodies with respect to the knob 28 of the bat 10 and with respect to each other.” - see par. [0063]) : expanding the flexible band; routing the expanded flexible band over a first end of a sports stick; and relaxing the flexible band on a handle (16) of the sports stick. In reference to claim 16 Steel discloses: The method of installing a flexible band on a sports stick as recited in Claim 15, wherein the flexible band is relaxed substantially on a wrap (26; “The resiliency of the annular bodies 452 allows for the user to securely readily position one or more of the annular bodies in any location about the handle portion 16 including longitudinally spacing the annular bodies with respect to the knob 28 of the bat 10 and with respect to each other.” - see par. [0063]) pre-installed on the handle (16) . In reference to claim 17 (as far as it is clear and definite) Steel discloses: The method of installing a flexible band on a sports stick as recited in Claim 15, wherein the flexible band is relaxed partially on a wrap (26) pre-installed on the handle (16) and partially on the surface of the sports stick (“The resiliency of the annular bodies 452 allows for the user to securely readily position one or more of the annular bodies in any location about the handle portion 16 including longitudinally spacing the annular bodies with respect to the knob 28 of the bat 10 and with respect to each other.” - see par. [0063]) . In reference to claim 18 (as far as it is clear and definite) Steel discloses: The method of installing a flexible band on a sports stick as recited in Claim 15, wherein the flexible band (452) is relaxed to create a press fit (inherent to the securement via resiliency described in par. [0063]) on at least a portion of the wrap (26) and the sports stick (10) . In reference to claim 19 Steel discloses: The method of installing a flexible band on a sports stick as recited in Claim 15, wherein sports stick (10) is one of the following: baseball bat (note: the bat 10 can be used to hit a baseball) , softball bat (note: the bat 10 can be used to hit a softball) , tennis racket, racquet ball paddle, pickle ball handle, hockey stick, or a lacrosse stick. In reference to claim 20 Steel discloses: The method of installing a flexible band on a sports stick as recited in Claim 15, wherein a plurality of flexible bands (452; “The result is that with a variety of differently configured annular bodies 452, the user can readily install one, two, three, four or more annular bodies 452 to the handle portion 16 of the bat 10 in one of hundreds, or thousands, of potential combinations.” - see par. [0062]) are relaxed substantially on the handle (16) of the sports stick (10) . Citations of Pertinent Art The following art is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure. All cited references a resilient band/sleeve for a baseball bat. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT CHRISTOPHER RYAN LEGENDRE whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-3364 . The examiner can normally be reached on FILLIN "Work schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F: 9-5 PM ET . 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 Eugene Kim can be reached at 571-272-4463. 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. /CHRISTOPHER R LEGENDRE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711