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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 10, 11 and 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/22/2026.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Specifically, claim 22 recites dependency to withdrawn claim 20. However, it is clear that claim 22 is intended to be dependent off of claim 21, and has been interpreted as such for the instant examination.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-9, 12-16 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US Patent 11547914 to Rause.
Regarding claim 1, Rause discloses a toss game projectile, comprising: an outer covering (301); a non-metallic structural insert (303) housed within the outer covering (Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39); and a bead-type filler (305; Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39) located between the structural insert and the outer covering (Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39), wherein the bead-type filler surrounds the structural insert (Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39).
Regarding claim 2, the outer covering encompasses the bead-type filler, and wherein the outer covering at least partially defines a body of the projectile (Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39).
Regarding claim 3, the structural insert reduces deformation of the body (Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39).
Regarding claim 4, the structural insert is formed of a polymer (Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39 – plastic is a type of polymer), wherein the outer covering is formed of a woven fabric (Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39 – fabric is inherently woven), and wherein at least a portion of the body includes bean-bag like tactile properties (Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39 – “bean-bag like properties are inherent to a fabric shell filled with beads).
Regarding claim 7, the body includes one of a horseshoe-like shape (Fig. 3D) and a disc-like shape.
Regarding claim 8, the body extends between a first end and a second end, wherein the body includes a horseshoe-like shape having a first leg and a second leg, and wherein the structural insert extends into the first leg and the second leg (Fig. 3D).
Regarding claim 9, the structural insert has a first end and a second end, wherein the first end of the structural insert is located at the first end of the body, and wherein the second end of the structural insert is located at the second end of the body (Fig. 3D).
Regarding claim 12, Rause discloses a toss-type game apparatus, comprising: a projectile body (300) extending between a first end and a second end (Fig. 3D); an outer covering (301) defining an outer surface of the projectile body (Fig. 3D); a structural insert (303) disposed within the projectile body (Fig. 3D), wherein the structural insert increases a stiffness of at least a portion of the projectile body (col. 5, ll. 18-39); and a bead-type filler located between the structural insert and the outer covering (Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39), wherein the filler encompasses the structural insert (Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39).
Regarding claim 13, the structural insert is a polymer (Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39 – plastic is a type of polymer), wherein the outer covering is a woven fabric (Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39 – fabric is inherently woven), and wherein the outer covering and the bead-type filler impart textural beanbag-like tactile properties to at least a portion of the projectile body (Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39 – “bean-bag like properties are inherent to a fabric shell filled with beads).
Regarding claim 14, the structural insert extends along a perimeter of the projectile body (Fig. 3D), and wherein the structural insert extends within the projectile body for substantially the entire length of the perimeter (Fig. 3D).
Regarding claim 15, the projectile body defines one of a horseshoe-like shape (Fig. 3D) and a disc-like shape.
Regarding claim 16, the projectile body includes a horseshoe-like shape including a first leg and a second leg, and wherein the structural insert extends into the first leg and the second leg (Fig. 3D).
Regarding claim 21, Rause discloses an apparatus, comprising: a body (300) configured to be tossed by a user (col. 5, ll. 18-39); an outer covering (301) defining an outer surface of the body (Fig. 3D); wherein the body has one of a horseshoe-like shape (Fig. 3D) and a disc-like shape; a non-metallic structural insert (303 and col. 5, ll. 18-39) located internal to body (Fig. 3D), wherein the structural insert increases a stiffness of the body (col. 5, ll. 18-39); and a bead-type filler sandwiched between the structural insert and the outer covering (Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39), wherein the filler completely surrounds the structural insert (Fig. 3D and col. 5, ll. 18-39).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 5, 6, 17 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rause.
Regarding claims 5, 6, 17, and 22, Rause discloses the limitations as set forth in the rejections above, but is silent regarding the specific composition of the plastic filler beads. However, a high-density polyethylene/polypropylene and calcium carbonate blend was/were conventional or well-known to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention, sufficient for the examiner to take official notice. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have recognized that modifying Rause to include a high-density polyethylene/polypropylene and calcium carbonate blend, would have advantageously provided a bag fill that allows for all weather play (these are well-known in the American Cornhole Association as an all-weather option compared to the traditional corn fill). Further, calcium carbonate is well-known in the plastics industry as an additive to the polymer to create a composite material with increased mechanical strength while reducing warping or shrinkage (again, which enhances all-weather capability). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention, to modify the plastic bead fill of Rause to include a high-density polyethylene/polypropylene and calcium carbonate blend.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicholas J Weiss whose telephone number is (571)270-1775. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7:00-4:00.
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.
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.
/NICHOLAS J. WEISS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Prosecution Insights