DETAILED ACTION
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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.
Claims 1-5 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.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the substrate layer", “the two silencing layer”, “the two panels”, “the plurality of silencing holes”, “the two surface”, “the first adhesive layer”, “the two surfaces”, “the second adhesive layer”, “the plurality of through holes”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim appears to be written in view of claim 1, however, claim 5 is an independent claim and does not utilize claim 1 to define antecedent basis.
Claims 1-5 each include the PEAK acronym which appears to be a brand name or an acronym. An acronym should have the definition spelled out prior to the use of the acronym. A brand name should not be used as the name does not clearly define the bounding of the subject matter for which protection is sought. As such, these claims are considered indefinite. Appropriate correction is required. The application is examined as best understood by the examiner.
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 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)(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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Xu (CN 117258251 A).
Regarding claim 1, Xu teaches 1. A PEAK racket, comprising a body including a substrate layer and two panels; See Fig. 2, wherein the two panels are respectively stacked on two surfaces of the substrate layer, and See Fig. 1, the body further comprises a racket body and a handle that is connected to a racket body; and See Fig. 1, wherein a silencing layer is bonded and fastened to the two surfaces of the substrate layer through a first adhesive layer, See Fig. 2; (14)(13), a plurality of silencing holes are provided on each silencing layer, See Fig. 1 and 2; (141) "a plurality of silencing and noise-reducing holes 141", an outer surface of each silencing layer is bonded and fastened to an inner side surface of a corresponding panel through a second adhesive layer, and See Fig. 2; (15), a plurality of through holes for reducing wind resistance are provided at a middle of the racket body, each through hole running through outer surfaces of the two panels. See Fig. 1 and 2; (141) "a plurality of silencing and noise-reducing holes 141".
Regarding claim 2, Xu teaches 2. The PEAK racket of claim 1, wherein the substrate layer is made of a PP honeycomb material. "most of the racket in the market is made of PP honeycomb-shaped material as the base material layer".
Regarding claim 3, Xu teaches 3. The PEAK racket of claim 1, wherein the panel is a glass fiber panel or a carbon fiber panel. "The panel 12 is a glass fiber plate or a carbon fiber plate.".
Regarding claim 4, Xu teaches 4. The PEAK racket of claim 1, wherein the silencing layer is made of foam cotton or fabric. "The silencing and noise reducing layer 14 is made of foaming cotton or cloth material, which is not limited.".
Regarding claim 5, Xu teaches 5. A manufacturing process for a PEAK racket, comprising the steps of:(a) taking the substrate layer, the two silencing layers, and the two panels, wherein the substrate layer, the two silencing layers, and the two panels are adapted to the PEAK racket; (b) drilling in a portion areas of the two silencing layers, to form the plurality of silencing holes; (c) fastening the two silencing layers to the two surfaces of the substrate layer through the first adhesive layer; (d) fastening the two panels to the outer surfaces of the two silencing layers through the second adhesive layer; and (e) drilling at the middle of the racket body, to form the plurality of through holes that are used to reduce wind resistance, wherein each through hole runs through the outer surfaces of the two panels. See Fig. 2 which shows the different section as rejected in claim 1 above. The steps of manufacturing would be obvious in view of the disclosure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bertrand FR 3117881 A1 - which teaches a racket with holes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY S VANDERVEEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0503. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11am - 7pm CST.
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, Nicholas Weiss can be reached at (571) 270-1775. 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.
/JEFFREY S VANDERVEEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3711