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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 1, 3, 5-8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakata et al. (JP-2020162473-A; herein English machine translation used for all citations) in view of Izaki et al. (US-20190373875-A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nakata teaches a rear grip base material comprising a main body portion (enlarged-diameter section, 100B or 10B) and a tubular fitting adhesion portion (small diameter section, 100A or 10A) at one end of the main body portion and to which a rod body is fitted and adhered (Nakata, Par. 0001, 0006, 0009, 0011-0014, and Fig. 1). Nakata teaches the tubular fitting adhesion portion comprises an innermost layer (12), an inner diameter adjustment layer (13), a main body layer (23) and an outermost layer (15), wherein each layer is a fiber-reinforced resin layer (Nakata, Par. 0015-0020, 0023-0026, 0028, and Fig. 3). Nakata teaches the rear grip base material is used for forming a rear grip of a fishing rod (Nakata, Par. 0001 and Fig. 1). Regarding the limitation of the rear grip base material forming a rear grip of a fishing rod by internal pressure molding, this is considered a product-by-process limitation. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (See MPEP 2113). The real grip base material structure of the prior art discloses a product which reasonably appears to be either identical or substantially identical to the claimed product-by-process rear grip base material structure subjected to the process steps of internal pressure molding, and therefore absent any objective evidence showing to the contrary, the addition of the process limitations of claim 1 does not provide a patentable distinction over the prior art. Nakata further teaches the inner diameter adjustment layer is formed by a multiple turn layer (Nakata, Par. 0017, 0028, and Fig. 3).
Nakata is silent regarding the fibers of the fiber-reinforced resin of the inner diameter adjustment layer being inclined 20 to 70 degrees relative to a circumferential direction of the rear grip base material.
Izaki teaches a material for use in fishing rods comprising a fiber-reinforced resin material, wherein the fiber-reinforced resin material is a plain weave and fibers of the plain weave are wound to be diagonally oriented at 45 degrees with respect to an axial direction of the fishing rod, resulting in an angle of 45 degrees with respect to a circumferential direction of the fishing rod (Izaki, Abstract, Par. 0009, and 0059-0060), which lies within the claimed range of 20 degrees to 70 degrees and therefore satisfies the claimed range, see MPEP 2131.03.
Nakata and Izaki are analogous art as they both teach fiber-reinforced resin materials for use in fishing rods. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the inner diameter adjustment layer of Nakata to be a plain weave with fibers that are diagonally oriented within the claimed range. This would allow for improved strength and scratch resistance (Izaki, Par. 0060).
Regarding claim 3, modified Nakata teaches the inner diameter adjustment layer is formed by at least one turn of a fiber-reinforced prepreg sheet as viewed in a circumferential direction (Nakata, Par. 0018, 0023, and Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 5, modified Nakata teaches the inner diameter adjustment layer comprises a multiple-turn layer of one plain weave as viewed in a circumferential direction (Nakata, Par. 0017, 0028, and Fig. 3; Izaki, Abstract, Par. 0009, and 0059-0060).
Regarding claim 6, modified Nakata teaches a part of the innermost layer is formed to overlap the inner diameter adjustment layer in an axial direction of the rear grip base material (Nakata, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 7, modified Nakata teaches a part of the innermost layer is formed on an inner surface of the main body layer (Nakata, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 8, modified Nakata teaches the innermost layer, main body layer, and the outermost layer extend across the main body portion, and thus modified Nakata satisfies the limitation of the main body portion being formed such that the innermost layer, the main body layer, and the outermost layer extend (Nakata, Par. 0017, 0019-0020, 0023-0028, Fig. 2, and 4).
Regarding claim 10, modified Nakata teaches a rear grip formed using the rear grip base material (Nakata, Par. 0001). Regarding the limitation of the rear grip being formed via internal pressure molding, this is considered a product-by-process limitation. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (See MPEP 2113). The real grip base material structure of the prior art discloses a product which reasonably appears to be either identical or substantially identical to the claimed product-by-process rear grip base material structure subjected to the process steps of internal pressure molding, and therefore absent any objective evidence showing to the contrary, the addition of the process limitations of claim 10 does not provide a patentable distinction over the prior art.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakata et al. in view of Izaki et al., Oserada et al. (JP-2019062918-A; herein English machine translation used for all citations), and Kawamura (WO-2021192431-A1; US-20230309524-A1 used as English language equivalent).
Regarding claim 1, Nakata teaches a rear grip base material comprising a main body portion (enlarged-diameter section, 100B or 10B) and a tubular fitting adhesion portion (small diameter section, 100A or 10A) formed at one end of the main body portion and to which a rod body is fitted and adhered (Nakata, Par. 0001, 0006, 0009, 0011-0014, and Fig. 1). Nakata teaches the tubular fitting adhesion portion comprises an innermost layer (12+13), an inner diameter adjustment layer (23), and a main body layer (14+15), wherein each layer is a fiber-reinforced resin layer (Nakata, Par. 0015-0020, 0023-0026, 0028, and Fig. 3). Nakata teaches the rear grip base material is used for forming a rear grip of a fishing rod (Nakata, Par. 0001 and Fig. 1).
Nakata is silent regarding the fibers of the fiber-reinforced resin of the inner diameter adjustment layer being inclined 20 to 70 degrees relative to a circumferential direction of the rear grip base material.
Izaki teaches a material for use in fishing rods comprising a fiber-reinforced resin material, wherein the fiber-reinforced resin material is a plain weave and fibers of the plain weave are wound to be diagonally oriented at 45 degrees with respect to an axial direction of the fishing rod, resulting in an angle of 45 degrees with respect to a circumferential direction of the fishing rod (Izaki, Abstract, Par. 0009, and 0059-0060), which lies within the claimed range of 20 degrees to 70 degrees and therefore satisfies the claimed range, see MPEP 2131.03.
Nakata and Izaki are analogous art as they both teach fiber-reinforced resin materials for use in fishing rods. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the inner diameter adjustment layer of Nakata to be a plain weave with fibers that are diagonally oriented within the claimed range. This would allow for improved strength and scratch resistance (Izaki, Par. 0060).
Modified Nakata is silent regarding the tubular fitting adhesion portion comprising an outermost layer that is a fiber-reinforced resin layer.
Oserada teaches a rear grip base material (21) comprising a main body portion (41) and a tubular fitting adhesion portion (40), wherein the tubular fitting adhesion portion comprises a fiber-reinforced main resin layer (50) and an outermost layer (51+52) (Oserada, Par. 0001, 0006, 0023, 0032-0033, 0039-0040, 0049-0050, Figs 5-6 and 7b).
Modified Nakata and Oserada are analogous art as they both teach rear grip base materials formed of multiple layers of fiber-reinforced resin. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the outermost layer (51+52) of Oserada as outermost layers of the tubular fitting adhesion portion of modified Nakata. This would allow for reinforcement of the rear grip base material (Oserada, Par. 0050).
Modified Nakata is silent regarding the rear grip base material being used for forming a rear grip of a fishing rod by internal pressure molding.
Kawamura teaches forming a grip for a fishing rod via internal pressure molding, wherein the grip is formed of a fiber reinforced resin material (Kawamura, Abstract, Par. 0049, 0053, and 0076).
Modified Nakata and Kawamura are analogous art as they both teach fiber reinforced resin grips for fishing rods. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use internal pressure molding to form the rear grip base material of modified Nakata into a rear grip of a fishing rod. This would allow for an outer surface that is more favorably molded as well as reduced weight of the material (Kawamura, Par. 0076).
Regarding claim 2, modified Nakata teaches the innermost layer is formed by a one-turn layer of two fiber-reinforced prepreg sheets (12+13) as viewed in a circumferential direction (Nakata, Par. 0018, 0023, and Fig. 3). Modified Nakata teaches the main body layer is formed by a one-turn layer of two fiber-reinforced prepreg sheets (14+15) as viewed in a circumferential direction (Nakata, Par. 0018, 0023, and Fig. 3). Modified Nakata teaches the outermost layer is formed by a one-turn layer of two fiber-reinforced prepreg sheets (51+52) as viewed in a circumferential direction (Oserada, Par. 0032-0033, 0039-0040, 0049-0050, and Fig. 7b).
Regarding claim 3, modified Nakata teaches the inner diameter adjustment layer is formed by at least one turn of a fiber-reinforced prepreg sheet (23) as viewed in a circumferential direction (Nakata, Par. 0017, 0028, and Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 5, modified Nakata teaches the inner diameter adjustment layer comprises a multiple-turn layer of one plain weave as viewed in a circumferential direction (Nakata, Par. 0017, 0028, and Fig. 3; Izaki, Abstract, Par. 0009, and 0059-0060).
Regarding claim 6, modified Nakata teaches a part of the innermost layer is formed to overlap the inner diameter adjustment layer in an axial direction of the rear grip base material (Nakata, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 8, modified Nakata teaches the innermost layer, main body layer, and the outermost layer extend across the main body portion, and thus Nakata satisfies the limitation of the main body portion being formed such that the innermost layer, the main body layer, and the outermost layer extend (Nakata, Par. 0017, 0019-0020, 0023-0028, Fig. 2, and 4; Oserada, Par. 0039-0040 and Fig. 7b).
Regarding claim 9, Nakata teaches a grip material comprising a main body portion (enlarged-diameter section, 100B or 10B) and a tubular fitting adhesion portion (small diameter section, 100A or 10A) formed at one end of the main body portion and to which a rod body is fitted and adhered (Nakata, Par. 0001, 0006, 0009, 0011-0014, and Fig. 1). Nakata teaches the tubular fitting adhesion portion comprises an innermost layer (12+13), an inner diameter adjustment layer (23), and a main body layer (14+15), wherein each layer is a fiber-reinforced resin layer (Nakata, Par. 0015-0020, 0023-0026, 0028, and Fig. 3). Nakata teaches the rear grip base material is used for forming a rear grip of a fishing rod (Nakata, Par. 0001 and Fig. 1).
Nakata is silent regarding the fibers of the fiber-reinforced resin of the inner diameter adjustment layer being inclined 20 to 70 degrees relative to a circumferential direction of the rear grip base material.
Izaki teaches a material for use in fishing rods comprising a fiber-reinforced resin material, wherein the fiber-reinforced resin material is a plain weave and fibers of the plain weave are wound to be diagonally oriented at 45 degrees with respect to an axial direction of the fishing rod, resulting in an angle of 45 degrees with respect to a circumferential direction of the fishing rod (Izaki, Abstract, Par. 0009, and 0059-0060), which lies within the claimed range of 20 degrees to 70 degrees and therefore satisfies the claimed range, see MPEP 2131.03.
Nakata and Izaki are analogous art as they both teach fiber-reinforced resin materials for use in fishing rods. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the inner diameter adjustment layer of Nakata to be a plain weave with fibers that are diagonally oriented within the claimed range. This would allow for improved strength and scratch resistance (Izaki, Par. 0060).
Modified Nakata is silent regarding the tubular fitting adhesion portion comprising an outermost layer that is a fiber-reinforced resin layer.
Oserada teaches a rear grip base material (21) comprising a main body portion (41) and a tubular fitting adhesion portion (40), wherein the tubular fitting adhesion portion comprises a fiber-reinforced main resin layer (50) and an outermost layer (51+52) (Oserada, Par. 0001, 0006, 0023, 0032-0033, 0039-0040, 0049-0050, Figs 5-6 and 7b).
Modified Nakata and Oserada are analogous art as they both teach rear grip base materials formed of multiple layers of fiber-reinforced resin. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the outermost layer (51+52) of Oserada as outermost layers of the tubular fitting adhesion portion of modified Nakata. This would allow for reinforcement of the rear grip base material (Oserada, Par. 0050).
Modified Nakata is silent regarding the material a reel seat base material that is used for forming a reel seat of a fishing rod by internal pressure molding.
Kawamura teaches forming a handle member including a reel seat and a grip for a fishing rod via internal pressure molding, wherein the handle member including the reel seat and the grip is formed of a fiber reinforced resin material (Kawamura, Abstract, Par. 0011-0012, 0014, 0049, 0053, and 0076).
Modified Nakata and Kawamura are analogous art as they both teach fiber reinforced resin materials for fishing rods. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use internal pressure molding to form the material of modified Nakata into a reel seat of a fishing rod as taught by Kawamura. This would allow for reel seat with a good grip and reduced weight, as well as a material with an outer surface that is more favorably molded (Kawamura, Par. 0076; Nakata, Par. 0006).
Regarding claim 10, modified Nakata teaches a rear grip formed by internal pressure molding by using the rear grip base material (Nakata, Par. 0001; Kawamura, Par. 0076).
Regarding claim 11, modified Nakata teaches a reel seat formed by internal pressure molding by using the reel seat base material (Kawamura, Par. 0011-0012 and 0076).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks and amendments filed 06 August 2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant requests withdrawal of the objection recited in the previous office action.
The objection recited in the previous office action has been withdrawn due to the present claim amendments.
Regarding arguments directed to the rejections over prior art, Applicant argues that Izaki’s sheet 100 is a different application than the sheet 23 of Nakata and thus would not have the benefit of the sheet of Izaki. This is not found persuasive for the following reasons:
Both Nakata and Izaki teach fiber-reinforced resin materials for use in fishing rods that are wrapped as stated in the grounds of rejection above. In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Izaki provides motivation for utilizing a plain weave with the angle such as allowing for improved strength and scratch resistance (Izaki, Par. 0060).
Applicant has not provided any evidence that the material of Nakata would not receive the benefits disclosed in Izaki or that the material of Nakata could not have been formed to have the claimed angle.
For the reasons stated above, Nakata in view of Izaki render obvious the claimed angle and Applicant’s argument is unpersuasive.
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 THOMAS J KESSLER JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3075. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5:30 M-Th.
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, Aaron Austin can be reached at 571-272-8935. 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.
/THOMAS J KESSLER/Examiner, Art Unit 1782
Prosecution Insights