Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/465,277

Adjustable Weight Putter

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Sep 12, 2023
Examiner
GORDEN, RAEANN
Art Unit
3711
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
1220 granted / 1469 resolved
+13.0% vs TC avg
Minimal -5% lift
Without
With
+-5.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
1510
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
45.8%
+5.8% vs TC avg
§102
13.8%
-26.2% vs TC avg
§112
21.0%
-19.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1469 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1-19 in the reply filed on 7/8/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no indication the claims fall into different separate classification. This is not found persuasive because classes include subclasses and the claims are clearly identified as a golf club head and method of using the club head which is distinct. The searches for golf club heads and a method of using the device are different. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claims 1-19 are 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 1, where is the spring-loaded surface? The cover of the weight is not clearly claimed as part of the invention. The tool opening is not claimed as part of the invention. Claim 3, the tool is not claimed as part of the invention. The spring-loaded surface is not claimed as part of the invention. What is the difference among the spring-loaded surface, plunger, and spring-loaded plunger [0031]? The locking ball is not claimed as part of the invention. Claim 5 are the plurality of opening and the plurality of weights in addition to the opening and weight in the base claim? Claim 8, the spring-loaded surface is not claimed as part of the invention. What is the difference among the spring-loaded surface, plunger, and spring-loaded plunger [0031]? Where is the finger in the figures? The tool is not claimed as part of the invention. Where is the recess space located? Claim 9, the post 7 does not appear to extend into the opening at the center according to figures 1 and 5, screw 4 is at the center. Where is the ball housing? Claim 11, are the two openings in addition to the opening in the base claim? Claim 12, the tool is not claimed as part of the invention. Claims 14-17, where is the spring-loaded surface? The cover of the weight is not clearly claimed as part of the invention. The tool opening is not claimed as part of the invention. Claim 19, the spring-loaded surface is not claimed as part of the invention. What is the difference among the spring-loaded surface, plunger, and spring-loaded plunger [0031]? Where is the finger in the figures? The tool is not claimed as part of the invention. Where is the recess space located? The post 7 does not appear to extend into the opening at the center according to figures 1 and 5, screw 4 is at the center. Where is the ball housing? The location of the flared distal end of the post 7 in relation to the opening in the club head is not clear. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAEANN GORDEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4409. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm. 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 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. /RAEANN GORDEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711 September 29, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 12, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599819
GOLF CLUB HEAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594464
GOLF BALLS HAVING AT LEAST ONE RADAR DETECTABLE MARK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594465
GOLF BALLS HAVING INCREASED IMPACT DURABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582876
GOLF BALL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576314
GOLF CLUB HEAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (-5.0%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1469 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month