Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/535,355

PUTTER WITH IMPROVED CONSTRUCTION AND ALIGNMENT

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 11, 2023
Examiner
HUNTER, ALVIN A
Art Unit
3711
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Acushnet Company
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
1128 granted / 1316 resolved
+15.7% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+2.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
1348
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.6%
-38.4% vs TC avg
§103
47.2%
+7.2% vs TC avg
§102
17.9%
-22.1% vs TC avg
§112
14.8%
-25.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1316 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 § 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. Claim(s) 1 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Franklin et al. (US 2013/0203522). Regarding claim 1, Franklin et al. discloses a putter having a first body including a striking face and a rear portion extending rearward from the striking face. Franklin et al. also discloses a centerline CL which would be equivalent to a face center plane (See Figure 3). The centerline passes through the face center of the striking face and is perpendicular to the ground plane. Franklin et al. also discloses the angle surface members on the heel 26 and toe 28 of the putterhead wherein the angle between the two toe surface angle surfaces 28 and 46 is 95 to 175 degrees (See Paragraph 0063). If a line parallel to the striking face is drawn through the center of the angle, the angle of the toeward angled surface 28 in relation to the parallel line is 47.5 to 87.5 degrees. This implies that the angle from the centerline to the toe angle surface 28 is 2.5 to 42.5 degrees. Regarding claim 2, see the above regarding claim 1. 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. Claim(s) 3-5 and 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franklin eta l. (US 2013/0203522). Regarding claim 3, Franklin et al. discloses the first body member including an angled toe surface having an angle relative to the face center plane wherein the plane extending along the angle toe surface intersects the face center plane at a distance. Since the angle can vary, the distance would vary due to its dependency on the angle of the toe surface angle. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have the intersection point of plane extending along the angled toe surface and the face center plane of any distance, as taught by Franklin et al., in order to distribute the weight of the putter head as desired. Regarding claim 4, see the above regarding claim 3. Regarding claim 5, Franklin et al. discloses the first body member including an angled heel surface having an angle relative to the face center plane wherein the plane extending along the angle heel surface intersects the face center plane at a distance. Since the angle can vary, the distance would vary due to its dependency on the angle of the heel surface angle. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have the intersection point of plane extending along the angled toe surface and the face center plane of any distance, as taught by Franklin et al., in order to distribute the weight of the putter head as desired. Regarding claim 11, Franklin et al. discloses a putter having a first body including a striking face and a rear portion extending rearward from the striking face. Franklin et al. also discloses a centerline CL which would be equivalent to a face center plane (See Figure 3). The centerline passes through the face center of the striking face and is perpendicular to the ground plane. Franklin et al. also discloses the angle surface members on the heel 26 and toe 28 of the putterhead wherein the angle between the two toe surface angle surfaces 28 and 46 is 95 to 175 degrees (See Paragraph 0063). If a line parallel to the striking face is drawn through the center of the angle, the angle of the toeward angled surface 28 in relation to the parallel line is 47.5 to 87.5 degrees. This implies that the angle from the centerline to the toe angle surface 28 is 2.5 to 42.5 degrees. Since the angle of the toe angle surface can vary, a distance between the face center plane and a plane extending along the angled toe surface would vary due to its dependency on the angle of the toe surface angle. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have the intersection point of plane extending along the angled toe surface and the face center plane of any distance, as taught by Franklin et al., in order to distribute the weight of the putter head as desired. Regarding claim 12, see the above regarding claim 11. Regarding claim 13, Franklin et al. discloses the first body member including an angled heel surface having an angle relative to the face center plane wherein the plane extending along the angle heel surface intersects the face center plane at a distance. Since the angle can vary, the distance would vary due to its dependency on the angle of the heel surface angle. Regarding claim 14, Franklin et al. discloses the angled heel surface being symmetrical with the angled toe surface about the face center (See Figure 3, 16, and Paragraph 0063). Regarding claim 15, see the above regarding claim 11. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6-10 and 16-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALVIN A HUNTER whose telephone number is (571)272-4411. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 7:30AM to 4:00PM Eastern Time. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eugene Kim, can be reached at telephone number 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice. /ALVIN A HUNTER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 11, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599820
WEIGHTED IRON SET
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594470
Irons with optimized face
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12576315
CLUBHEADS FOR IRON-TYPE GOLF CLUBS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569730
GOLF CLUB HAVING AN ADJUSTABLE WEIGHT ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569731
GOLF CLUB
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
86%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+2.9%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1316 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month