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 § 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 4, 7, 8 and 20 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.
The claims fail to define any structure thereof and how the thickness and height of the thickened stress reducing region is to be measured. While the claims are read in light of the specification, limitations are not imported absent of some explicit definition.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
(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) 11- 13 and 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Matsunaga et al. 2022/0032134.
As to claim 11, Matsunaga shows a golf club head comprising: a striking face portion 2 located at a frontal portion of said golf club head, adapted to impact a golf ball, and a body portion 4, attached to a rear of said striking face portion, wherein said striking face portion comprises: a central opening 201; and a face insert 101 to cover said central opening that comprises a thickened stress reducing region at 203 that is considered to curve in the shape of a ring having a fourth thickness t1, wherein said thickened stress reducing region forms a ring protruding rearward from said face insert; and a thickened central region 105, located near a geometric center of said face insert, having a first thickness t2; wherein said fourth thickness of 3.3mm [0073] is greater than said first thickness of 2.2mm [0074].
Claims 12, 13 and 15 are considered met were the crown leading edge, crown apex and top ledge are is not structurally defined in any relationship to any other elements. As such, 103a can be considered a crown leading edge, apex or top ledge that is effectively zero mm away meeting the less than 1.0mm or less than 10mm as recited.
As to claim 16, element 203 considered to be fourth thickness of said thickened stress reducing region is a thickest portion of said striking face portion as shown in fig. 6.
Claims 17 and 18 are considered met where the average width of a typical iron golf club ranges from 3-3.5 inches (76-89mm) and 1.5-2 inches (38-51mm) in height. Such puts his thickened stress reducing region 203 at between 38-44.5mm from the center within the claimed range of 15-46.0 mm across any radial direction and 20-25 mm across a vertical cross-section.
Claim(s) 11-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Murphy et al. 2003/0100381
As to claim 11, Murphy shows a golf club head comprising: a striking face portion 72 located at a frontal portion of said golf club head, adapted to impact a golf ball, and a body portion 60, attached to a rear of said striking face portion, wherein said striking face portion comprises: a central opening at 46 in fig. 8; and a face insert 60 to cover said central opening that comprises a thickened stress reducing region at 74 that is considered to curve in the shape of a ring having a fourth thickness d, wherein said thickened stress reducing region can be described as forming a ring protruding rearward from said face insert; and a thickened central region at 723, located near a geometric center of said face insert, inherently having a first thickness; wherein said fourth thickness is greater than said first thickness as shown in fig. 8.
Claims 12, 13 and 15 are considered met were the crown leading edge, crown apex and top ledge are is not structurally defined in any relationship to any other elements. As such, 180 can be considered a crown leading edge, apex or top ledge that is effectively zero mm away meeting the less than 1.0mm or less than 10mm as recited.
As to claim 16, element d is considered to be fourth thickness of said thickened stress reducing region is a thickest portion of said striking face portion as shown in fig. 8. As to dimensional recitations in claims 14 and 17-19, Murphy shows at [0098] width w in fig 1A is 78mm and height is 48mm for an aspect ratio in a range of 1-1.7.625 and that such is conventionally in the range of 1.9. With what can be called his thickened stress reducing region in his skirt of 74, such is considered to be place a height distance H at half his center of 24mm withing the claimed range of 15-30mm.
As to claim 20 where the thickness of the thickened stress reducing region is considered d to measure .2-1 inch (5-25.4mm) [0073], such calculates a range of results in a T/H ratio using 24mm for the height of rom range of .2- 1,05 overlapping and meeting the claimed range of about 0.6 to about 1.1.
Conclusion
Claims 1-10 are allowed only for the reasons set forth by the Board in their decision issued on 8/26/25 in the parent application 17/471,040. Claim 4 is rejected as set forth above as being indefinite.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to William Pierce whose telephone number is (571)272-4414 and E-mail address is bill.pierce@USPTO.gov. For emergency assistance, supervisory assistance can be obtained with Nicholas Weiss at (571)270-1775.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, communication via email at the above address may be found more effective. Where current PTO internet usage policy does not permit an examiner to initiate communication via email, such are at the discretion of the applicant. However, without a written authorization by applicant in place, the USPTO will not respond via Internet e-mail to any Internet correspondence which contains information subject to the confidentiality requirement as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 122. A paper copy of such correspondence will be placed in the appropriate patent application. The following is a sample authorization form which may be used by applicant:
“Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with me by responding to this inquiry by electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.”
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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/WILLIAM M PIERCE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Prosecution Insights