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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 02/17/2026 has been entered. Claims 8-11 are pending in the application (claims 1-7 are withdrawn).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claims 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gebert (20220347541) in view of Chen (20170354850).
Regarding claim 8, Gebert (Figures 1-5) teaches a ball, comprising: a single-piece seamless hollow spherical shell (14) (Para. 0012), defining a plurality of uniformly spaced holes (42) in a wall thereof (Para. 0012).
Gebert does not teach a ball manufactured via an additive manufacturing process, the internal reinforcement structure is integrally formed on the inner surface of the wall during the additive manufacturing process, an internal reinforcement structure disposed on an inner surface of the wall of the spherical shell and extending from the inner surface toward a center of the hollow spherical shell, the internal reinforcement structure configured to strengthen the wall of the hollow spherical shell.
It is noted that the claim recitations of “a ball manufactured via an additive manufacturing process” and “wherein the internal reinforcement structure is integrally formed on the inner surface of the wall during the additive manufacturing process” are directed to a product that is made by a process (a product-by-process claim). 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 (See: In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985)). The combined teachings of the prior art of Gebert and Chen teach the final product as claimed and therefore meets the claim.
Chen (Figures 1-5) teaches an internal reinforcement structure (13) (Para. 0018) disposed on an inner surface of the wall of the spherical shell (See figures 1-5) and extending from the inner surface toward a center of the hollow spherical shell (See figures 1-5), the internal reinforcement structure configured to strengthen the wall of the hollow spherical shell (Para. 0018), wherein the internal reinforcement structure (13) (Para. 0018) is formed on the inner surface of the wall (Para. 0016-0017) (See figures 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Gebert with an internal reinforcement structure as taught by Chen as a means of providing an interior of a hollow ball with ribs to reinforce the structural strength of the ball to prevent the ball from being deformed or distorted due to hitting or treading (Chen: Para. 00018).
Regarding claim 9, the modified Gebert (Figures 1-5) teaches a ball, comprising: a single-piece seamless hollow spherical shell (14) (Para. 0012), defining a plurality of uniformly spaced holes (42) in a wall thereof (Para. 0012).
The modified Gebert does not teach the internal reinforcement structure is an internal rib structure of interconnected ribs, that form a web of ribs, protruding inward from the inner surface of the wall of the hollow spherical shell.
Chen (Figures 1-5) teaches the internal reinforcement structure is an internal rib structure of interconnected ribs (Fig. 4, Part No. 12, 13) (Para. 0018), that form a web of ribs (See fig. 4), protruding inward from the inner surface of the wall of the hollow spherical shell (Para. 0018).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Gebert with the internal structure is an internal rib structure of interconnected ribs as taught by Chen as a means of providing an interior of a hollow ball with ribs to reinforce the structural strength of the ball to prevent the ball from being deformed or distorted due to hitting or treading (Chen: Para. 00018).
Regarding claim 10, the modified Gebert (Figures 1-5) teaches a ball, comprising: a single-piece seamless hollow spherical shell (14) (Para. 0012), defining a plurality of uniformly spaced holes (42) in a wall thereof (Para. 0012).
The modified Gebert does not teach the internal reinforcement structure is a plurality of rim ribs formed around an internal circumferential edge of each of the plurality of holes and extending inward from the inner surface of the wall of the of the spherical shell toward a center of the hollow spherical shell.
Chen (Figures 1-5) teaches the internal structure is a plurality of rim ribs (Fig. 1-4, Part No. 12, 13) (Para. 0018) formed around an internal circumferential edge of each of the plurality of holes (see fig. 1-5) and extending inward from the inner surface of the wall of the of the spherical shell toward a center of the hollow spherical shell (Para. 0018).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Gebert with the internal reinforcement structure is a plurality of rim ribs as taught by Chen as a means of providing an interior of a hollow ball with ribs to reinforce the structural strength of the ball to prevent the ball from being deformed or distorted due to hitting or treading (Chen: Para. 00018).
Regarding claim 11, the modified Gebert (Figures 1-5) teaches the seamless hollow spherical shell has a smooth outer surface without any weld seams. (Para. 0012).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the prior art of record does not teach the recitation in claim 8 of “a ball manufactured via an additive manufacturing process” and “wherein the internal reinforcement structure is integrally formed on the inner surface of the wall during the additive manufacturing process”, this is not found persuasive because the recited limitations of claim 8 are directed to a product that is made by a process (a product-by-process claim). 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 (See: In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985)). The combined teachings of the prior art of Gebert and Chen teach the final product of a ball having internal reinforcement structure and therefore meets the claim.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CHRISTOPHER GLENN whose telephone number is (571)272-1277. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m..
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.
/C.G./Examiner, Art Unit 3711
/JOSEPH B BALDORI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711