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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on 5/23/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the 2023-001871 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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) 1-3, 5-11, 13-14, 17-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(a) as being anticipated by Umezawa et al (2013/0196790). Claim 1, Umezawa discloses a golf ball comprising a spherical core, an inner cover layer (applicant’s intermediate layer) positioned outside the spherical core , and an outermost cover positioned outside the inner cover layer and having a plurality of dimples (fig 1), wherein a material hardness Hm (Shore D hardness) of the inner cover layer is 62, a material hardness Hc (Shore D hardness) of the outermost cover is 35, a thickness Tc (mm) of the outermost cover is 1.0 mm (table 9, ex 1), and a total lower volume Vi (mm3) of the plurality of dimples satisfy, Vi>365 and (Hc/Tc)×(Hm/Vi)≤7.5. The total lower dimple volume Vi (fig 2) is 464.4 mm3 (table 3) [(40x1.53) + (184x1.31) + (96x0.73) + (32x1.72) + (16x1.45) + (16x0.62) + (8x0.49)]. Solving the equation [(35/1) x (62/464.4) = 4.7 ≤7.5]. The material hardness Hc of the outermost cover ranges from 35 to 60 in Shore D hardness [0053]. Claims 2-3, Vi = 464.4 mm3 (table 3). Claim 5, the outermost cover contains a polyurethane as a resin component (table 2). Claim 6, the value (Hc/Tc) (35/1= 35) is 30 or more and 75 or less (table 9, ex. 1). Claim 7, the value (Hm/Vi) (62/464.4= 0.13) is 0.08 or more and 0.22 or less (table 9, ex. 1). Claim 8, a surface hardness Hs of the spherical core is 57 Shore D or 86 Shore C (table 9, ex 1). Claim 9, a center hardness Ho of the spherical core is 42 Shore D hardness or 66 Shore C hardness (table 9, ex. 1). Claim 10, the material hardness Hm of the inner cover layer ranges from 50 to 80 in Shore D hardness [0050]. Claim 11, a thickness Tm of the inner cover layer ranges from 1.0 mm to 3.0 mm [0051]. Claim 13, the thickness Tc of the outermost cover ranges from 0.5 mm to 3.0 mm [0054]. Claim 14, Vi = 464.4 mm3 (table 3). Claims 17-18, Solving the equation [(35/1) x (62/464.4) = 4.7 ≤7.5. Claim 20, Vi = 464.4 mm3 (table 3).
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) 1-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. (2023/0082849) in view of Umezawa et al. (2013/0196790). Claim 1, Watanabe discloses a golf ball comprising a spherical core, an intermediate layer positioned outside the spherical core, and an outermost cover positioned outside the intermediate layer and having a plurality of dimples (fig 1). Watanabe further discloses a material hardness Hm (Shore D hardness) of the intermediate layer of 60 [0078], a material hardness Hc (Shore D hardness) of the outermost cover of 35 [0089], and a thickness Tc (mm) of the outermost cover is 1.0 mm [0091]. Watanabe discloses the material hardness Hc of the outermost cover ranges from 35-60 in Shore D hardness [0089]. Watanabe does not disclose a dimple volume greater than 365. Umezawa teaches a three-layer golf ball comprising a total lower dimple volume (fig 2) of 464.4 mm^3 (table 3) [(40x1.53) + (184x1.31) + (96x0.73) + (32x1.72) + (16x1.45) + (16x0.62) + (8x0.49)]. Solving for the equation using the values of Watanabe, as shown above, in view of the total dimple volume of Umezawa, the value is 4.5. (Hc/Tc)×(Hm/Vi)≤7.5 [(35÷1) x (60 ÷ 464.4)= 4.5]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have modified the dimple volume for the desired flight performance. Claims 2-3, Umezawa teaches a total lower dimple volume (fig 2) of 464.4 mm3 (table 3). Claim 4, Watanabe discloses the surface hardness (Shore C hardness) of the spherical core < a surface hardness (Shore C hardness) of the intermediate layer > a surface hardness (Shore C hardness) of the golf ball is satisfied (87.4 < 98 >87) (table 6, ex. 1). Claim 5, Watanabe discloses the outermost cover contains a polyurethane as a resin component [0093]. Claim 6, Watanabe discloses the value (Hc/Tc) is 35 (35/1) (see above). Claim 7, Watanabe discloses the value (Hm/Vi) is 0.13 (60/464.4) (see above). Claim 8, Watanabe discloses the surface hardness H100 of the spherical core ranges from 83-94 in Shore C hardness [0056]. Claim 9, Watanabe discloses the center hardness H0 of the spherical core ranges from 62-72 in Shore C hardness [0064]. Claim 10, Watanabe discloses the material hardness Hm of the intermediate layer ranges from 60-72 in Shore D hardness [0078]. Claim 11, Watanabe discloses a thickness Tm of the intermediate layer ranges from 0.9 mm to 1.5 mm [0080]. Claim 13, Watanabe discloses the thickness Tc of the outermost cover ranges from 0.3 mm to 1.2 mm [0091]. Claim 14, Umezawa teaches a total lower dimple volume (fig 2) of 464.4 mm3 (table 3). Claim 15, Watanabe discloses a difference (Hms-Hcs) between a surface hardness Hms of the intermediate layer and a surface hardness Hcs of the golf ball is more than 0; (98-87) (table 6, ex. 1). Claim 16, Watanabe discloses a difference (Hms-Hs) between a surface hardness Hms of the intermediate layer and a surface hardness Hs of the spherical core is more than 0; (98-87.4) (table 6, ex. 1). Claims 17-18, Solving for the equation using the values of Watanabe, as shown above, in view of the total dimple volume of Umezawa, the value is 4.5. (Hc/Tc)×(Hm/Vi)≤7.5 [(35÷1) x (60 ÷ 464.4)= 4.5]. Claim 20, Umezawa teaches a total lower dimple volume (fig 2) of 464.4 mm3 (table 3). One of ordinary skill in the art would have modified the dimple volume for the desired flight performance.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. (2023/0082849) in view of Umezawa et al. (2013/0196790), and further in view of Tachibana et al. (2017/0173398). Watanabe discloses the material hardness Hc of the outermost cover ranges from 35-60 in Shore D hardness [0089]. Tachibana teaches an outer cover hardness of 31 Shore D (table 3). Varying the hardness by 4 units is within the capabilities of one skilled in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would modify range for the desired performance.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues Umezawa does not discloses the outer cover hardness less than 48. However, Umezawa makes clear the range for the outer cover hardness is from 35 to 60 Shore D [0012; 0053]. In regards to the dimple volume, modifying the dimple is an obvious modification in the golfing art for flight performance.
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 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
June 26, 2026
Prosecution Insights