DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in reply to Applicants response after Non-Final Rejection received on June 30, 2026. Claim(s) 1-16 is/are currently pending in the instant application.
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 Examiner acknowledges the Applicants filing of replacement drawings in view of the prior objection. The drawings have been accepted. No claims are amended at this time. Claims 17-20 have been canceled. No claims have been added in the response on June 30, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Viens U.S. Patent 5,427,383 (hereafter Viens).
Regarding claim 1, Viens discloses a substrate (see at least, alignment guide 12, Fig. 11) comprising a top surface, a bottom surface opposite the top surface (see at least, alignment guide has planar upper and lower surfaces, col. 3, lines 47-51), and an origin disposed on the top surface (center 22, Fig. 11), the substrate (see at least alignment guide 12) further comprising a plurality of substrate markings having a set of first substrate markings (62), a set of second substrate markings (68), a set of third substrate markings (64), and a set of fourth substrate markings (66), wherein the first through fourth substrate markings each comprise a differentiating feature (e.g. side to side, front to back, opposite corners); and
a measuring cord (see at least, cord 16, Figs. 1, 2) comprising a first terminal end (cord 16 end at stake 14) and a second terminal end opposite the first terminal end (cord 16 end 20 opposite of stake 14), wherein the measuring cord is configured to rotatably couple to the origin (see at least: stake 14 is installed in center 22), the measuring cord further comprising a plurality of cord markings (where the cord 16 measures each distance with markings 18 and 20, col. 5, lines 10-31); wherein
each of the plurality of cord markings is associated with at least one of the plurality of substrate markings (see at least cord 16, marked 18 and 20, col. 5, lines 20-31).
Regarding claim 2, Viens discloses the plurality of cord markings further comprising in order from the first terminal end a first cord marking, a second cord marking, a third cord marking, a fourth cord marking, and a fifth cord marking (see at least Figs. 3, 5, 7, 9 and Abstract: The playing field may be, for example, volleyball, croquet, or badminton and may be laid out by aligning the cord over relevant lines and marking distances at predetermined locations indicated by the marks. The layout device may then be removed from the playing field so that it does not interfere with the participants.)
Regarding claim 3, Viens discloses wherein the first and fourth cord markings are each associated with the first substrate marking, the second cord marking is associated with the second substrate marking, the third cord marking is associated with the third substrate marking, and the fifth cord marking is associated with the fourth substrate marking (see at least Badminton [Abstract] for example has end lines, side lines, center line to divide left and right service, net line, and short service lines).
Regarding claim 4, Viens discloses wherein the plurality of substrate markings forms a simulated game court boundary at the top surface, the simulated game court boundary comprising:
a plurality of game boundary corners disposed substantially equidistant from the origin to form a first major side, a second major side opposite the first major side, a first minor side, and a second minor side opposite the second minor side; a longitudinal first half having an upper service area portion and an upper non-volley zone portion; and a longitudinal second half having a lower service area portion and a lower non-volley zone portion (see at least Badminton court layout has all of these court lines).
Regarding claim 5, Viens discloses wherein the set of second substrate markings are substantially equidistant from the origin (see at least Badminton, end lines or long service lines).
Regarding claim 6, Viens discloses wherein the set of third substrate markings are substantially equidistant from the origin (see at least Badminton, side lines, singles or doubles).
Regarding claim 7, Viens discloses wherein the set of fourth substrate markings form the game boundary corners of the simulated game court boundary (see at least corners 26/28 Volleyball court Figs. 3-4, Col. 3, lines 59-65 and Badminton 48/50 and 52/54 Figs. 7-8, Col. 4, lines 36-46).
Regarding claim 8, Viens discloses wherein the set of second substrate markings form midpoints of the first major side and the second major side (see at least net line 62 and point line 68).
Regarding claim 9, Viens discloses wherein a subset of the set of first substrate markings form midpoints of the first minor side and the second minor side (see at least net line 62 midpoint of major side and point line 68 midpoint of minor side).
Regarding claim 10, Viens discloses wherein the set of first substrate markings comprises a collinear alignment, wherein the origin bisects the set of first substrate markings (see at least Fig. 11, center point 22 bisects the corner diagonals 26 and 28).
Regarding claim 11, Viens discloses wherein the upper service area portion and the lower service area portion are each formed by subsets of the set of first substrate markings, the set of third substrate markings, and the set of fourth substrate markings (see at least Figs. 7-8, layout for Badminton, similar to layout for tennis or pickleball).
Regarding claim 12, Viens discloses wherein the upper non-volley zone portion and the lower non-volley zone portion are formed by subsets of the set of first substrate markings, the set of second substrate markings, and the set of third substrate markings (see at least Figs. 7-8, layout for Badminton, similar to layout for tennis or pickleball)..
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.
Claim(s) 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cortable.com
(https://cortable.com/) in view of Stay et al. U.S. Patent 5,107,595 (hereafter Stay).
Image 1a (https://cortable.com/)
PNG
media_image1.png
1034
1912
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Image 1b (https://cortable.com/)
PNG
media_image2.png
1034
1912
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Image 2 (https://cortable.com/)
PNG
media_image3.png
1034
1912
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Image 3 (https://cortable.com/)
PNG
media_image4.png
1034
1912
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Image 4 (https://web.archive.org/web/20220328163212/https://cortable.com/)
PNG
media_image5.png
1034
1912
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Image 5 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMcgxI1yVnY&t=4s)
PNG
media_image6.png
1033
1466
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, a stencil periphery having a first major side, a second major side opposite the first major side, a first minor side, and a second minor side opposite the first minor side (images 1a and 1b, first and second major sides being to the left and right of the playing area and the minor sides being the back line of the playing area), the stencil periphery further comprising a first corner formed by an intersection of the first major side and the first minor side, a second corner formed by an intersection of the second major side and the first minor side, a third corner formed by an intersection of the second major side and the second minor side, and a fourth corner formed by an intersection of the first major side and the second minor side (image 1b, four corners formed by two major and two minor sides), the stencil periphery further comprising a longitudinal upper half and a longitudinal lower half (image 1b, center line in the middle of the minor sides extending towards the center);
a plurality of indicators disposed on the stencil periphery comprising: a first upper non-volley indicator disposed on the first major side at the longitudinal upper half (image 1b, strap between first major side and second major side on the left),
a second upper non-volley indicator disposed on the second major side at the longitudinal upper half (image 1b, strap between the first major side and the second major side on the right), wherein the second upper non-volley indicator and the first upper non-volley indicator are equally distanced from the first minor side (see at least image1b),
a first center indicator disposed at a midpoint of the first minor side,
a first lower non-volley indicator disposed on the first major side at the longitudinal lower half (image 1b, strap connected to minor side left in the middle to non-volley boundary left),
a second lower non-volley indicator disposed on the second major side at the longitudinal lower half, wherein the second lower non-volley indicator and the first lower non-volley indicator are equally distanced from the second minor side (image 1b, strap between the first major side and the second major side on the right), and
a second center indicator disposed at a midpoint of the second minor side (image1b).
Cortable fails to disclose the first and second diagonal straps extending from the first to third and second to fourth corners as part of the stencil.
Stay disclseos, in the area of accurate marking and perimeter boundary’s,
a first diagonal strap (4) extending from a first terminal end to a second terminal end (at top left corner 6 to bottom right corner 6), wherein the first diagonal strap couples to the second corner and the fourth corner (top left (2) to bottom right (4));
a second diagonal strap (4) extending from a third terminal end to a fourth terminal end (at top right corner 6 to bottom left corner 6), wherein the second diagonal strap couples to the first corner and the third corner (top right (1) to bottom left (3)), wherein the strap diagonal strap is coupled to the strap diagonal strap at a stencil center (see at least col. 5, lines 6-9; At the midpoint of each of the diagonal members 4 is an indicator marker such as a colored band 12. The bands facilitate the user locating the longitudinal midpoint of each of the diagonally extending members.), therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the court boundary markings as disclosed by Cortable with the diagonal lines for marking square or rectangle areas as taught by Stay for accurate perimeters as using known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way (KSR C)
Regarding claim 14, wherein the first terminal end and the second terminal end each extend beyond the second corner and the fourth corner, respectively, such that the second corner and the fourth corner are each disposed between the first terminal end and the second terminal end (Cortable discloses where major and minor boundary sides extend beyond the corners in order to be secured to the ground. Therefore, it would be clear that a diagonal strap for marking could also proceed past the corner. Additionally it would have been an obvious matter of design choice since such a modification would involve a mere change in the size (in this case the length) of the component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPC 237 (CCPA 1955)).
Regarding claim 15, wherein the third terminal end and the fourth terminal end each extend beyond the first corner and the third corner, respectively, such that the first corner and the third corner are each disposed between the third terminal end and the fourth terminal end (Cortable discloses where major and minor boundary sides extend beyond the corners in order to be secured to the ground. Therefore, it would be clear that a diagonal strap for marking could also proceed past the corner. Additionally it would have been an obvious matter of design choice since such a modification would involve a mere change in the size (in this case the length) of the component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPC 237 (CCPA 1955)).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cortable.com
(https://cortable.com/) in view of Stay et al. U.S. Patent 5,107,595 (hereafter Stay) in further view of Aldstadt U.S. Patent 5,928,095 (hereafter Aldstadt).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Cortable.com and Stay disclose that of claim 13 specifically Cortable.com discloses a loop at the end of the strap and Stay disclosing a hole at the corner but both failing to disclose a grommet specifically.
Aldstadt discloses a court boundary tape and measuring apparatus where the segments in the kits to form basketball courts wherein each of the plurality of anchor straps comprises at least one grommet (grommets 62 and 66 at distal ends of the markers, see Fig. 7) therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the combination of portable pickleball courts as taught by Courtable.com and thepickleballsource.com with the grommets at the ends of the boundary lines as substituting one known element for another would obtain predictable results (KSR B).
Response to Arguments
The remarks begin on page 7 of the response on June 30, 2026 with a summary of the Office Action and amendments to the claims.
Regarding the drawing objection (remarks page 7) the Office has accepted the replacement drawings and the rejection has been withdrawn.
The Applicant moves to the rejection under 35 U.S.C § 103 directed to claims 17-20. The claims have been canceled and the rejection is moot in view of that action.
Regarding the prior notice of allowable subject matter on claims 1-16, unfortunately upon additional searching regarding allowability of the claims, references Viens and Stay were found. These references directly apply to the claimed subject matter of 1-16. The prior notice of allowable subject matter has been rescinded at the present time. The Examiner has presented the above rejection of the claims in response. This Office Action is Non-Final since new art has been collected and applied to the claims.
In summary, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C § 102 and 103. No claims are allowable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DYLAN C WHITE whose telephone number is (571)272-1406. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:00 EST.
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, Beth Boswell can be reached at (571)272-6737. 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.
/DYLAN C WHITE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3625 August 12, 2026
Prosecution Insights