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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 2-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 2 states that the internal cavity has a fibrous fill; however, claim 1 recites the internal cavity having a fibrous fill. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claims 3-5 and 7 are also rejected due to dependency of claim 2.
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) 1-5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cleghorn et al. (US 2017/0173413) in view of Kazama (JP 07-039610).
Regarding claim 1, Cleghorn et al. discloses a club head having a striking face portion and body portion. The striking face and body together define an internal cavity evident by Figures 5 and 6. The body portion incorporates a weight adjustment portion having an elongate channel, weight member, and fastener. The elongate channel has a plurality of scalloped depressions along the lower wall (See Figures 40-67). The weight member is received in the channel and has a fastener receiving aperture. The fastener has a fastener head and threaded shaft both depicted in Figure 62 of element 1122 and engages the weight member wherein the fastener head is secured to the scalloped depressions. Cleghorn et al. does not disclose a fibrous fill in the internal cavity. Kazama discloses a club head having an internal cavity wherein the internal cavity has a fibrous fill of cotton (See Paragraph 0006). One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have the internal cavity filled with cotton, as taught by Kazama, in order to improve the hitting sound of the club head.
Regarding claim 2, see the above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, see the above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, Applicant does not disclose why having a fibrous fill of more than 25% of the internal cavity is critical in order to attain the invention. Kazama shows a fibrous fill occupying a volume amount of the internal cavity and notes that the fibrous fill suppresses the impact sound. Absent any showing of unexpected results or advantage, one having ordinary skill in the art would have concluded that the fibrous fill of the instant invention would be added for the same reason and would be mere routine optimization (See In re Aller).
Regarding claim 5, see the above regarding claim 4.
Regarding claim 7, Applicant does not disclose why having a fibrous fill of less than 30% of the total weight is critical in order to attain the invention. Kazama discloses the fibrous material being 2 grams and notes that the fibrous fill suppresses the impact sound (See Paragraph 0006). Absent any showing of unexpected results or advantage, one having ordinary skill in the art would have concluded that the weight of fibrous fill of the instant invention would achieve the same results and would be mere routine optimization (See In re Aller).
Claim(s) 8-12, 14-16, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoneyama (GB 2172510 A) in view of Kazama (JP 07-039610).
Regarding claim 8, Yoneyama discloses a club head having a striking face portion and body portion attached to the rear of the striking face portion, wherein the striking face portion and body portion define an internal cavity filled with fibrous fill 26 (See Figure 2 and Abstract). Yoneyama shows the fibrous fill filling more than 25% of the internal cavity (See Figure 2). Yoneyama does not disclose a fibrous fill in the internal cavity. Kazama discloses a club head having an internal cavity wherein the internal cavity has a fibrous fill (See Paragraph 0006). Kazama also notes that the entire internal cavity can be filled with a fibrous fill (See Paragraph 0006). One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have the internal cavity with a fibrous fill, as taught by Kazama, in order to improve the hitting sound of the club head. Applicant does not disclose why having a fibrous fill of less than 30% of the total weight is critical in order to attain the invention. Kazama discloses the fibrous material being 2 grams and notes that the fibrous fill suppresses the impact sound (See Paragraph 0006). Absent any showing of unexpected results or advantage, one having ordinary skill in the art would have concluded that the weight of fibrous fill of the instant invention would achieve the same results and would be mere routine optimization (See In re Aller).
Regarding claim 9, Yoneyama discloses the fibrous fill being glass fiber (See Page 2, lines 32 through 35).
Regarding claim 10, Applicant does not disclose why having a fibrous fill of more than 25% of the internal cavity is critical in order to attain the invention. Kazama shows a fibrous fill occupying a volume amount of the internal cavity and notes that the fibrous fill suppresses the impact sound. Absent any showing of unexpected results or advantage, one having ordinary skill in the art would have concluded that the fibrous fill of the instant invention would be added for the same reason and would be mere routine optimization (See In re Aller).
Regarding claim 11, see the above regarding claim 10.
Regarding claim 12, the density of the fibrous fill to the striking face is considered to be met being that Yoneyama discloses the striking face made of stainless steel and the fibrous fill made of a glass fiber.
Regarding claim 14, Yoneyama discloses a club head having a striking face portion and body portion attached to the rear of the striking face portion, wherein the striking face portion and body portion define an internal cavity filled with fibrous fill 26 (See Figure 2 and Abstract). Yoneyama shows the fibrous fill filling more than 25% of the internal cavity (See Figure 2). The density of the fibrous fill to the striking face is considered to be met being that Yoneyama discloses the striking face made of stainless steel and the fibrous fill made of a glass fiber. Yoneyama does not disclose a fibrous fill in the internal cavity. Kazama discloses a club head having an internal cavity wherein the internal cavity has a fibrous fill (See Paragraph 0006). Kazama also notes that the entire internal cavity can be filled with a fibrous fill (See Paragraph 0006). One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have the internal cavity with a fibrous fill, as taught by Kazama, in order to improve the hitting sound of the club head.
Regarding claim 15, Yoneyama discloses the fibrous fill being glass fiber (See Page 2, lines 32 through 35).
Regarding claim 16, Yoneyama shows the fibrous fill filling more than 30% of the total volume (See Figure 2).
Regarding claim 18, see the above regarding claim 8.
Regarding claim 19, Yoneyama discloses the fibrous fill being a synthetic fiber being that the fiber is glass fiber (See Abstract).
Regarding claim 20, Kazama discloses the fibrous fill having loose fibers.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/04/26 have been fully considered; however, after further review, the previously indicated allowability of claims 6, 7, 12, 13, 17, 18, and 20 having been withdrawn in light of newly found prior art. The above rejection has been made to reflect the new findings.
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
