Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 16, 2026
Application No. 18/752,027

GOLF BALL

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Jun 24, 2024
Priority
Jun 30, 2023 — JP 2023-108142
Examiner
GORDEN, RAEANN
Art Unit
3711
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Sumitomo Rubber Industries Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allowance Rate
1234 granted / 1487 resolved
+13.0% vs TC avg
Minimal -5% lift
Without
With
+-4.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
1517
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.6%
-38.4% vs TC avg
§103
45.9%
+5.9% vs TC avg
§102
12.1%
-27.9% vs TC avg
§112
21.8%
-18.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1487 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 § 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, 3-11, and 13-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sasaki et al. (2003/0045375). Claim 1, Sasaki discloses a golf ball comprising a spherical core, and an outermost cover positioned outside the spherical core and having a plurality of dimples formed thereon, wherein a hardness difference S (=Hs-Ho) of 15-40 Shore D or 30-63 Shore C between a surface hardness Hs of the spherical core and a center hardness Ho (Shore C hardness) of the spherical core [0035], a material hardness C (Shore D hardness) of 35-55 for the outermost cover [0045]. Sasaki discloses the total dimple volume is from 300 to 700 mm3 [0071]. Solving for V x (S+C)/1000≥55 (700 x (30+55)/1000 = 59.5). Claim 3, S x C ≥1000 (30x55=1650) is satisfied. Claim 4, the cover contains an ionomer resin [0049]. Claim 5, 85≥Vx(S+C)/1000≥55 (700 x (30+55)/1000 = 59.5). Claim 6, the hardness difference S is 15-40 Shore D or 30-63 Shore C [0035]. Claim 7, the surface hardness Hs of the spherical core ranges from 40-70 Shore D or 63-102 Shore C [0037]. Claim 8, Hayashi discloses the center hardness Ho of the spherical core ranges from 30 to 70 Shore D or 50 to 102 Shore C hardness [0142]. Claim 9, the material hardness C of the outermost cover ranges from 35 to 55 in Shore D hardness [0045]. Claim 10, the total dimple volume is from 300 to 700 mm3 [0071]. Claim 11, the outermost cover layer has a thickness from 0.5 mm to 2.0 mm [0043]. Claim 13, 2500 ≥ SxC ≥ 1000 (30x55=1650) is satisfied. Claim 14, the material hardness C of the outermost cover ranges from 35 to 55 in Shore D hardness [0045]. Claim 15, the total dimple volume is from 300 to 700 mm3 [0071]. Claim 16, the core is one layer made from polybutadiene [0028]. Claim 17, the single core diameter is from 25 to 40 mm [0034]. 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) 2 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaki et al. (2003/0045375) in view of Iwami et al. (2005/0049084). Claim 2, Sasaki describes a lower volume but does not disclose the values for the lower volume [0071]. Iwami teaches a lower volume V (applicant’s Vi) of 400.4 mm3 and an upper volume W (applicant’s Vo) of 184.9 mm3 (table 4 examples VI). Vi-1.50xVo ≥ 0 [400.4-1.5x184.9 = 123.05]. Claim 12, Iwami teaches a lower volume V (applicant’s Vi) of 400.4 mm3 and an upper volume W (applicant’s Vo) of 184.9 mm3 (table 4 examples VI). 260 ≥ Vi-1.50xVo ≥ 0 [400.4-1.5x184.9 = 123.05]. One of ordinary skill in the art would modify the dimple volume for the desired flight performance. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 July 29, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 24, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
May 13, 2026
Response Filed
Aug 03, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12702901
METHOD FOR SINGLE-STEP HEAT TREATMENT OF TITANIUM ALLOYS, GOLF CLUB STRIKING FACES, AND GOLF CLUB HEADS
2y 7m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12702903
GOLF CLUB HEAD WITH LOW CG AND HIGH MOI
2y 9m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12685904
COATING FREE, FINISHED GOLF BALL WITH POLYURETHANE COVER
2y 10m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12685903
GOLF BALL
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12685905
GOLF BALL
2y 4m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (-4.6%)
2y 1m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1487 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month