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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The references cited in the PCT international search report by the Canadian Intellectual Property Office have been considered, but will not be listed on any patent resulting from this application because they were not provided on a separate list in compliance with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(1). In order to have the references printed on such resulting patent, a separate listing, preferably on a PTO/SB/08 form, must be filed within the set period for reply to this Office action.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because they have a line and shading quality that is too dark distinguish between different features and too dark to be reproduced. Refer to 37 CFR 1.84(I). See Figures 1-3. Photographs, including photocopies of photographs, are not ordinarily permitted in utility patent applications. See MPEP 608.02 VII.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cohen et al. (US 2013/0072330 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Cohen discloses a sport paddle [100], comprising a rigid blade [102, 104] (see paragraph 0066: “the strike surface may be a continuous strike surface (e.g., hard paddle instead of strings)) with a flat face (paragraph 0066: “strike surface”) on one side and a glove [114, 2900] attached (via glove attachment [112] and gripping surface [106]) to the opposing side of the blade [102, 104], wherein the glove [2900] has a strap [108 and/or 110] for securing the sport paddle [100] to a user's hand (paragraphs 0066, 0071-0072, 0074-0078, 0080-0083, 0147, and Figures 1-4 and 29).
Regarding claim 2, Cohen discloses the sport paddle of claim 1, wherein the glove [114, 2900] has one or more finger segments [A] (see annotated Figure 29 below for all reference letters) each having an open end [B] to permit the user's fingers to be inserted into the one or more finger segments [A] (paragraphs 0083, 0147, Figures 3-4, and annotated Figure 29 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
614
526
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Cohen discloses the sport paddle of claim 2, wherein the one or more finger segments [A] is at least two finger segments and each finger segment [A] is attached to an adjacent finger segment [A] at their open ends [B], and wherein the glove [114, 2900] extends from the open ends [B] of the finger segments [A] to cover at least a portion of the back of the user's hand (paragraphs 0083, 0147, Figures 3-4, and annotated Figure 29 above).
Regarding claim 5, Cohen discloses the sport paddle of claim 2, wherein the one or more finger segments [A] each have a second open end [C] to permit a user's fingers to extend through the finger segments [A] (paragraph 0147 and annotated Figure 29 above).
Regarding claim 9, Cohen discloses the sport paddle of claim 2, wherein the face (paragraph 0066: “strike surface”) of the blade [102, 104] is flat for substantially the entire area of the face (paragraph 0066: “strike surface”) (paragraphs 0066, 0073, and Figures 1-2).
Regarding claim 10, Cohen discloses the sport paddle of claim 9, wherein the face (paragraph 0066: “strike surface”) is curved about its perimeter (see frame [102] in Figure 1) (paragraphs 0066, 0071-0073, and Figures 1-2).
Regarding claim 11, Cohen discloses the sport paddle of claim 2, wherein the strap [108] has two ends (see top end and bottom end of strap [108] in Figure 1) which are connected with a readily releasable fastener [116] to facilitate easy attachment and removal from the user's hand (paragraph 0076 and Figures 1-3).
Regarding claim 12, Cohen discloses the sport paddle of claim 2, wherein the glove [114, 2900] comprises a cushion (paragraph 0075, “the gripping surface may be cushioned;” paragraph 0078: “the attachment 112 may be a cushioned or tacky surface;” and paragraph 0082: “[t]he gripping surface 106A may also comprise one or more cushioned areas, such as the palm area”) positioned to sit between the palm of the user's hand and the blade [102, 104] (paragraphs 0071, 0074-0075, 0078, 0082, and Figures 1-4 and 29).
Regarding claim 13, Cohen discloses the sport paddle of claim 2, wherein the blade [102, 104] is shaped on the side opposite the flat face (paragraph 0066: “strike surface”) to have a palm-shaped protrusion [106A] positioned below the glove [114, 2900] (paragraphs 0066, 0075, 0082, and Figure 2A).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cohen as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Rittenhouse (US 1,523,899).
Regarding claim 4, Cohen discloses the sport paddle of claim 3, wherein the strap [108 and/or 110] is adjacent to a portion of the glove [114, 2900] that covers the back of the user's hand (paragraph 0076 and Figures 1-4). Cohen does not disclose the strap being integrally formed with a portion of the glove. Rittenhouse, however, teaches a similar sport paddle (Figure 1) comprising a glove [8] attached to the back of a blade [6, 9], wherein the glove [8] has a strap [11] for securing the sport paddle to a user’s hand, wherein the strap [11] is integrally formed with a portion of the glove [8] that covers the back of the user’s hand (page 1, lines 24-53 and Figures 1-3). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure Cohen’s wrist strap to be integrally formed with a portion of the glove that covers the back of the user’s hand where the glove is permanently attached to the back of the blade because Rittenhouse teaches that this configuration securely fastens the hand of the player to the racket (page 1, lines 49-43).
Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cohen as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Park (KR 20110113083 A using machine translation).
Regarding claims 6 and 8, Cohen does not disclose a sleeve for storing spare balls which is attachable to the glove. Park, however, teaches a similar glove [2], comprising a sleeve [4] for storing spare balls [B] which is attachable to the glove [2], wherein the sleeve [4] has a tube-like shape with an open end (when opening and closing portion [10] is open) shaped to receive and store one or more spare balls [B] within the sleeve [4], wherein the sleeve [4] has opposing sides (e.g., left side and right side of crocodile shaped body in Figure 1) and a top side (e.g., top side of crocodile shaped body in Figure 1) that extend the length of the sleeve [4], and wherein the opposing sides (e.g., left side and right side of crocodile shaped body in Figure 1) are made of an elastic material (page 2: “[t]he glove main body 2 may be manufactured by using natural leather or artificial leather” and “[t]he accommodating part 4 may be made of the same material as the main body 2”) and the top side (e.g., top side of crocodile shaped body in Figure 1) is made of a wear-resistant material (page 2: “[t]he glove main body 2 may be manufactured by using natural leather or artificial leather” and “[t]he accommodating part 4 may be made of the same material as the main body 2”) (pages 2-3 and Figure 1; wherein leather has some flexibility and stretchability (i.e., is elastic) and is wear-resistant). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure Cohen’s sport paddle to include a sleeve for storing balls because Park teaches that this configuration stores extra balls for use during practice (page 3).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cohen in view of Park as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Mooney (US 2006/0091174 A1).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Cohen does not disclose the sleeve having a loop shaped to receive one end of the strap therethrough to attach the sleeve to the glove. Mooney, however, teaches a similar sleeve [1] for storing spare balls [B] which is attached to a user via a strap [2], wherein the sleeve [1] has a loop [3] shaped to receive one end of the strap [2] therethrough to attach the sleeve [1] to the user (paragraphs 0014-0015 and Figures 1-3). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the modified Cohen sleeve to include a loop shaped to receive one end of the strap therethrough to attach the sleeve to the glove because Mooney teaches that this configuration securely mounts a ball carrier to a strap for easy access by a user (paragraphs 0003 and 0014-0015).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Brewer et al. (US 1,558,666) and 이윤호 (KR 101179817 B1) which disclose similar sports paddles with gloves attached to the back.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUDREY B. WALTER whose telephone number is (571)270-5286. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8:30 am - 4:30 pm.
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.
/AUDREY B. WALTER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Prosecution Insights