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 and 103
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.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0181303 (Sanchez et al., hereinafter Sanchez).
Regarding claims 1 and 9, Figures 1 and 2 of Sanchez show a golf club head with the recited striking face 202, a skirt between a crown 212 and a sole 214, a toe and heel portion and a hosel 206 connected to the forward half of the club head. The forward and rear halves of the Sanchez club are considered to define a face cup and aft body, respectively. As Figure 1 of Sanchez shows a unitary construction, the forward and rear halves are inherently bonded; Figure 2 of Sanchez shows the interior to be hollow and therefore forms a cavity. Figure 2 of Sanchez further shows the face cup including a face return extension 204 covered by a striking face 202 that broadly correspond to the recited inner core and outer cover, respectively.
Regarding claims 2-4, Sanchez discloses that extension 204 (inner core) is made from a composite type material and the striking face 202 (outer cover) is made out of a titanium type material. See Sanchez, paragraph [0029].
Claims 5-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanchez as applied above.
Regarding claims 5-8, Sanchez does not explicitly disclose the thickness of the extension or the striking face. Official Notice is taken that changing the thickness of the golf club head elements would alter the center of gravity of a golf club head and discovering an optimum value of a result-effective variable has been held to be within the capabilities of the person of ordinary skill in the art. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in this art, by routine experimentation, to provide Sanchez the recited thickness ranges in order to obtain the optimum center of gravity of his golf club.
Regarding claim 10, Official Notice is taken that curing is a conventional construction method of golf club heads. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in this art to attach the inner core and outer cover by curing in order to ensure a secure and permanent structure.
Claims 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanchez as applied above in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2016/0166890 (DeMille et al., hereinafter DeMille).
Regarding claims 11-14, Sanchez does not show the outer cover spanning over the striking face. Figure 14 of DeMille shows a face cup of a golf club head having an outer cover (metal cap 280) spanning over the front portion of the head including an inner core (face insert 150) made of SMC. The substitution of one known face cup for another would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention since the substitution of the face cup of DeMille would have yielded predictable results, namely, an improved face structure of composite material.
Regarding claims 15-18, as similarly set forth above, Official Notice is taken that changing the thickness of the golf club head elements would alter the center of gravity of a golf club head and discovering an optimum value of a result-effective variable has been held to be within the capabilities of the person of ordinary skill in the art. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in this art, by routine experimentation, to provide the Sanchez club as modified above with the recited thickness ranges in order to obtain the optimum center of gravity of the golf club.
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Official Notice is taken that curing and surface pre-treatment are conventional construction methods of golf club heads. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in this art to bond the inner core to the outer cover by curing in order to ensure a secure and permanent structure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Raleigh Chiu whose telephone number is (571) 272-4408. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Tuesday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eugene Kim, can be reached on (571) 272-4463.
The fax 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
It is noted that all practice before the Office is in writing (see 37 C.F.R. § 1.2) and the proper authority for action on any matter in this regard are the statutes (35 U.S.C.), regulations (37 C.F.R.) and
the commentary on policy (MPEP). Therefore, no telephone discussion may be controlling or considered authority of Petitioner’s/Caller’s action(s).
/RALEIGH W CHIU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Prosecution Insights