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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1 in the reply filed on 3/23/2026 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement (see section listed as prior art section [0003]). 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Drawings
Figure 7 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. 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.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the geometric patterns from claim 99 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 80 and 83 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 80, tradenames should not be used in the claim (Surlyn), see MPEP 2173.05(u). Claim 83, how does the alloy comprise brazing foil?
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) 73, 74, 78-83, 100, and 101 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sullivan et al. (6,244,977) in view of Briggs et al. (4,338,131). Claim 73, Sullivan discloses a golf ball comprising an inner core, an outer cover layer, and an intermediate layer comprising a metal alloy (fig 1), wherein a thickness of the intermediate layer is from 0.001 to 0.05 inches (0.0254 -1.27 mm) (col 12, lines 35-40), and the intermediate layer is placed between the outer cover layer and the inner core. Sullivan discloses the metal intermediate layer may be an alloy but does not disclose an amorphous alloy. Briggs teaches amorphous alloys (abstract). One of ordinary skill in the art would have used an amorphous alloy for increased hardness and strength (Briggs col. 1, lines 35-40). Claim 74, Sullivan discloses a golf ball. Claim 78, Sullivan discloses an additional layer, wherein the additional layer comprises a geometric structure (sphere) of a first material (Sullivan discloses the intermediate layer comprises more than one layer) (col. 11, lines 49-52). Claim 79, Sullivan discloses the additional layer is placed between the inner core and the intermediate laver. Claim 80, Sullivan discloses the outer cover layer comprises ionomers (Surlyn) (col. 20, lines 54-60). Claim 81, Sullivan discloses the inner core comprises polybutadiene or liquid (col. 18, lines 2-9). Claim 82, Sullivan discloses the thickness of the intermediate layer is in a range from 0.001 to 0.05 inches (0.0254 -1.27 mm) (col 12, lines 35-40). Claim 83, Briggs teaches the amorphous alloy comprises at least 75% nickel by weight (col. 2, lines 17-20). Claim 100, Sullivan discloses the intermediate layer is attached (glued) to the inner core (fig 1). Claim 101, Sullivan discloses the golf ball comprising a dimple design on the outer cover layer (fig 1). One of ordinary skill in the art would have used an amorphous alloy for increased hardness and strength (Briggs col. 1, lines 35-40).
Claim(s) 75-77 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sullivan et al. (6,244,977) in view of Briggs et al. (4,338,131), and further in view of Pocklington (4,229,401). Claim 75, Sullivan does not disclose additional shapes for the intermediate metal layer. Pocklington teaches a shape for an interior layer where the shape wraps around the golf ball, wherein the shape is in a form of gores, where gores are wedge-shaped strips narrowing toward poles and wider at an equator; and wherein the poles are two points on a surface of the golf ball where an axis of rotation intersects the surface and the equator is an imaginary line that is perpendicular to the axis of the golf ball and equidistant from the poles and runs around a middle of the golf ball (fig 2). Claim 76, Pocklington teaches wherein shape is formed from longitudinal strips connecting the poles. Sullivan discloses the metal layer is one piece.
Claim 77, Pocklington teaches the longitudinal strips connecting one of the poles and the equator. The intermediate layer made using two pieces is a method step and does not further limit the claim because the final product is shown as one piece in figure 5. One of ordinary skill in the art would have modified the shape of the layer for the desired hardness and durability.
Claim(s) 93 and 98-99 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sullivan et al. (6,244,977) in view of Briggs et al. (4,338,131), and further in view of Sullivan et al. (2006/0148590). Claim 93, Sullivan ’977 in view of Briggs discloses the additional layer as a sphere but does not disclose the geometric structure creates a plurality of pockets for a second material. Sullivan ‘590 teaches an interior layer with a geometric structure with pockets for a second material (fig 1a). Claim 98, Sullivan ‘590 teaches the geometric structure comprises a honeycomb pattern (fig 1a). Claim 99, Sullivan ‘590 teaches the geometric structure comprises a square pattern (fig 1b). One of ordinary skill in the art would modify the shape of the layer for the desired hardness and durability.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 94-97 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
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
March 30, 2026