Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/057,654

GOALKEEPER CATCHING GLOVE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Feb 19, 2025
Examiner
HADEN, SALLY CLINE
Art Unit
3732
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
BAUER HOCKEY LLC
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
32%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 11m
To Grant
74%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 32% of cases
32%
Career Allow Rate
248 granted / 773 resolved
-37.9% vs TC avg
Strong +42% interview lift
Without
With
+41.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 11m
Avg Prosecution
67 currently pending
Career history
840
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.4%
-34.6% vs TC avg
§103
40.4%
+0.4% vs TC avg
§102
22.0%
-18.0% vs TC avg
§112
29.1%
-10.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 773 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/16/2025 has been entered. Response to Amendment Applicant’s amendment, received 12/3/2025, is reviewed and entered. This Office Action is a non-final rejection. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Status of Claims Amended 1, 4, 6-7 Newly Added 16-18 Canceled 5 Pending 1-4 and 6-18 Presented for Examination 1-4 and 6-18 Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4 and 6-18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Drawings 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 “front of the unitary impact resistant member being concave in the palm region” (claim 1) 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. Specification The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: “an exterior of the palm region being concave”, “a front of the unitary impact resistant member being concave in the palm region” in claim 1, “the unitary impact resistant member is normally biased toward the rest position” in claim 4 (the disclosure has support for the member biasing the glove toward the at rest position, but not the member itself being biased). The specification has support for the palm region being concave but not the exterior of the palm region being concave. The specification is silent as to the front of the unitary impact resistant member being concave in the palm region. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a) The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-4 and 6-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The new matter is “an exterior of the palm region being concave” and “a front of the unitary impact resistant member being concave in the palm region” in claim 1. The specification has support for the palm region being concave but not the exterior of the palm region being concave. The specification is silent as to the front of the unitary impact resistant member being concave in the palm region. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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) 1-4, 6, 8-10, 12-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Goldsmith (US 5551083 A). As to claim 1, Goldsmith discloses a goalkeeper catching glove (“Sports catch glove with stiffener having a dish shape,” title) comprising: a front portion (FIG 2, see annotated FIG 2 below) defining a cuff region, a thumb region, a finger region, and a palm region, an exterior of the palm region being concave (FIG 2), the palm region extending between the thumb region and the finger region (FIG 2), and between the cuff region and the finger region (FIG 2), and the front portion comprising a unitary impact resistant member (stiffener 50), the unitary impact resistant member spanning at least a majority of the thumb region, at least a majority of the finger region, and at least a majority of the palm region (the claims do not define any boundaries of the regions, so the boundaries of the regions are left up to interpretation, and in this interpretation, the regions of the front portion are sized and located such that 50 spans the entirety of the thumb, finger, and palm regions and a portion of the cuff region), a front of the unitary impact resistant member being concave in the palm region (FIGS 2 and 5-6), the unitary impact resistant member being a plastic unitary impact resistant member (col 3 line 30-35), the unitary impact resistant member being a single part or an integral part (50 is considered to be a single part as shown in FIG 7 and is also integral to the glove); a rear portion connected to the front portion (FIG 1), the front portion and the rear portion defining therebetween a space for receiving a hand of a goalkeeper (FIGS 5-6); and a trap connected to at least one of the front portion or the rear portion (see annotated FIG 2 below), the trap extending in a gap defined between the thumb region and the finger region (FIG 2, the gap is occupied by the trap), the trap extending between distal portions of the thumb region and the finger region (FIG 2), the trap being configured for catching a hockey puck therein (capable of catching and intended to catch, see col 3 line 5-10). PNG media_image1.png 724 518 media_image1.png Greyscale As to claim 2, Goldsmith discloses the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 1, wherein the unitary impact resistant member spans at least 95 percent of each of the thumb region, the finger region, and the palm region (see the rejection of claim 1 above). As to claim 3, Goldsmith discloses the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 2, wherein the unitary impact resistant member spans the cuff region, the thumb region, the finger region, and the palm region (see the rejection of claim 1 above). As to claim 4, Goldsmith discloses the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 1, wherein: the unitary impact resistant member has a rest position (the position shown in the FIGS) and is foldable between the rest position and a plurality of folded positions (along articulation axis 15, see col 3 line 15-25 and/ or along 52 and/ or 54, see col 3 line 35-50), the unitary impact resistant member is normally biased toward the rest position for returning the goalkeeper catching glove to the rest position (to the degree disclosed by Applicant, FIG 7 shows the rest position for the member, the member is capable of biasing the glove toward the rest position, due to the pre-curved shape and material of the member). As to claim 6, Goldsmith discloses the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 1,wherein a plastic of the plastic unitary impact resistant member is one of: polycarbonate (PC), acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) (col 3 line 30-40), PC-ABS blend, polyketone (PK), PC siloxane copolymer, PC blend, thermoplastic, thermoplastic composite, and high-density polyethylene (HDPE). As to claim 8, Goldsmith discloses the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 1, wherein the unitary impact resistant member is a molded unitary impact resistant member (col 4 line 15-25). As to claim 9, Goldsmith discloses the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 1, wherein the front portion further comprises a facing connected to a front of the unitary impact resistant member (20; the side of 50 to which 20 is connected is considered to be the front side of the member). As to claim 10, Goldsmith discloses the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 9, wherein the facing is laminated on the front of the unitary impact resistant member (col 5 line 35-50 discloses at least a portion of 20 is laminated, and 20 is on the front of the member as set forth in the rejection of claim 9 above; therefore, 20 “is laminated on the front of” 50). As to claim 12, Goldsmith discloses the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 1, wherein the front portion further comprises a foam backing connected to a back of the unitary impact resistant member (20; col 5 line 35-50 discloses at least a portion of 20 is neoprene which is a type of foam; the side of 50 to which 20 is connected is considered to be the back side of the member). As to claim 13, Goldsmith discloses the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 12, wherein the foam backing is laminated on the back of the unitary impact resistant member (col 5 line 35-50 discloses at least a portion of 20 is laminated, and 20 is on the back of the member as set forth in the rejection of claim 12 above; therefore, 20 “is laminated on the back of” 50). As to claim 14, Goldsmith discloses the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 1, wherein the front portion further comprises an inner member connected to the unitary impact resistant member, the inner member being disposed between the unitary impact resistant member and the rear portion (20; at least a portion of 20 such as 26 in FIGS 5-6 is between the member 50 and the rear portion). As to claim 15, Goldsmith discloses the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 14, wherein the inner member is made from foam (20; col 5 line 35-50 discloses at least a portion of 20 is neoprene which is a type of foam). As to claim 16, Goldsmith discloses the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 1, wherein the trap comprises a webbing (see annotated FIG 2 below). As to claim 17, Goldsmith discloses the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 16, wherein the trap further comprises a reinforcement strip connected to the webbing (see annotated FIG 2 below). As to claim 18, Goldsmith discloses the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 17, wherein the trap further comprises an edge piece covering a peripheral edge of the reinforcement strip (see annotated FIG 2 below). PNG media_image2.png 780 633 media_image2.png Greyscale Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 Claim(s) 7 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldsmith (US 5551083 A). As to claim 7, Goldsmith does not disclose the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 6, wherein the plastic is PC. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide PC, since it is within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.07. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide PC, to provide a plastic with the desired degree of impact resistance, durability, and shape-retaining properties. As to claim 11, Goldsmith does not disclose the goalkeeper catching glove of claim 10, wherein the facing is made from synthetic polyurethane. Goldsmith col 5 line 10-20 does disclose at least a portion of the facing 20 is made from synthetic leather, and it is known to make synthetic leather from PU, so synthetic polyurethane is within the scope of the Goldsmith reference. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide synthetic PU, since it is within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.07. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide synthetic PU, to provide a leather-like material that is less expensive than leather, water resistant, and of the desired weight. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SALLY HADEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6731. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5. 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, Clinton Ostrup can be reached at 571-272-5559. 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. SALLY HADEN Primary Examiner Art Unit 3732 /SALLY HADEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 19, 2025
Application Filed
Aug 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Sep 23, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 08, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Dec 03, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 16, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 11, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12543802
INFANT SWADDLING GARMENT ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12478121
Surgical Gown
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12471648
Patient gown
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Patent 12419362
LIGHT BIB BODY AND BIB
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 23, 2025
Patent 12414596
HOOD STRUCTURE FOR A GARMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 16, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
32%
Grant Probability
74%
With Interview (+41.5%)
3y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 773 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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