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 .
Continuation Data
This application claims priority to Provisional application 63/638,193, filed April 24, 2024.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-9, 12, 13, are 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spriegel (2022/0339508) in view of Tanaka et al (2025/0353319), hereinafter Tanaka.
With respect to claims 1 and 12, Spriegel teaches a golf tee (paragraph 0051), comprising a paper material (paragraph 0056) such that the paper forms a substantially cylindrical tube (paragraphs 0051 and 0061: hollow golf-ball holding device is a hollow tube structure), having a first end and a second end (paragraphs 0051 and 0053: hollow ball support end 920 and pointed golf teel end 970), wherein the first end is configured to hold a golf ball (paragraphs 0051 and 0054: the golf tee 900 will remain in place and hold a golf ball 1450 when place on it; removal of the insertion tool reveals a ball-support 1620 of the hollow device 1600 for holding a golf ball 1750 above the ground) and the second end is configured to be inserted into a teeing ground (paragraphs 0051 and 0045: the golf tee is to be inserted into the ground 1759).
With respect to claim 2, Speigel teaches the golf tee, wherein the film material comprises one of paper, cardboard, a biodegradable material, a glass fiber film, or a carbon fiber film (paragraph 0056).
With respect to claim 5, Spriegel teaches the golf tee, wherein a length of the golf tee is between 0.5 inches and 3.99 inches (paragraph 0052: golf tee height is less than 4 inches).
Spriegel fails to specifically teach a first ply of film material coupled to a second wherein the coupled plies form the cylindrical tube and the wall thickness of the golf tee and the thickness of the ply materials.
With respect to claims 1, 3, and 12, Tanaka teaches in paragraphs 0023, 0071, 0073, 0075, and 0079, a cylindrical paper tube formed by spirally winding a first paper layer around a mandrel, applying adhesive, and spirally winding a second/outer paper layer around the first layer, thereby coupling the layers to form the cylindrical tube.
With respect to claim 4, Tanaka teaches the wall thickness of the tube being between 0.004 inches and 0.100 inches (paragraph 0081).
With respect to claim 6, Tanaka teaches wherein the inner ply of film material has a thickness of 0.003 inches to 0.050 inches (paragraph 0057).
With respect to claim 7, Tanaka teaches wherein the outer ply of film material has a thickness of between 0.003 inches to 0.050 inches (paragraph 0073).
With respect to claims 8 and 17, Tanaka teaches wherein the inner ply of film material comprises 50 lb. craft paper (paragraph 0051: kraft paper).
With respect to claims 9 and 18, Tanaka teaches wherein the outer ply of film material comprises one of a machine finish (MF) or machine glaze (MG) type paper (paragraphs 0051 and 0073).
With respect to claim 13, Tanaka teaches the method, further comprising: cutting the tube to various lengths to form the tube (paragraph 0079).
With respect to claim 15, Tanaka teaches the method, wherein a wall thickness of the tube the first ply, the adhesive layer and the second ply is between 0.004 inches and 0.100 inches (paragraph 0081).
With respect to claim 16, Tanka teaches the method, wherein the first and second ply of film material each have a thickness of between 0.003 inches to 0.050 inches (paragraph 0057).
In view of Tanaka’s teachings, it would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to form the hollow paper golf tee of Spriegel using the multi-ply paper tube construction taught by Tanaka. One would be motivated for the purpose of proving a hollow paper tee having a durable, bonded tubular structure while retaining the lightweight and biodegradable properties desired by Spriegel.
5. Claims 10, 11, 14, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spriegel in combination with Tanaka and in further view of Bhudolia et al (2025/0129686), hereinafter Bhudolia.
Spriegel’s teachings in combination with the teachings of Tanaka are discussed above. The combination however fails to specifically teach an angle between the inner ply of film material and the outer ply of film material, the second ply of film material being wound around the mandrel at an angle with respect to the first ply of film material, and the directions wherein the first and second plies of film material are wound around the mandrel.
With respect to claim 10, Bhudolia teaches wherein an angle between the inner ply of film material and the outer ply of film material is greater than 0 degrees (paragraph 0042: the fiber orientation (winding angle) of the outer layers 302 is different than the fiber orientation (winding angle) of the inner layers 304).
With respect to claim 11, Bhudolia teaches wherein the angle between the inner ply of paper material and the outer ply of paper material is between 40 and 45 degrees.
With respect to claim 14, Bhudolia teaches wherein the second ply of film material is wound around the mandrel at an angle with respect to the first ply of film material (paragraphs 0042, 0056, and 0059).
With respect to claim 19, Bhudolia teaches wherein the first ply of film material is wound around the mandrel in a first direction and the second ply of film material is wound around the mandrel in the first direction (paragraph 0038).
With respect to claim 20, Bhudolia teaches wherein the first ply of film material is wound around the mandrel in a first direction and the second ply of film material is wound around the mandrel in a second direction (paragraph 0038 and paragraph 0059: the filament layers may be cross-piled when applied to the mandrel).
In view of Bhudolia’s teachings, it would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the multi-ply tubular construction of Spriegel and Tanaka by winding the respective plies at different orientations, as taught by Bhudolia. One would be motivated for the purpose of increasing the strength of the resulting tubular structure by controlling the winding orientation of the plies.
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure: See attached PTO form 892, Refence Cited.
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Allyson N. Trail whose telephone number is (571) 272-2406. The examiner can normally be reached between the hours of 7:30AM to 4:00PM Monday thru Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Pham, can be reached on (571) 272-3689. The fax phone number for this Group is (571) 273-8300.
Communications via Internet e-mail regarding this application, other than those under 35 U.S.C. 132 or which otherwise require a signature, may be used by the applicant and should be addressed to [allyson.trail@uspto.gov].
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/ALLYSON N TRAIL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
August 29, 2026
Prosecution Insights