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 I, claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 08/28/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 10 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08/28/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, ln 2-3, “one or more vent pin and vent pin hole” should recite --one or more vent pins and vent pin holes--.
In claim 1, ln 5, “the vent pins” should recite --the one or more vent pins--.
In claim 1, ln 6, “the vent pins” should recite --the one or more vent pins--.
In claim 1, ln 8, “the vent pins and vent pin holes” should recite –the one or more vent pins and vent pin holes--.
In claim 8, “the vent pins and the vent pin holes” should recite –the one or more vent pins and vent pin holes--.
In claim 9, “the vent pins” should recite --the one or more vent pins--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-9 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 1, ln 3, recites the pin holes for the support pins. It is not clear if this claim term is the same or different from the previously introduced plurality of support pin holes. Furthermore, if it is referencing the plurality of support pin holes, it is not clear which of the plurality of support pin holes is being referenced.
Claim 1, ln 5, recites the support pins. It is not clear which of the plurality of support pin holes is being referenced.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the support pins located outermost as seen from poles of the spherical cavity" in ln 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1, ln 7, recites the support pins. It is not clear which of the plurality of support pin holes is being referenced.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the clearances between the vent pins and vent pin holes" in ln . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1, ln 9, recites the support pins and support pin holes. It is not clear which of the plurality of support pin holes and support pin holes is being referenced.
For the purpose of compact prosecution, Claim 1 has been interpreted to mean:
A vertically separating two-part golf ball mold comprising a spherical cavity, a plurality of support pins and support pin holes for disposing a core within the spherical cavity and one or more vent pins and vent pin holes, wherein the plurality of support pins and support pin holes have a clearance released to the exterior, the one or more vent pins and vent pin holes have a clearance released to the exterior, the plurality of support pins further comprises support pins located outermost as seen from poles of the spherical cavity, the one or more vent pins are located inward from where the plurality of support pins located outermost as seen from poles of the spherical cavity are positioned, the one or more vent pin holes and the plurality of support pin holes have a shortest distance therebetween of 0.20 mm or less, and the sum of the total area of the clearances between the one or more vent pins and vent pin holes and the total area of the clearances between the plurality of support pins and support pin holes is 1.00 mm2 or more.
Claim 7 and 9 have similar issues to claim 1 regarding recitation of the support pins and support pin holes. The claims have been interpreted to mean that the plurality of support pins and support pin holes are required to possess the limitations of the claims.
All claims dependent on the above rejected claims are rejected as well because they include all the limitations of the rejected claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endo et al. (JP2004322347 with reference made to examiner provided machine translation) hereinafter Endo.
Regarding claim 1, Endo teaches:
A vertically separating two-part golf ball mold comprising a spherical cavity (Fig 1: upper mold U, lower mold L; ln 13-14), a plurality of support pins and support pin holes for disposing a core within the spherical cavity (Fig 1, 6: support pin/intermediate vent pin S, pin hole 11; ln 103-104) and one or more vent pins and vent pin holes (Fig 1, 6: pole vent pin P, pin hole 9, fixing pin/intermediate vent pin F, pin hole 13), wherein the plurality of support pins and support pin holes have a clearance released to the exterior (Fig 1; ln 118-120), the one or more vent pins and vent pin holes have a clearance released to the exterior (Fig 1; ln 118-120), the plurality of support pins further comprises support pins located outermost as seen from poles of the spherical cavity (Fig 6), the one or more vent pins are located inward from where the plurality of support pins located outermost as seen from poles of the spherical cavity are positioned (Fig 6; Table 2, annotated Table 2: example 5; latitudes of the pole vent pin and first fixing pins are located closer to the poles than the support pins), and the sum of the total area of the clearances between the one or more vent pins and vent pin holes and the total area of the clearances between the plurality of support pins and support pin holes is 1.00 mm2 or more (Table 2, annotated Table 2: example 5; see below).
Annotated Table 2 of Endo is presented below with relevant information translated:
PNG
media_image1.png
933
876
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In ln 188-190, Endo defines clearance as “half the difference between the inner diameter of the pin hole and the outer diameter of the pin”. The “size” of the pins appears to refer to the diameter length of the pin at the wall of the cavity.
Given the above, the contribution of each pin to the sum of the total area of clearances of the pins can be expressed as:
Area of pin hole – area of pin
clearance area of each type of pin = number of pins x π x (rhole2-rpin2), where rhole = “clearance” + rpin and rpin = “size”/2
clearance area of pole vent pin = 1 x π x ((0.050 + 1.45/2)2 – (1.45/2)2) = 0.236
clearance area of support vent pin = 4 x π x ((0.010 + 4.50/2)2 – (4.50/2)2) = 0.566
clearance area of first fixing pin = 8 x π x ((0.010 + 3.40/2)2 – (3.40/2)2) = 0.857
Therefore, the total area of the clearances of the pins and holes is:
Total area = 1.66 mm2.
Fig 5 and Table 2, example 4 also meet the above limitation with a total area of 3.93 mm2.
Endo does not teach the one or more vent pin holes and the plurality of support pin holes have a shortest distance therebetween of 0.20 mm or less.
Applicant specification discloses that the above limitation allows for efficiently discharging gases that are generated outside of the mold ([0044]).
Endo teaches that an object of the present invention is to provide a golf ball mold that allows air to be easily discharged (ln 37-38).
While drawings are not to scale, drawings and pictures can anticipate claims if they clearly show the structure which is claimed, and the description of the article pictured can be relied on, in combination with the drawings, for what they would reasonably teach one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2125.
Fig 5/6 of Endo represent specific geometric configurations of the golf ball mold where certain geometric rules and relationships must be maintained, for example the placement of the pins, angles, latitudes, etc.. The relative sizes of the pins in Fig 5/6 appear to correspond to the dimensions recited in Table 2, examples 4/5 of Endo, respectively. Endo further makes a deliberate choice to represent space between, for example, the fixing pins while showing no space or practically no space between the fixing pins and adjacent support pins. Any measurement of the space between the fixing pins and adjacent support pins would result in a distance that is within 0.20 mm or less, combined with the teachings of the relative sizes of the pins that are explicitly recited in Table 2 of Endo.
Therefore, given the teachings of Endo in combination with the configuration as illustrated in the drawings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have relied upon the figures and teachings of Endo to arrive a mold having a shortest distance that is within 0.20 mm or less between the fixing pins and adjacent support pins.
Regarding claim 2, Endo teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Endo further teaches wherein each support pin is arranged at a position where the angle of intersection between an axis connecting top and bottom poles of the mold and a normal from a center on the axis and toward a wall of the cavity where the support pin retracts is between 15 and 30° (Table 2; example 4; latitude of the support pins is 74.26, which calculates to 90-74.26 = 26.74° relative to the perspective defined by the claim).
Regarding claim 3, Endo teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Endo further teaches wherein the mold has three or more support pins in an upper mold half or a lower mold half (Fig 5, 6; Table 2, example 4, 5).
Regarding claim 4, Endo teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Endo further teaches wherein the mold has three or more vent pins in an upper mold half or a lower mold half (Fig 5, 6; Table 2, example 4, 5).
Regarding claim 5, Endo teaches the apparatus of claim 4.
Endo further teaches wherein at least one vent pin is located at a pole (Fig 5, 6: pole vent pin P).
Regarding claim 6, Endo teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Endo further teaches wherein the number of vent pins is equal to or greater than the number of support pins (Fig 5, 6; Table 2, example 4, 5).
Regarding claim 7, Endo teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Endo further teaches wherein the clearance between the plurality of support pins and the support pin holes is 0.020 mm or less (Table 2, example 5).
Regarding claim 8, Endo teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Endo further teaches wherein the clearance between some of the one or more vent pins and the vent pin holes is 0.020 mm or less (Table 2, example 5, first fixing pins).
Endo does not teach wherein the clearance between the pole vent pin and the pole vent pin hole is 0.020 mm or less.
However, Endo teaches that the clearance between the pole vent pin and the pole vent pin hole is close to the claimed range (Table 2, example 5, pole vent pin; 50 µm/2 = 0.025 mm). In ln 188-190, Endo defines clearance as “half the difference between the inner diameter of the pin hole and the outer diameter of the pin”.
It has been held that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. See MPEP 2144.05(I).
Applicant specification discloses that the above limitation is a preference and does not demonstrate any criticality of the claimed range ([0043]).
Applicant specification further discloses the purpose of the vent pin and vent pin holes is for venting gases ([0008]).
Endo teaches the purpose of the clearance for the pole vent pin is for discharging air (ln 118-119).
Since the claimed range and prior art values are close, applicant discloses the claimed range as merely a preference and has not demonstrated any criticality to the claimed range, and the claimed clearance and prior art clearance fulfill the same purpose, the difference between the prior art clearance and the claimed range cannot be considered to hold any patentable weight. Therefore, the prior art value makes obvious the claimed range for the clearance between the one or more vent pins and the vent pin holes.
Regarding claim 9, Endo teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Endo further teaches wherein the plurality of support pins slidably advance and retreat in the plurality of support pin holes (Fig 1: ln 111) and the one or more vent pins do not move slidably (Fig 1; ln 112-113).
Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endo in view of Kimura et al. (US2015/0367178) hereinafter Kimura.
Regarding claim 1, Endo teaches:
A vertically separating two-part golf ball mold comprising a spherical cavity (Fig 1: upper mold U, lower mold L; ln 13-14), a plurality of support pins and support pin holes for disposing a core within the spherical cavity (Fig 1, 6: support pin/intermediate vent pin S, pin hole 11; ln 103-104) and one or more vent pins and vent pin holes (Fig 1, 6: pole vent pin P, pin hole 9, fixing pin/intermediate vent pin F, pin hole 13), wherein the plurality of support pins and support pin holes have a clearance released to the exterior (Fig 1; ln 118-120), the one or more vent pins and vent pin holes have a clearance released to the exterior (Fig 1; ln 118-120), the plurality of support pins further comprises support pins located outermost as seen from poles of the spherical cavity (Fig 6), the one or more vent pins are located inward from where the plurality of support pins located outermost as seen from poles of the spherical cavity are positioned (Fig 6; Table 2, annotated Table 2: example 5; latitudes of the pole vent pin and first fixing pins are located closer to the poles than the support pins), and the sum of the total area of the clearances between the one or more vent pins and vent pin holes and the total area of the clearances between the plurality of support pins and support pin holes is 1.00 mm2 or more (Table 2, annotated Table 2: example 5; see below).
Annotated Table 2 of Endo is presented below with relevant information translated:
PNG
media_image1.png
933
876
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In ln 188-190, Endo defines clearance as “half the difference between the inner diameter of the pin hole and the outer diameter of the pin”. The “size” of the pins appears to refer to the diameter length of the pin at the wall of the cavity.
Given the above, the contribution of each pin to the sum of the total area of clearances of the pins can be expressed as:
Area of pin hole – area of pin
clearance area of each type of pin = number of pins x π x (rhole2-rpin2), where rhole = “clearance” + rpin and rpin = “size”/2
clearance area of pole vent pin = 1 x π x ((0.050 + 1.45/2)2 – (1.45/2)2) = 0.236
clearance area of support vent pin = 4 x π x ((0.010 + 4.50/2)2 – (4.50/2)2) = 0.566
clearance area of first fixing pin = 8 x π x ((0.010 + 3.40/2)2 – (3.40/2)2) = 0.857
Therefore, the total area of the clearances of the pins and holes is:
Total area = 1.66 mm2.
Fig 5 and Table 2, example 4 also meet the above limitation with a total area of 3.93 mm2.
Endo does not teach the one or more vent pin holes and the plurality of support pin holes have a shortest distance therebetween of 0.20 mm or less.
Endo does not teach the one or more vent pin holes and the plurality of support pin holes have a shortest distance therebetween of 0.20 mm or less.
However, Endo teaches that the dimples are formed by the pins (ln 126) and that the support pins and vent pins are adjacent each other (Fig 5, 6). Therefore, the shortest distance between the vent pins and support pins are determined by the desired distance between each dimple of the golf ball.
In the same field of endeavor regarding golf balls, Kimura teaches forming a golf ball such that the distances between neighboring dimples (i.e., the widths of the lands) become substantially zero for the motivation of reducing aerodynamic resistance ([0092]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the mold as taught by Endo to produce a golf ball such that the distances between neighboring dimples becomes essentially zero in order to reduce aerodynamic resistance.
Regarding claim 2, Endo in view of Kimura teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Endo further teaches wherein each support pin is arranged at a position where the angle of intersection between an axis connecting top and bottom poles of the mold and a normal from a center on the axis and toward a wall of the cavity where the support pin retracts is between 15 and 30° (Table 2; example 4; latitude of the support pins is 74.26, which calculates to 90-74.26 = 26.74° relative to the perspective defined by the claim).
Regarding claim 3, Endo in view of Kimura teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Endo further teaches wherein the mold has three or more support pins in an upper mold half or a lower mold half (Fig 5, 6; Table 2, example 4, 5).
Regarding claim 4, Endo in view of Kimura teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Endo further teaches wherein the mold has three or more vent pins in an upper mold half or a lower mold half (Fig 5, 6; Table 2, example 4, 5).
Regarding claim 5, Endo in view of Kimura teaches the apparatus of claim 4.
Endo further teaches wherein at least one vent pin is located at a pole (Fig 5, 6: pole vent pin P).
Regarding claim 6, Endo in view of Kimura teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Endo further teaches wherein the number of vent pins is equal to or greater than the number of support pins (Fig 5, 6; Table 2, example 4, 5).
Regarding claim 7, Endo in view of Kimura teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Endo further teaches wherein the clearance between the support pins and the support pin holes is 0.020 mm or less (Table 2, example 5).
Regarding claim 8, Endo in view of Kimura teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Endo further teaches wherein the clearance between some of the one or more vent pins and the vent pin holes is 0.020 mm or less (Table 2, example 5, first fixing pins).
Endo does not teach wherein the clearance between the pole vent pin and the pole vent pin hole is 0.020 mm or less.
However, Endo teaches that the clearance between the pole vent pin and the pole vent pin hole is close to the claimed range (Table 2, example 5, pole vent pin; 50 µm/2 = 0.025 mm). In ln 188-190, Endo defines clearance as “half the difference between the inner diameter of the pin hole and the outer diameter of the pin”.
It has been held that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. See MPEP 2144.05(I).
Applicant specification discloses that the above limitation is a preference and does not demonstrate any criticality of the claimed range ([0043]).
Applicant specification further discloses the purpose of the vent pin and vent pin holes is for venting gases ([0008]).
Endo teaches the purpose of the clearance for the pole vent pin is for discharging air (ln 118-119).
Since the claimed range and prior art values are close, applicant discloses the claimed range as merely a preference and has not demonstrated any criticality to the claimed range, and the claimed clearance and prior art clearance fulfill the same purpose, the difference between the prior art clearance and the claimed range cannot be considered to hold any patentable weight. Therefore, the prior art value makes obvious the claimed range for the clearance between the one or more vent pins and the vent pin holes.
Regarding claim 9, Endo in view of Kimura teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Endo further teaches wherein the support pins slidably advance and retreat in the support pin holes (Fig 1: ln 111) and the vent pins do not move slidably (Fig 1; ln 112-113).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER A WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5361. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8 am-4 pm EST.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached at 571-270-7001. 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.
/ALEXANDER A WANG/Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/ALISON L HINDENLANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Prosecution Insights