DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05 JAN 26 have been fully considered and are not completely persuasive.
Any objection/rejection not maintained herein has been overcome by Applicant’s reply.
In response to Applicant’s traversal of the rejection of claim 11 and 13-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102/(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 4,507,889 to Allen because the planar body therein, e.g., 10, is limited to a generally circular portion, which lacks the features of the claimed non-circular planar body now claimed, the examiner must respectfully disagree.
While Allen does disclose that “The elastomeric speed loader body 10 has a main circular portion 11,” e.g., col. 5, ll. 8-9 (e.g., “5:8-9”), the passage continues, “and an integral radially extending holding and release projection 12,” id., ll. 9-10. Viewing the relevant figures, it is evident that projection 12 in combination with circular portion 11 achieves the newly-recited feature of “a non-circular planar body” at least in part because claim 11 fails to require the tab feature of claim 19, understood as element 22, e.g., Fig. 1, of Applicant’s disclosure. Thus, the planar body disclosed by Allen is sufficiently non-circular because such includes projection 12.
Alternatively, because the embodiments are or appear otherwise identical, and because the previous rejection noted and relied upon Figs. 11-19 of Allen, at least Figs. 11-12 of which clearly demonstrate a non-circular planar body 111, a non-circular planar body is fairly disclosed. Note that, despite Allen disclosing such as “a generally circular body portion,” 6:67, such is shown as sufficiently non-circular to meet the claim.
For these reasons, the art-based rejection in view of Allen must stand as modified to meet amended claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 11 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recites the limitations "the forward face" in line 7 and "the rear face" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. These are caused by Applicant’s amendment at line 5 from "faces" to --surfaces--.
Any unspecified claim is rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
The claims will be further treated on the merits as best understood only.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claims 11 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Allen.
Re: claim 11, Allen discloses the claimed invention including a speed loader (title) for storing and loading cartridges to a revolver (abstract: see also, e.g., Figs. 7 and 16-19), having a revolver cylinder 36 with a rear surface (shown/inherent), and a grip (shown/inherent) having a forward portion opposite the cylinder rear surface (shown) and separated by the rear surface by a grip gap (shown), the speed loader comprising: a non-circular planar body 11, e.g., Figs. 4, 9-10, and 13, 5:10-11 (including projection 12; body 111, e.g., Figs. 11-12, not including projection 112), with opposed major forward and rear surfaces 14, 13, respectively, e.g., Figs. 1-3, and having a periphery (shown; see also e.g., Figs. 11-12); the planar body defining a plurality of cartridge receptacles 114 on the forward [sur]face (shown, as best understood); each of the plurality of cartridge receptacles configured to removably retain the head of a cartridge C having a case length (shown; see particularly, e.g., Figs. 14); each of the cartridge receptacles defining a floor surface 116 spaced apart from the rear [sur]face by a limited floor thickness amount (shown, as best understood); and the case length plus the floor thickness being a limited overall length relative to the grip gap (shown/inherent), such that the speed loader and cases may readily be extracted from the cylinder without interference by the grip (shown/inherent); and wherein the plurality of cartridge receptacles is arranged in a polygon proximate to the periphery (shown; see, e.g., Fig. 11-19). A polygon is met in every embodiment because Allen fairly shows the receptacles arranged in a hexagon.
Re: claim 13, Allen further discloses wherein the cylinder has a length (shown/inherent) and the case length plus the floor thickness is less than the cylinder length (shown/inherent; cf. e.g., Figs. 16 and 18).
Re: claim 14, Allen further discloses wherein the planar body has an overall thickness of a first thickness (shown/inherent), and the floor thickness is less than half the overall thickness (clearly shown, e.g., Figs. 13-14).
Re: claims 15-16, Allen further discloses wherein the major rear surface is flat (shown) and free of protrusions (also shown; see e.g., Fig. 8). Too, were there to be protrusions on the rear surface of the cylinder, the device would likely not function as shown in the drawing figures, i.e., abutting the cylinder with speed loader, as shown in, e.g., Fig. 18.
Re: claim 17, Allen further discloses wherein each receptacle has a selected diameter, and the floor thickness [amount] is less than half the diameter (both clearly shown).
Re: claim 18, Allen further discloses wherein each receptacle has a selected diameter, the planar body has an overall thickness, and the overall thickness is less than the selected diameter (all clearly shown; see relevant drawing figures).
Re: claim 19, Allen further discloses including a tab 12, 112 protruding laterally from the periphery (shown).
Re: claim 20, Allen further discloses wherein the body is a unitary body (shown; see also, 3:1-5; 5:8-10; and, claim 1).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to Bret Hayes at telephone number (571) 272 – 6902, fax number (571) 273-6902, or email address bret.hayes@uspto.gov, which is preferred, especially for requesting interviews, general questions, etc. Note, however, that return correspondence cannot be made in the event that information subject to the confidentiality requirement as set forth in 35 U.S.C. § 122 has been included. See MPEP §§ 502.03 and 713.01, I, regarding email communications. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays through Fridays from 5:30 AM to 1:30 PM, Eastern.
The Central FAX Number is 571-273-8300.
If attempts to contact the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Troy Chambers, can be reached at (571) 272 – 6874.
/Bret Hayes/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641
27-Feb-26