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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The specification is incomplete. Please see the format below and the format in the cited patents. Appropriate correction is required.
Content of Specification
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION: See 37 CFR 1.72(a) and MPEP § 606. The title of the invention should be placed at the top of the first page of the specification unless the title is provided in an application data sheet. The title of the invention should be brief but technically accurate and descriptive, preferably from two to seven words. It may not contain more than 500 characters.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCES TO RELATED APPLICATIONS: See 37 CFR 1.78 and MPEP § 211 et seq.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT: See MPEP § 310.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT. See 37 CFR 1.71(g).
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM: The specification is required to include an incorporation-by-reference of electronic documents that are to become part of the permanent United States Patent and Trademark Office records in the file of a patent application. See 37 CFR 1.77(b)(5) and MPEP § 608.05. See also the Legal Framework for Patent Electronic System posted on the USPTO website (https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2019LegalFrameworkPES.pdf) and MPEP § 502.05
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR. See 35 U.S.C. 102(b) and 37 CFR 1.77.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(c). The specification should set forth the Background of the Invention in two parts:
(1) Field of the Invention: A statement of the field of art to which the invention pertains. This statement may include a paraphrasing of the applicable U.S. patent classification definitions of the subject matter of the claimed invention. This item may also be titled “Technical Field.”
(2) Description of the Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98: A description of the related art known to the applicant and including, if applicable, references to specific related art and problems involved in the prior art which are solved by the applicant’s invention. This item may also be titled “Background Art.”
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(d). A brief summary or general statement of the invention as set forth in 37 CFR 1.73. The summary is separate and distinct from the abstract and is directed toward the invention rather than the disclosure as a whole. The summary may point out the advantages of the invention or how it solves problems previously existent in the prior art (and preferably indicated in the Background of the Invention). In chemical cases it should point out in general terms the utility of the invention. If possible, the nature and gist of the invention or the inventive concept should be set forth. Objects of the invention should be treated briefly and only to the extent that they contribute to an understanding of the invention.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S): See MPEP § 608.01(f). A reference to and brief description of the drawing(s) as set forth in 37 CFR 1.74.
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(g). A description of the preferred embodiment(s) of the invention as required in 37 CFR 1.71. The description should be as short and specific as is necessary to describe the invention adequately and accurately. Where elements or groups of elements, compounds, and processes, which are conventional and generally widely known in the field of the invention described, and their exact nature or type is not necessary for an understanding and use of the invention by a person skilled in the art, they should not be described in detail. However, where particularly complicated subject matter is involved or where the elements, compounds, or processes may not be commonly or widely known in the field, the specification should refer to another patent or readily available publication which adequately describes the subject matter.
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.
Claims 2-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jackson (US Patent Number 6835881) in view of Alleto et al (US Patent number 8389838).
Regarding claim 2, as the applicant’s invention is best understood, Jackson discloses the use of a guitar pick holder device comprising: a guitar pick having a preformed hole (14); b. a clasp mechanism selected from the group consisting of a lobster clasp, a keyring (18), a spring-loaded clip, or another fastener, wherein the clasp (18) is configured to pass through the preformed hole (14) of the guitar pick; and wherein the device is configured to enable convenient removal and reattachment of the guitar pick (via the ring) for easy access during the playing of a stringed instrument.
Jackson does not disclose an attachment mechanism that secures the clasp and guitar pick to a specific article.
Alleto discloses the use of a guitar pick holder device comprising an attachment mechanism (12) configured to secure the clasp (another fastener 30) and guitar pick to an article selected from the group consisting of jewelry (30), a keychain, a zipper, or other wearable accessories.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the ring as disclosed in Jackson to include jewelry in lieu of a ring as disclosed in Aletto in order to provide a convenient means for retrieving a guitar pick.
Regarding claim 3, Jackson does not disclose the specific use of a plastic pick.
Aletto discloses the use of a guitar pick that is formed from plastic (column 1, line 39).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the device as disclosed in Jackson to include the plastic pick as disclosed in Aletto since the use of plastic picks in conventional and well known in the art.
Regarding claim 4, Jackson discloses wherein the guitar pick is removably secured within the clasp to allow replacement or interchangeability (via attachment to the clasp/ring (18).
Regarding claim 5, Jackson discloses wherein the clasp (18) and attachment mechanism are configured to accommodate guitar picks of varying sizes and thicknesses.
Regarding claim 6, Jackson does not disclose wherein a surface of the guitar pick is customized with one or more decorative elements selected from the group consisting of branding, logos, engravings, artwork, or personalized designs.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the device as disclosed in Jackson to include logos and/or designs as a matter a design choice since customizations are well known in the guitar pick art.
Regarding claim 7, Jackson discloses wherein the clasp is configured to hold multiple guitar picks simultaneously (via the clasp/ring).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/10/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The newly presented claims are not allowable based on the rejection above.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLY R LOCKETT whose telephone number is (571)272-2067. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00 pm M-F.
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, Dedei Hammond can be reached at 571-270-7938. 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.
/KIMBERLY R LOCKETT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837