DETAILED ACTION
In the Non-Final Rejection mailed 5/21/2025:
Claims 1-20 were rejected.
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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
The amendment to the claims filed 8/19/2025 has been entered:
Claims 1-20 are active.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 8/19/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 5-9 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made under 35 USC 103 over Jones (US 20120180360) in view of Lesenfants (US 20100071243).
While Jones does not expressly teach the claimed chassis device now recited in amended independent claim 1, the claimed invention is unpatentable over Jones in view of Lesenfants, as detailed below.
Applicant's arguments, filed 8/19/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 2-4 and 10-20 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that Lesenfants does not disclose or suggest the claimed helically inclined surface, since surface 238 is part of a “spring retainer assembly” and not part of a “chassis lock”, the examiner respectfully disagrees. While component 236 is described my Lesenfants as a spring retainer assembly of magazine 74, it is also shown and described as a functional component of fastening mechanism 220, which is described in paragraph [0125] as being designed to couple and uncouple forearm 58 to and from the remainder of firearm 50. In paragraph [0129], Lesenfants states that rotating anchor 224 over inner surface 238 forces the anchor 224 further into the magazine 74, which causes fastening member 222 to try to move toward the forearm 58. As such, it is clear that component 236, in conjunction with components 222 and 224, functions as a locking device for forearm 58. Additionally, as shown in Fig. 34 and described in paragraph [0129], inner surface 238 constitutes a helically inclined surface at least because it is described as both being inclined and positioned annularly around the interior of the hole of component 236. Further, the declining portion of inner surface 238 clearly corresponds to the claimed detent of the helically inclined surface.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are 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.
Claims 1 and 10 recite the limitation “the top surface” in lines 6 and 3, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims, since a top surface of the chassis lock devices and a top surface of the chassis lock were not previously recited in the claims.
Claims 12-13 recite the limitation “the chassis” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims, since only a chassis locking system and a chassis lock, as opposed to a chassis, were previously recited in the claims. The examiner notes that “the chassis” is also present at least in claims 14 (line 2), 15 (lines 2 and 3), and 17 (line 2), which each depend from claim 13.
Claims 2-9, 11, and 14-20 are rejected for depending from an indefinite claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 10-12 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lesenfants (US 2010/0071243), herein ‘Lesenfants’.
Regarding claim 10, Lesenfants discloses a chassis locking system (200 and/or 220; Figs. 26-29 and/or 30-34), comprising:
a bolt (222) having a cross pin (224) extending through the bolt (Fig. 33); and
a chassis (58) comprising a chassis lock (236) including a hole inset into a top surface of the chassis lock (Fig. 34; the top surface being the annular surface of component 236 facing out of the page, the hole extending from the top surface into component 236 to define inner surface 238), wherein a bottom of the hole inset into the top surface of the chassis lock is a helically inclined surface (238) that contacts the cross pin of the bolt as the bolt is turned (Fig. 34; par. 129).
Regarding claim 11, Lesenfants discloses wherein the helically inclined surface includes a detent at one end of the helically inclined surface (Fig. 34; par. 129).
Regarding claim 12, Lesenfants discloses wherein the chassis is connectable (Fig. 1) to a rifle stock (52; via receiver 54) and to a receiver (54) of a bolt action rifle (50; Fig. 1; par. 78).
Regarding claim 18, Lesenfants discloses wherein the bolt includes a spacer (circumferential flange on fastening member 222, as shown in Figs. 30-33).
Regarding claims 19-20, Lesenfants discloses wherein the bolt includes an interface feature comprising one or more of knurling, a slot, and a depression (208; Figs. 26-27; par. 122) disposed within a head of the bolt (Figs. 26-27).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones (US 20120180360) and further in view of Lesenfants (US 20100071243).
Regarding claims 1-4, Jones discloses a chassis device (100), comprising:
a chassis (104) which is connectable between a rifle stock (102) and a receiver (106) of a bolt action rifle (200; par. 30), the chassis including a rear bolt hole (Figs. 3-7; par. 37; through which a fastener 170 is located, adjacent the rear end of component 104) and a front bolt hole (Figs. 3-7; par. 37 through which a fastener 170 is located, adjacent the front end 140 of component 104) which each accept a bolt (170);
wherein each of the rear bolt hole and the front bolt hole include a helically inclined surface (par. 37; the helically inclined surface being the threading therein which would need to be present to accommodate corresponding threading of fasteners 170, described as Allen bolts);
Jones does not expressly teach a first chassis lock device disposed in a front of the chassis and a second chassis lock device disposed in a rear of the chassis, the first chassis lock device and the second chassis lock device each including a hole inset into a top surface of the first chassis lock device and the second chassis lock device, wherein a bottom of the hole insert into the top surface of the first chassis lock device and the second chassis lock device is a helically inclined surface, wherein the bolt has a cross pin, and wherein the helically inclined surface includes a detent.
Lesenfants teaches a chassis locking system (200 and/or 220; Figs. 26-29 and/or 30-34) for a firearm (50), comprising: a bolt (222) having a cross pin (224) extending through the bolt (Fig. 33); and a chassis (58) comprising a chassis lock device (236) including a hole inset into a top surface of the chassis lock (Fig. 34; the top surface being the annular surface of component 236 facing out of the page, the hole extending from the top surface into component 236 to define inner surface 238), wherein a bottom of the hole inset into the top surface of the chassis lock is a helically inclined surface (238) contacting the cross pin of the bolt as the bolt is turned (Fig. 34; par. 129), wherein the helically inclined surface includes a detent at one end (Fig. 34; par. 129).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the threaded Allen bolts and bolt holes of Jones with cross pin bolts and locking devices which have a helically inclined surface and detent, respectively, as taught by Lesenfants with a reasonable expectation of success in order to prevent the bolts from coming undone inadvertently while requiring only a small amount of rotation since threaded connections are not used (Lesenfants; par. 130).
Regarding claim 5, the modified Jones discloses wherein the rifle stock receives and connects directly to the chassis (Figs. 6-7; par. 37).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Jones discloses wherein the rifle stock includes a front stock hole in a front end of the stock which corresponds to the front bolt hole in the chassis (Figs. 3-7; par. 37; through which a fastener 170 is located, adjacent previously described front bolt hole in the front end 140 of component 104) and a rear stock hole in a rear end of the stock which corresponds to the rear bolt hole in the chassis (Figs. 3-7; par. 37; through which a fastener 170 is located, adjacent previously described rear bolt hole in the rear end of component 104).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Jones discloses wherein the chassis is attachable to the rifle stock by the rear stock hole in the rear end of the rifle stock and the rear bolt hole in the chassis (Figs. 6-7; par. 37 and 39).
Regarding claim 8, the modified Jones discloses wherein the chassis is attachable to the rifle stock by the front stock hole in the front end of the rifle stock and the front bolt hole in the chassis (Figs. 6-7; par. 37 and 39).
Regarding claim 9, the modified Jones discloses wherein the chassis maintains relational accuracy between an action of the bolt action rifle and the chassis when the chassis is removed or connected to the rifle stock (Fig. 2; par. 37-39).
Regarding claims 10-11, Jones discloses a chassis locking system (100), comprising:
a bolt (170); and
a chassis (104) comprising a chassis lock including a helically inclined surface (par. 37; the helically inclined surface being the threading therein which would need to be present to accommodate corresponding threading of fasteners 170, described as Allen bolts).
Jones does not expressly teach wherein the bolt has a cross pin extending therethrough, wherein the chassis lock includes a hole inset into a top surface of the chassis lock, and wherein a bottom of the hole inset into the top surface of the chassis lock is a helically inclined surface that contacts the cross pin of the bolt as the bolt is turned.
Lesenfants teaches a chassis locking system (200 and/or 220; Figs. 26-29 and/or 30-34) for a firearm (50), comprising: a bolt (222) having a cross pin (224) extending through the bolt (Fig. 33); and a chassis (58) comprising a chassis lock device (236) including a hole inset into a top surface of the chassis lock (Fig. 34; the top surface being the annular surface of component 236 facing out of the page, the hole extending from the top surface into component 236 to define inner surface 238), wherein a bottom of the hole inset into the top surface of the chassis lock is a helically inclined surface (238) contacting the cross pin of the bolt as the bolt is turned (Fig. 34; par. 129), wherein the helically inclined surface includes a detent at one end (Fig. 34; par. 129).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the threaded Allen bolts and bolt holes of Jones with cross pin bolts and locking devices which have a helically inclined surface and detent, respectively, as taught by Lesenfants with a reasonable expectation of success in order to prevent the bolts from coming undone inadvertently while requiring only a small amount of rotation since threaded connections are not used (Lesenfants; par. 130).
Regarding claim 12, the modified Jones discloses wherein the chassis is connectable (Figs. 6-7; par. 37) to a rifle stock (102) and to a receiver (106) of a bolt action rifle (200; par. 30).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Jones discloses wherein the chassis includes a rear bolt hole (Figs. 3-7; par. 37; through which a fastener 170 is located, adjacent the rear end of component 104) and a front bolt hole (Figs. 3-7; par. 37 through which a fastener 170 is located, adjacent the front end 140 of component 104).
Regarding claims 14 and 17, the modified Jones discloses wherein the helically inclined surface of the chassis is disposed in each of the rear bolt hole and in the front bolt hole (par. 37; in order to accommodate the corresponding bolts 170 inserted into each hole).
Regarding claim 15, the modified Jones discloses wherein the cross pin of the bolt interacts with the helically inclined surface of the chassis as the cross pin is turned (Lesenfants: Fig. 34; par. 129) to tighten the chassis to a rifle stock (102).
Regarding claim 16, the modified Jones discloses wherein the helically inclined surface pulls the cross pin into the stock as the bolt is turned (Lesenfants: Figs. 31-34; par. 129).
Regarding claim 18, the modified Jones discloses wherein the bolt includes a spacer (Lesenfants: circumferential flange on fastening member 222, as shown in Figs. 30-33).
Regarding claims 19-20, the modified Jones discloses wherein the bolt includes an interface feature comprising one or more of knurling, a slot, and a depression (Lesenfants: 208; Figs. 26-27; par. 122) disposed within a head of the bolt (Figs. 26-27).
Conclusion
Claims 1-20 are rejected.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN S GOMBERG whose telephone number is (571)272-4802. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 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, Troy Chambers can be reached at (571)272-6874. 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.
/Troy Chambers/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3641 /Troy Chambers/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3641
/BENJAMIN S. GOMBERG/
Examiner
Art Unit 3641