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 .
The present application is a CIP of Application No. 17/112,960, which is now U.S. Patent No. 11,678,655.
Drawings
The drawings were received on April 7, 2023. These drawings are acceptable.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on July 31, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Matthews et al. (US 5,458,079).
Matthews et al. discloses the same boat hunting blind as claimed, as shown in Figures 1-9, which is comprised of a skirt frame, defined as Part #40, that includes a right side brace, defined as Part #42, a left side brace, defined as Part #44, a front lateral brace, defined as Part #46, and a rear lateral brace, defined as Part #48, a plurality of legs, defined as Parts #20a-b and 22a-b, each with a first section that is pivotally connected at an upper end to said skirt frame, and at a lower end to a center stop bracket, defined as Part #34, and a second section that is pivotally connected at an upper end to said center stop bracket, and at a lower end to a mounting bracket or foot, defined as Part #24, for mounting to a gunwale of a boat, as shown in Figures 3-5, and a blind top frame that is comprised of a first top panel support, defined as Part #62, that is pivotally connected with brackets, defined as Part #66, to said skirt frame, and a second top panel support, defined as Part #64, that is pivotally connected with brackets, defined as Part #66, to said skirt frame, as shown in Figures 6-9. A skirt panel is carried on said skirt frame, and first and second top panels are carried on said first and second top panel supports, as shown in Figure 2. Said first top panel support is movable between a first concealment position, as shown in Figure 7, and a first shooting position, as shown in Figures 8-9, and said second top panel support is movable between a second concealment position, as shown in Figures 7-8, and a second shooting position, as shown in Figure 9.
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.
Claims 1-5 and 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matthews et al. in view of Foiles (US 6,769,379).
Matthews et al., as set forth above, discloses all of the features claimed except for the use of first and second support posts for pivotally supporting said first and second top panel supports.
Foiles discloses a boat hunting blind, as shown in Figures 1-13, which is comprised of a frame with front and rear crossbars, each defined as Part #40, first and second vertical support posts, each defined as Part #58, that are mounted to said front and rear crossbars, as shown in Figure 1, a first top panel support, defined as Part #64, that is pivotally attached to said first and second support posts with a bracket, defined as Part #57, and a second top panel support, defined as Part #64, that is also pivotally attached to said first and second support posts with said bracket, as shown in Figure 9. A skirt panel, defined as Part #76, and first and second top panels, defined as Parts #70 and 74, are carried by said frame, as shown in Figure 2.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art, to utilize first and second support ports to pivotally support first and second top panel supports of a boat hunting blind, as taught by Foiles, in combination with the boat hunting blind as disclosed by Matthews et al. for the purpose of providing a boat hunting blind with means to facilitate the movement of first and second top panel supports between raised and lowered positions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-8, 16-18 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARS A OLSON whose telephone number is (571) 272-6685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:00am - 4:00pm.
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, SAMUEL J MORANO can be reached at 571-272-6684. 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.
November 17, 2025
/LARS A OLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615