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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed October 27th, 2025 has been entered. Claim 2 has been canceled. Claims 1 and 3-5 remain pending in the application. Claims 1 and 3 are currently amended. Claim 5 is newly added. Applicant’s amendments to the disclosure have overcome the objection to the disclosure, the provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejections, and the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed August 12th, 2025.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, Ln. 11, “the fixing screw” lacks sufficient antecedent basis due to amendments in claim 1. Examiner suggests “the fixing screw” should read --a fixing screw--
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1 and 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (JP H10276629, English translation from Espacenet which was provided by Applicant), in view of Amano (US 5,848,757).
PNG
media_image1.png
390
402
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1. Annotated Figure 7 from Sato
Regarding Claim 1, Sato, Figures 1-3 and 7 and annotated Figure 1 above, teaches a fishing spinning reel (spinning reel; See Sato, Ln. 156) comprising:
a rotor 3 rotated by a winding operation of a handle 1;
a bail support member 40 attached to a support arm 31 of the rotor, and supporting a bail 46;
a line roller 45 supported by the bail support member 40, and guiding a fishing line to a spool 4 around which the fishing line is wound and held (See Sato, Ln. 330-333);
a line slider 44 supporting one end 46c of the bail 46, and guiding the fishing line picked up by the bail 46 to the line roller 45 (See Sato, Ln. 349-351); and
an attachment portion 46c’ at the one end of the bail 46 and disposed at a bottom portion 44’’ within the line slider 44,
Sato teaches all the elements of the fishing spinning reel except for the attachment portion being fixed to the line slider by a fixing screw from the line slider side and the attachment portion being sandwiched between the bottom portion of the line slider and an inner surface of a head of the fixing screw.
PNG
media_image2.png
378
332
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2. Annotated Figure 2 from Amano
However, Amano, Figures 1-3 and annotated Figure 2 above, teaches wherein the attachment portion 6 is fixed to the line slider 9 by the fixing screw 7 from a side of a line slider side, and
the attachment portion 6 is sandwiched between the bottom portion 9a of the line slider 9 and an inner surface 7a’ of a head 7a of the fixing screw 7.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Sato with a fixing screw on the line slider side which sandwiches the attachment portion between the line slider and the head of the fixing screw, as taught by Amano, for the purpose of preventing damage to the fishing line while in operation (i.e. “the fishing line is effectively prevented from being twined around the line guide section”) (See Amano, Col. 1, Ln. 35-36).
Regarding Claim 3, Sato in view of Amano are advanced above.
Sato, annotated Figure 1 above, further teaches an accommodation portion 44’ having a bottomed tubular shape, provided in the line slider 44, and accommodating the attachment portion 46c’ (See Sato, Ln. 500-505),
wherein the fixing screw 56 is inserted into the line slider 44 through an opening 43’ of the accommodation portion 44’ (See Sato, Ln. 291-293).
Regarding Claim 4, Sato in view of Amano are advanced above.
Sato further teaches wherein an insertion hole 44g into which the one end 46c of the bail 46 is inserted is formed on a side surface 44b of the line slider 44 (See Sato, Ln. 347-348), and
the insertion hole 44g has an inner diameter larger than an outer diameter of the one end 46c of the bail 46 (inner diameter of the insertion hole 44g must be larger than outer diameter of the one end of the bail 46c to allow for penetration of the hole by the bail; See Sato, Fig. 7).
Regarding Claim 5, Sato in view of Amano are advanced above.
Amano, annotated Figure 2 above, further teaches wherein the inner surface 7a’ of the head 7a of the fixing screw 7 directly contacts the attachment portion 6.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Sato with a fixing screw on the line slider side which sandwiches the attachment portion between the line slider and the head of the fixing screw, as taught by Amano, for the purpose of preventing damage to the fishing line while in operation (i.e. “the fishing line is effectively prevented from being twined around the line guide section”) (See Amano, Col. 1, Ln. 35-36).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see Pg. 5-7, filed October 27th, 2025, have been fully considered.
Regarding the objection to the Specification, Applicant has submitted acceptable amendments. Therefore, the objection has been withdrawn.
Regarding the rejection of Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102/103, Applicant has amended the claim. The amendments are sufficient to overcome the previously set forth rejection. Therefore, this rejection has been withdrawn. However, a new ground of rejection has been set forth under 35 U.S.C. 103 based on the amended claim.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Sato in view of Amano are utilized in the current rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 (See Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 above).
Regarding the rejections of Claims 3-4, the claims are dependents of rejected claim 1 and Applicant has provided no additional arguments. Therefore, the rejections are maintained.
Regarding newly added Claim 5, the claim is a dependent of rejected claim 1, and Applicant’s arguments regarding the cited art, as it applies to claim 1, are moot. Additionally, a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 has been made for additional limitations outlined in claim 5.
Conclusion
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 TIFFANY DOMONIQUE JEFFERSON whose telephone number is 571-272-0403. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am-7:30pm ET.
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, Victoria Augustine can be reached at 313-446-4858. 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.
/T.D.J./Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/ANNA M MOMPER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights