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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 2-3 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 2 should depend from claim 1 and claim 3 should depend from claim 2. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by U.S. Pre-Grant Publication 2018/0087872 by White (White).
Regarding claim 1, White discloses a throw lever system, said system comprising: a ring; a first reverse dovetail located on said ring; a second reverse dovetail located on said ring, wherein said second reverse dovetail is offset from said first reverse dovetail, a first lever (112/206/304) releasably coupled to said first reverse dovetail (See Figures, clearly illustrated, multiple dovetail mounting points located around the ring).
Regarding claim 2, White further discloses a second lever releasably coupled to said second reverse dovetail (See at least Figures 2-4, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 3, White further discloses wherein said second lever has a dissimilar height than said first lever (See at least Figures 2-4, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 4, White further discloses a blank releasably coupled to said second reverse dovetail (314).
Regarding claim 5, White further discloses wherein said first reverse dovetail comprises two protrusions which extend inwardly toward one another to create an open topped gap (See Figures, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 6, White further discloses wherein said open topped gap comprises a triangular shaped base with opposing gap corners (See Figures, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 7, White further discloses wherein said first lever comprises lips on a base, wherein said lips fit within said opposing gap corners (See Figures, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 8, White further discloses wherein said first reverse dovetail aligns with a one o'clock orientation, and wherein said second reverse dovetail aligns with a three o-clock orientation along said ring (See at least Figure 4, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 9, White further discloses wherein said first reverse dovetail comprises a dovetail coupler, and wherein said dovetail coupler does not extend completely through said ring (See at least Figures 3-4, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 10, White further discloses wherein said ring comprises a firearm coupler (See Figures, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 11, White discloses a firearm, said firearm comprising: a throw system, said throw system comprising: a ring; a first reverse dovetail located on said ring; a second reverse dovetail located on said ring, wherein said second reverse dovetail is offset from said first reverse dovetail; a first lever releasably coupled to said first reverse dovetail; wherein said firearm further comprises a scope (See Figures, all aspects clearly illustrated), and wherein when said ring is rotated, the power of said scope is adjusted (See entire disclosure, mentioned throughout the specification).
Regarding claim 12, White further discloses wherein said first reverse dovetail corresponds to a first desired magnification, and wherein said second reverse dovetail corresponds to a second desired magnification (See Figures, clearly illustrated, each dovetail would represent a magnification point).
Regarding claim 13, White further discloses wherein a user can switch between said first desired magnification and said second desired magnification by manipulating said first lever (See entire disclosure, mentioned throughout the specification).
Regarding claim 14, White further discloses wherein ring is rotatable relative to said firearm (See at least Abstract).
Regarding claim 15, White further discloses wherein said first reverse dovetail aligns with a one o'clock orientation, and wherein said second reverse dovetail aligns with a three o-clock orientation along said ring (See at least Figure 4, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 16, White further discloses wherein said ring is fixed relative to said scope via firearm couplers (See at least Paragraph 0015).
Regarding claim 17, White further discloses wherein the location of said first lever can be aligned with a desired magnification on said scope (See at least Figure 4, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 18, White further discloses a second lever releasably coupled to said second reverse dovetail (See at least Figures 2-4, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 19, White further discloses wherein said second lever has a dissimilar height than said first lever (See at least Figures 2-4, clearly illustrated).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over White.
Regarding claim 20, White discloses the claimed invention except for the second lever having a dissimilar color to the first lever. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the second lever be a dissimilar color to the first lever, since applicant has not disclosed that the different colors solve any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with levers having the same color.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892 Form for a listing of applicable prior art references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN C WEBER whose telephone number is (571)270-5377. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM 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.
/Jonathan C Weber/Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 3641
JONATHAN C. WEBER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3641