3Notice 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
In response to the amendment filed 1 – 20; claims 1 - 14 are pending; claims 15 – 20 have been withdrawn.
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.
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 – 6, 8, 13 – 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Sniper’s Rifle / rifle de francotirador” by Reneujo (https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2205051, 3/26/2017) in view of “Fiber Optic Fixed Sights for Picatinny Rail - Gel Ball, Gel Blaster, Airsoft” by Superpoo (https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:3401070, 2/13/2019; known herein as Thingiverse2)
Re claims 1, 8:
Reneujo teaches
1. A 3D printed training firearm (Reneujo, pg. 1; pg. 10), comprising:
an integral firearm body having no moving parts and printed using a first material indicative of an inert training tool (Reneujo, pg. 10, Reneujo teaches a 3d printed rifle assembled from a plurality of parts with no moving mechanism), including:
a grip portion; a trigger portion (Reneujo, pgs. 1 – 2; pg. 9); and
a barrel portion, the barrel portion having an upper surface, wherein the upper surface comprises a first groove at a muzzle end of the barrel portion and a second groove at a grip end of the barrel portion (Reneujo, pg. 11 show grooves; pg. 2 show a riffle with a rail with grooves for accessory (i.e., scope) including front grooves and the rear grooves); wherein sight are printed using a second material resembling components of a live firearm (Reneujo shows on pg. 2 and pg. 3 shows that components can be printed in different colors).
8. A 3D printed training firearm (Reneujo, pg. 1; pg. 10), the training firearm comprising:
an integral firearm body having no moving parts and printed using a first material of a first color indicative of an inert training firearm (Reneujo, pg. 10, Reneujo teaches a 3d printed rifle assembled from a plurality of parts with no moving mechanism), including:
a grip portion; a trigger portion (Reneujo, pgs. 1 – 2; pg. 9); and
a barrel portion, the barrel portion having an upper surface extending from a muzzle end of the barrel portion to a grip end of the barrel portion, wherein the upper surface comprises a first groove at the muzzle end and a second groove at the grip end (Reneujo, pg. 11 show grooves; pg. 2 show a riffle with a rail with grooves for accessory (i.e., scope) including front grooves and the rear grooves); and
wherein sight(s) are printed using a second material of a second color substantially similar to a color of a live firearm (Reneujo shows on pg. 2 and pg. 3 shows that components can be printed in two different colors).
Reneujo teaches a 3d printed scope (Reneujo, pgs. 3 – 4; pgs. 6 – 8) mounted on a rail. Reneujo does not explicitly disclose a front sight and a rear sight. Thingiverse2 teaches a front sight having a first base portion for positioning within the first groove; and a rear sight having a second base portion for positioning within the second groove (Thingiverse2, pgs. 1 - 7). Therefore, in view of Thingiverse2, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the 3d printed weapon described in Reneujo, by providing the front and rear sights as taught by Thingiverse2 instead of a scope sight, since front and rear sights are known to be lightweight, inexpensive, independent of batteries, and resistant to environments compare to a scope.
Re claim 2:
2. The 3D printed training firearm of claim 1, wherein grip portion, trigger portion, and barrel portion are the integral with the firearm body is created layer-by-layer in a single additive manufacturing session (Reneujo, pg. 10, “Print Settings”).
Re claim 3:
3. The 3D printed training firearm of claim 1, wherein the firearm body is sized and shaped to resemble a make and a model of a live firearm (Reneujo, pgs. 2 - 3).
Re claim 4:
4. The 3D printed training firearm of claim 1, the rear sight comprising a dovetail having first and second posts (Thingiverse2, pg. 2).
Re claim 5:
5. The 3D printed training firearm of claim 4, the front sight comprising a blade, wherein each of the blade, the first post, and the second post include a sight dot (Thingiverse2, pgs. 1 - 2).
Re claim 6:
6. The 3D printed training firearm of claim 4, wherein each sight dot comprises a phosphorescent element (Thingsverse2, pgs. 3 – 7 and website https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:3401070 shows sight dots with phosphorescent element).
Re claim 13:
13. The training firearm of claim 8, wherein the second color is black, grey, or metallic in appearance (Reneujo shows on pg. 2 and pg. 3 shows that components can be printed in different colors).
Re claim 14:
14. The training firearm of claim 8, wherein the front sight comprises a blade having a first sight dot, and the rear sight comprises a first and second post having a second and third sight dot, respectively (Thingsverse2, pgs. 3 – 7 and website https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:3401070 shows sight dots with phosphorescent element).
Claims 7 and 9 - 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reneujo and Thingiverse2 as applied to claim 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Fuller (US 2024/0200908 A1)
Re claims 7 and 9 - 11:
Reneujo disclose 7. The 3D printed training firearm of claim 1, wherein each of the first and second groove define a recess and 9. The training firearm of claim 8, the first groove defining a first recess and a
first retention, and the second groove defining a second recess and a second retention. (Reneujo, pg. 11 show grooves; pg. 2 show a riffle with a rail with grooves for accessory (i.e., scope) including front grooves and the rear grooves); but does not explicitly disclose a retention lip.
Fuller teaches an invention related to sights for use on firearms, in particular handguns having a slider element (Fuller, Abstract). Fuller teaches 7. The 3D printed training firearm of claim 1, wherein each of the groove define a recess and a retention lip. 9. The training firearm of claim 8, the groove defining a recess and a retention lip (Fuller, figs 5 – 6 and fig. 9). 10. The training firearm of claim 9, the first base portion of the front sight is configured for placement within the first recess and the first retention lip overlaps a portion of the first base portion. 11. The training firearm of claim 9, the second base portion of the rear sight is configured for placement within the second recess and the second retention lip overlaps a portion of the second base portion (Fuller, figs 5 – 6 and fig. 9). Therefore, in view of Fuller, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the training firearm described in Reneujo, by providing the retention lip as taught by Fuller, in the retention mechanism may be biased to a retention position but may be actuatable without tools, e.g. by push buttons, to unlock the retention mechanism to allow the sight mounting component to be removed from the adapter shoe (Fuller, [0049]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reneujo and Thingiverse2 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of “3D Printed Repeating Slingbow/Crossbow Pistol” (from https://legolini.com, retrieved from Internet Wayback Machine on 1/8/2023, know herein as Legolini).
Re claim 12:
Reneujo teaches two colors: white or black. However, Reneujo does not explicitly disclose 12. The training firearm of claim 8, wherein the first color is blue, orange, or red (Legolini, pg. 7). Therefore, in view of Fuller, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the training firearm described in Reneujo, by other colors as taught by Legolini, since it was known in the art to use different colors for ecstatic reason.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-14 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.
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 JACK YIP whose telephone number is (571)270-5048. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 9:00 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, XUAN THAI can be reached at (571) 272-7147. 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.
/JACK YIP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
