DETAILED ACTION
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-14 and 20 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.
Independent claim 1 recites “a cornhole airmail apparatus for installing in a gameplay hole”. The claim then recites features of the airmail tube in comparison to the gameplay hole, e.g. “a first tube end engageable with the gameplay hole” and “the gameplay hole has a gameplay hole diameter, a portion of the tube lip has a lip diameter greater than the gameplay hole”. Because the gameplay hole of the cornhole device is not claimed, and is not specified e.g. a regulation sized cornhole apparatus any elements of the airmail apparatus compared to or capable of “engaging” the undefined features of a generic unspecified cornhole board, are also indefinite.
Claim 20 contains similar language to claim 1, and is indefinite for the same reasons.
Claims 4 and 8-14 are additionally indefinite since the term “the tube angled opening” lacks proper antecedent basis.
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.
Claims 1, 7-8, 14-15, and 20, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (CN 208975134).
In respect to claim 1, although indefinite for the reasons stated in the 35 USC 112(b) rejection, above, Chen discloses an airmail tube including, a cylindrical tube 3 having a first tube end of the tube engageable with a gameplay hole and a second tube end opposite the first tube end (Fig. 1); male threads disposed adjacent the first tube end and a tube lip 31, wherein the male threads are positioned between the lip and the first tube end (Fig. 1); the lip having a greater diameter than the gameplay hole and the male threads extendable through the hole (Fig. 2). A securing ring 4 including: a ring outer surface and a ring inner surface, the inner surface being engageable with the male threads (Fig. 1; 0028), and a flat top surface and a bottom surface extending between the inner and outer surfaces; wherein the lip is urged against the upper surface of the top panel adjacent the gameplay hole (Fig. 2) and the securing ring top surface is urged against a lower surface of the top panel when the airmail tube is installed (as is readily evident to one of ordinary skill in the art, via a screwing action).
In respect to claims 7 and 14, Chen discloses an opening which is provided on a angled board, thus providing an “angled opening”.
In respect to claim 8, 15, and 20, Chen discloses the claimed feature above, and further the previously non-recited features of the cornhole device, as well as securing with the threads.
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.
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 2-3, 9-10, and 16, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (CN 208975134).
Chen substantially discloses the claimed invention, including a securing ring with interior female threads, which is essentially a “nut”, well known in the art. Wingnuts, which provide protrusions away from the securing surface (and thus in this case would project downwards) for gripping by a user. The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, namely, the existence of wingnuts and the protrusions specifically used to assist in user grip.
Claims 4, 6, 11, 13, 17, and 19, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (CN 208975134) in view of Hockridge et al. (US 4,938,485).
Chen substantially discloses the claimed invention for the reasons stated above, but does not teach a tub section which projects from the gameplay hole, having a tapered first tube diameter and second tube diameter that is larger adjacent the gameplay hole, however, Hockridge et al. teach a cornhole board and providing an airmail apparatus in the gameplay hole including an airmail apparatus with a tapered first tube diameter and larger second tube diameter (Fig. 5). It would be obvious to provide a tapered section to the tube of Chen in view of Hockridge to provide a more challenging opening shape (Col. 3, 62-69). Implementation on the slanted board results in a rear portion of the tube wall extending higher.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 12 may be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 18 is 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.
The claims contain allowable subject matter, particularly in claiming the angled opening, angled walls of the cylinder, and/or height differences. Spady (US 2020/0406114) discloses a very similar apparatus, including holes which one of ordinary skill would understand could be fastened with screws and a fastener, however it is not “cylindrical”. Corsaut (US 2023/0122635) also discloses a very similar apparatus, however, the taper is in the other direction, and thus does not read on the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE ROBERT GRABOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3518. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-6pm.
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, Daniel Troy, can be reached at 571-270-3762. 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.
/KYLE R GRABOWSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637