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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The I.D.S. received 4-20-26 has a reference lined-through. This reference was previously considered and cited on the PTO-892 with the Non-Final Office 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 1-18 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.
With regards to claims 1 and 14, the phrase “to form a self-retained cartridge” is unclear. This limitation introduces another cartridge with relation to the previously disclosed “slider cartridge”. It is believed that another cartridge is not formed but the existing slider cartridge is now “self-retained”. The claim needs to further limit the slider cartridge as being self-retained instead of disclosure where another cartridge is formed. Claims 5, 6, 16, and 17 also disclose “form the self-retained slider cartridge”.
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)(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 1, 7-13, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Marfione (11,945,126).
With regards to claims 1 and 7-9, Marfione disclose the same invention including a slider cartridge (38, 40, 42, 48) for an out-the-front knife (10) having a handle (12) and blade (14) that is selectively deployable out a front of the handle to move from a stowed position within the handle (Fig. 1) to a deployed out of the handle (Fig. 2), the cartridge having a slider plate (48), a pair of opposing catches (40, 42), at least one biasing element (38), the opposing catches are configured to be retained on opposing ends of the slider plate under bias of the at least one biasing element to form a self-retained slider cartridge that is manipulable in space apart from the knife handle and knife blade (Figs. 4, 9, and 10), each of the catches includes at least one aperture configured to detachably receive a respective end of the at least one biasing element such that the at least one biasing element extends between the catches (Fig. 10), the at least one biasing element is two biasing elements (38) between the catches and extending along an outer face of the slider plate (Figs. 4 and 10), and the catches are of identical form (40, 42).
With regards to claims 10-13, Marfione disclose the same invention including an out-the-front knife (10) having a knife handle (12), a knife blade (14) that is selectively deployable out of a front of the knife handle to move from a stowed position within the handle (Fig. 1) to a deployed position out of the handle (Fig. 2) and the cartridge of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), a detent mechanism positioned at a rear end of the knife within the handle to interact with a tang of the knife blade to secure the blade in the stowed position until a bias of the detent mechanism is overcome by movement of the plate (46, Fig. 10), a detent mechanism positioned at a front end of the knife within the handle to interact with a tang of the knife blade to secure the blade in the deployed position until a bias of the detent mechanism is overcome by movement of the plate (44, Fig. 10), and a movable engagement member coupled to the handle to move in fore and aft directions and operable in conjunction with the slider plate to move the blade between the stowed and deployed positions (16).
With regards to claims 19 and 20, Marfione disclose the same invention including a method of assembling an out-the-front knife (10, Fig. 4) having a handle (12) and blade (14) that is selectively deployable out a front of the handle to move from a stowed position within the handle (Fig. 1) to a deployed out of the handle (Fig. 2), the method including providing a slider plate (48), a pair of opposing catches (40, 42), and at least one biasing element (38), configuring the opposing catches on opposing ends of the slider plate under a bias of the at least one biasing element to form a self-retaining slider cartridge (Figs. 4 and 10), positioning the cartridge between opposing portions of the handle (Fig. 4), and the cartridge being manipulable in space apart from the portions of the handle and the blade (Figs. 4, 9, and 10).
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 2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marfione (11,945,126). See Figure below for Examiner added reference labels.
With regards to claims 2-6, Marfione discloses the invention including each of the catches includes structures (y) that are operable to assist in securing each respective catch on a respective one of the opposing ends of the slider plate (catches 40, 42 incorporate portion x which abuts a front side of slider plate 48 and portion y that abuts a backside of slider plate 48 which assists in securing), the slider plate includes a catch engaging slot on each of the opposing ends of the slider plate to insertably receive a respective one of the catches (Figs. 4 and 10), the slots are defined by a slot width (Figs. 4 and 10), the structures are configured to abut a backside of the slider plate to assist in retaining the catches in the assembly (y), and a slider plate engaging end of the catches which includes the structures is provided in a form factor that is configured to nest with the opposing end of the slider plate to assist in retaining the catches on the slider plate in the assembly (in Fig. 9, the ends of plate 48 nest with portions x and y of catches 40 and 42).
PNG
media_image1.png
490
464
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, with regards to claims 2 and 4, Marfione fails to disclose the structures (y) are opposing tabs that protrude outwardly from a center of the catch to a side of the slider plate and the tabs protrude outwardly beyond the slot width such that the tabs overlap with portions of the slider plate adjacent to the slots.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the different portions of the structures (y) of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient including taking the form of opposing tabs that protrude outwardly from a center of the catch to a side of the slider plate and protrude outwardly beyond the slot width such that the tabs overlap with portions of the slider plate adjacent to the slots. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify the device of Marfione to obtain the invention as specified in claims 2-6. The claim would have been obvious because a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product is not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense.
Claims 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marfione (11,945,126). See rejections of claims 1-6 and 10-12 above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments and affidavit filed 4-20-26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The affidavit discloses a Reddit post from February 2023 in an attempt to disqualify Marfione (11,945,126) as prior art. The actual Reddit post (4 pictures) was reviewed and not just the screenshot provided and will be referred to as Reddit Post. After review, it has been determined that the Reddit Post does not provide support for each and every claimed limitation. While the cartridge is shown, there is no description explaining the cartridge or the knife and, therefore, the specifics of the claim are not supported by the Reddit Post. In claims 1 and 10 there is no support for “sliding” or any of the structures being “sliding” structures, a stowed position, catches, and the catches are configured to be retained on opposing ends of the slider plate under a bias of the at least one biasing element that is manipulable in space apart from the knife handle and the knife blade. In claim 14, a stowed position, “sliding” or any of the structures being “sliding” structures, catches with opposing tabs extending outwardly from a center of the catch beyond a respective catch engaging slot in each end of the slider plate to assist in securing the catches in the slider plate. In claim 19, a stowed position, “sliding” or any of the structures being “sliding” structures, and the catches on opposing ends of the slider plate under bias of the at least one biasing element. Without a description in the Reddit Post, there is no way to determine how the Reddit Post pictures provide support for each and every limitation. For example, while the Reddit Post does show one side of the structures that are labeled as the catches in the instant Application, the Reddit Post fails to show any details of these structures or discuss any of the details that allows for these structures to be considered catches and, therefore, are not supported. It is noted that dependent claim limitations are not supported by the Reddit Post but are not listed here. Since all of the limitations are not supported by the Reddit Post, Marfione (11,945,126) is still considered prior art.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JASON DANIEL PRONE whose telephone number is (571)272-4513. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 7:00 am-3:00 pm.
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, Boyer D Ashley can be reached on (571)272-4502. 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.
05 June 2026
/Jason Daniel Prone/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights