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 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, and 8-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mead et al., U. S. Patent Application No. 2013/0312726, in view of Winkler et al., U.S. Patent No. 4,833,969, and in further view of Herlach et al., U.S. Patent No. 1,784,355. As to Claim 1, Mead teaches a toy launcher (10) comprising a main body (12) and two or more cartridges (24-38) removably attached to the main body, paragraphs 0024 and 0028, noting clips removably attached to clip connector (22) which is attached to the main body. Each of the cartridges may be configured to hold a plurality of projectiles, paragraph 0024. The cartridges may comprise a first cartridge disposed on a first side of the main body and a second cartridge disposed on a second side of the main body, see Figure 3. Mead teaches flywheels (wheels) disposed within the main body in front of the cartridges, paragraphs 0025 and 0026, noting that a push link (58) pushes projectiles (darts) forward from cartridge to flywheels. Mead teaches that a push rod (58) may operate to first eject projectiles one by one from the first cartridge and then eject projectiles one by one from a second cartridge, only eject projectiles one by one from the first cartridge, or only eject projectiles from the second cartridge toward a firing position at which the flywheels fire the projectiles from the launcher, paragraphs 0026 and 0032, noting that the toy may be operated with or without all cartridges attached and the toy may be operated to fire all projectiles from a first cartridge and then fire projectiles from a second cartridge. Mead is silent as to a movable casing and as to two push rods. Winkler teaches a loading device for a weapon comprising two cartridges (3, 4), Col. 2, ln. 25-26. The loading device may have a casing (15) movably attached to a main body (1), Col. 2, ln. 24-25 and Col. 3, ln. 26-33. Winkler teaches that a push rod (9) may be movably attached to the casing, Col. 3, ln. 34-37. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide Mead with a casing movable attached to the main body, and a push rod movably attached to the casing, as taught by Winkler, to provide Mead with a movable component positioning a projectile to be advanced toward a firing position, to provide Mead with a known substitute loading system. Mead, as modified, does not provide a duplicate second push rod. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide an additional duplicate push rod, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art, St Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Mead, as modified, discloses the claimed invention except for providing a stop member. Herlach teaches a launcher (firearm) having two cartridges (cartridge magazines) comprising a stop member (i) disposed between two cartridges (d), page 3 ln. 27-30 and see Figure 4. The stop member may be disposed adjacent a push rod and biased toward a side of a main body (breech), which may be considered to be a first side, page 2, ln. 23-31 and page 3, ln. 27-44, noting spring bolt. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide Mead, as modified, with a stop member configured as claimed and as taught by Herlach, to provide Mead, as modified, with a stop member configured to restrict action of a push rod when an associated cartridge is empty, to yield the predictable result of facilitating efficient operation of a multiple cartridge launcher. As to Claim 2, Mead, as modified, discloses the claimed invention except for arranging two push rods as a first push rod on the first side of the main body and the second push rod on the second side of the main body. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to arrange two push rods as claimed, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). As to Claim 3, Herlach teaches that under the condition that the first cartridge is attached to the main body and is at least partially full, the stop member is pushed away from the first side so that the push rod operates to first eject projectiles one by one from the first cartridge, page 3, ln. 114-128, noting that the magazine in feeding position contacts projections to move stop member out of locking position to allow push rod (breech piece) to move a projectile (cartridge) to firing position. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide Mead with the stop member configured as claimed and as taught by Herlach, to provide Mead, as modified, with action to free the push rod under the condition of a loaded cartridge to yield the predictable result of automatically selecting a first cartridge. As to Claim 6, Herlach teaches that the stop member may be biased toward a first side, as discussed above and further that a spring may bias the stop member, page 3, ln. 41-43, noting spring bolt. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide Mead, as modified, with a spring biased stop member, as taught by Herlach, to provide Mead, as modified, with a known substitute mechanical component. As to Claim 8, Herlach teaches that the stop member may be movably attached to the main body, page 3, ln. 27-30. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide Mead, as modified, with a stop member movably attached to the main body, as taught by Herlach, to provide Mead, as modified, with stop member movement capable of confining and releasing a push rod, to yield the predictable result of facilitating automatic selection of a cartridge for supplying projectiles. As to Claim 9, Herlach teaches the stop member may engage the push rod when a cartridge is not present or when a cartridge is empty, page 3, ln. 30-35. It follows that if the stop member responds to an empty cartridge, the leading projectile engages the lever which operates the stop member. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide Mead, as modified, with a stop member pushed away from the first side by a lead projectile, as taught by Herlach, to provide Mead, as modified, with a known substitute configuration for operation of the stop member. As to Claim 10, Mead teaches that first and second cartridges may be spring loaded, paragraph 0027. As to Claims 11 and 12, Mead teaches a trigger assembly (19) connected to a push rod (58), paragraph 0026, but Mead does not teach that the trigger assembly may activate reciprocal movement of a casing. Winkler teaches that the casing may be activated for reciprocal movement by a motor drive, Col. 3, ln. 55-63, Col. 4, ln. 4-7, and Col. 2, ln. 56-64, noting that the casing receives a first projectile and delivers the projectile for loading. It follows that movement is reciprocal in that the plurality of projectiles in each cartridge are loaded. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide Mead, as modified with motorized reciprocal movement of the casing, as taught by Winkler, to provide Mead, as modified, with a known substitute configuration for operating a casing to deliver projectiles in position for firing. Mead, as modified, teaches the claimed invention except for configuring the reciprocal movement of the casing to be activated by the trigger assembly. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the activation of the casing to be initiated by the trigger assembly, since it was known in the art that a launcher may be arranged in semi-automatic form to advance a projectile to firing position and to fire the projectile by action of a trigger.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, and 7 are 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant’s argument that Mead, in view of Winkler, fails to teach push rods movably attached to a casing, the examiner maintains the position that Mead teaches a push rod which ejects projectiles from a cartridge. A mechanical link advances a second cartridge into position so that the push rod may eject projectiles from the second cartridge. Mead does not provide a reciprocating casing with first and second cartridges. Winkler teaches a reciprocating casing operating in cooperation with a push rod which is movable with respect to the casing with two cartridges. The push rod operates when the casing has moved a projectile into position behind a breech. In the broadest reasonable interpretation, the push rod is movably attached to the casing, to the extent of the claimed invention as understood in view of applicant’s specification.
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 JOHN ELLIOTT SIMMS JR whose telephone number is (571)270-7474. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am - 5:00 pm - M-F.
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, Nicholas Weiss can be reached at (571) 270-1775. 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.
/JOHN E SIMMS JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711 25 February 2026