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 .
Application Status
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined in this application.
This communication is the first action on the merits.
As of the date of this action, no information disclosure statement has been filed on behalf of this case.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species D (Figs. 9-15) in the reply filed on 11/25/2025 is acknowledged.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 1-20 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.
Claim 1 recites the phrase "the axis" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner suggests changing “the axis” to --an axis--. Claim 13 is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 3 recites the phrase "one direction of the four-way screw" in lines 1-2. This renders the claim vague and indefinite, since it is unclear what the term “direction” is referencing. It seems the only apparent directional component of the four-way screw is that of the protrusion of the screw from the bottom hemisphere towards the top hemisphere. Further clarification is required.
Claim 11 recites the phrase "the compressible foam" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner suggests changing “the compressible foam” to --a compressible foam--.
Claim 18 recites the phrase "other than compressible foam" in line 2. This renders the claim vague and indefinite, since it is unclear how the hemispheres being made of “compressible foam” as recited in parent claim 17 can be considered accurate, if claim 18 is further narrowing the invention to have hemispheres made of a material “other than compressible foam”. Further clarification is required.
Claim 19 recites two sentences at “screw. The” in line 2. This renders the claim vague and indefinite. The Examiner suggests changing “wherein the two hemispheres” in line 1 to –wherein, when the two hemispheres-- and “screw. The” in line 2 to --screw, the--.
Claim 19 recites the phrase "The concave surfaces" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner suggests changing “The concave surfaces” to --concave surfaces--.
Claims 2-12 and 14-20 are rejected based on their respective dependencies.
Appropriate correction is required. Accordingly, the invention has been examined as best understood.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singer (U.S. Pat. 2764838) in view of Pressey (U.S. Pat. 2820396).
In regard to claim 1, Singer discloses a multifunctional strike indicator assembly comprising: a top hemisphere defining a substantially flat inner surface and a substantially hemispherical outer surface (Figs. 1-6 and Column 2 lines 3-50, where there is a top hemisphere 15 defining a substantially flat inner surface and a substantially hemispherical outer surface); a bottom hemisphere defining a substantially flat inner surface with a slot running along the axis of the bottom hemisphere in a perpendicular direction, and a substantially hemispherical outer surface (Figs. 1-6 and Column 2 lines 3-50, where there is a bottom hemisphere 16 defining a substantially flat inner surface with a slot 21 running along the axis of the bottom hemisphere 16 in a perpendicular direction); a two-way screw, housed in a rigid inner component; and a nut component configured to rotationally engage with the two-way screw (Figs. 1-6 and Column 2 lines 3-50, where there is a two-way screw 19, housed in a rigid inner component, and a nut component 20 configured to rotationally engage with the two-way screw 19); wherein the two-way screw is affixed to the bottom hemisphere at a central region thereof, the nut component is affixed to the top hemisphere at a central region thereof, and the top and the bottom hemisphere are configured to connect with the substantially flat inner surface of the top hemisphere flush to the substantially flat inner surface of the bottom hemisphere when the two-way screw is engaged with the nut component (Figs. 1-6 and Column 2 lines 3-50, where the two-way screw 19 is affixed to the bottom hemisphere 16 at a central region thereof, the nut component 20 is affixed to the top hemisphere 15 at a central region thereof, and the top and the bottom hemisphere 15/16 are configured to connect with the substantially flat inner surface of the top hemisphere 15 flush to the substantially flat inner surface of the bottom hemisphere 16 when the two-way screw 19 is engaged with the nut component 20). Singer is silent on a four-way screw. Pressey discloses a four-way screw connection mechanism (Figs. 2-5 and Column 2 line 61 – Column 3 line 6, where there is a four-way screw connection mechanism which includes a four-way screw 31, receiving threads 39, and set screw 40 to create a threaded connection and a wedging force between the two respective connection members). Singer and Pressey are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which includes screws. 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 device body of Singer such that there is a four-way screw connection mechanism in view of Pressey. The motivation would have been to enable the threaded protrusion of the four-way screw to apply a wedging force on the receiving threads, in order to secure the screw and create a relatively stronger connection between the two threaded portions.
In regard to claim 2, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 1, wherein the slot is facilitated to hold a fishing line (Singer, Figs. 1-6 and Column 2 lines 3-50, where the slot 21 is facilitated to hold a fishing line 9).
In regard to claim 3, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 1, wherein one direction of the four-way screw is aligned with the slot (Singer, Figs. 1-6 and Column 2 lines 3-50, where one direction in which the fishing line 9 can pass through the screw 19 is aligned with the slot 21).
In regard to claim 5, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 1, wherein the top hemisphere and bottom hemisphere can disengage by unscrewing the top hemisphere from the bottom hemisphere, disengaging the nut component from the four-way screw (Singer, Figs. 1-6 and Column 2 lines 3-50, where the top hemisphere and bottom hemisphere 15/16 can disengage by unscrewing the top hemisphere 15 from the bottom hemisphere 16, disengaging the nut component 20 from the screw 19).
In regard to claim 13, Singer discloses a multifunctional strike indicator assembly comprising: a top hemisphere defining a substantially flat inner surface and a substantially hemispherical outer surface (Figs. 1-6 and Column 2 lines 3-50, where there is a top hemisphere 15 defining a substantially flat inner surface and a substantially hemispherical outer surface); a bottom hemisphere defining a substantially flat inner surface with a concave slot running along the axis of the bottom hemisphere in a perpendicular direction, and a substantially hemispherical outer surface (Figs. 1-6 and Column 2 lines 3-50, where there is a bottom hemisphere 16 defining a substantially flat inner surface with a concave slot 21 running along the axis of the bottom hemisphere 16 in a perpendicular direction); a two-way screw, housed in a rigid inner component; and a nut component configured to rotationally engage with the two-way screw (Figs. 1-6 and Column 2 lines 3-50, where there is a two-way screw 19, housed in a rigid inner component, and a nut component 20 configured to rotationally engage with the two-way screw 19); wherein the two-way screw is affixed to the bottom hemisphere at a central region thereof, the nut component is affixed to the top hemisphere at a central region thereof, and the top and the bottom hemisphere are configured to connect with the substantially flat inner surface of the top hemisphere flush to the substantially flat inner surface of the bottom hemisphere when two-way screw is engaged with the nut component (Figs. 1-6 and Column 2 lines 3-50, where the two-way screw 19 is affixed to the bottom hemisphere 16 at a central region thereof, the nut component 20 is affixed to the top hemisphere 15 at a central region thereof, and the top and the bottom hemisphere 15/16 are configured to connect with the substantially flat inner surface of the top hemisphere 15 flush to the substantially flat inner surface of the bottom hemisphere 16 when the two-way screw 19 is engaged with the nut component 20); and wherein the concave slot is configured to hold a fishing line in a slip, or a no-slip position (Figs. 1-6 and Column 2 lines 3-50, where the concave slot 21 is at least configured to hold a fishing line in a slip (Fig. 5) or a no-slip position (Fig. 6)). Singer is silent on a four-way screw. Pressey discloses a four-way screw connection mechanism (Figs. 2-5 and Column 2 line 61 – Column 3 line 6, where there is a four-way screw connection mechanism which includes a four-way screw 31, receiving threads 39, and set screw 40 to create a threaded connection and a wedging force between the two respective connection members). Singer and Pressey are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which includes screws. 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 device body of Singer such that there is a four-way screw connection mechanism in view of Pressey. The motivation would have been to enable the threaded protrusion of the four-way screw to apply a wedging force on the receiving threads, in order to secure the screw and create a relatively stronger connection between the two threaded portions.
In regard to claim 14, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 13, wherein in the no slip position (Singer, Fig. 6), the top hemisphere and the bottom hemisphere are rotated in a closed position, with the four-way screw and the nut component holding the fishing line in place, and the substantially flat surfaces of the top hemisphere and the bottom hemisphere compressing to prevent the strike indicator from being disengaged (Singer, Figs. 1-6 and Column 2 lines 3-50, where the top hemisphere 15 and the bottom hemisphere 16 are rotated in a closed position, with the screw 19 and the nut component 20 holding the fishing line 9 in place, and the substantially flat surfaces of the top hemisphere 15 and the bottom hemisphere 16 are compressed to prevent the strike indicator from being disengaged, in the no slip position).
In regard to claim 15, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 13, wherein in the slip position (Singer, Fig. 5) the top hemisphere and the bottom hemisphere are rotated in a closed position with the fishing line passing freely through the slot in the four-way screw, and the substantially flat surfaces of the hemispheres are compressed to prevent the strike indicator from being disengaged (Singer, Figs. 1-6 and Column 2 lines 3-50, where the top hemisphere 15 and the bottom hemisphere 16 are rotated in a closed position with the fishing line 9 passing freely through the slot 21 in the screw 19, and the substantially flat surfaces of the hemispheres are compressed to prevent the strike indicator from being disengaged, in the slip position).
In regard to claim 16, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 13, wherein the top hemisphere and bottom hemisphere can disengage by unscrewing the top hemisphere from the bottom hemisphere, disengaging the nut component from the four-way screw (Singer, Figs. 1-6 and Column 2 lines 3-50, where the top hemisphere and bottom hemisphere 15/16 can disengage by unscrewing the top hemisphere 15 from the bottom hemisphere 16, disengaging the nut component 20 from the screw 19).
Claims 4 and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singer (U.S. Pat. 2764838) in view of Pressey (U.S. Pat. 2820396) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Douglas (U.S. Pub. 20220279769).
In regard to claim 4, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 1. Singer as modified by Pressey is silent on the substantially flat inner surface of the top hemisphere includes a concavity of less than about 0.40 mm, and wherein the substantially flat inner surface of the bottom hemisphere includes a concavity of less than about 0.40 mm. Douglas discloses the substantially flat inner surface of the top hemisphere includes a concavity of less than about 0.40 mm, and wherein the substantially flat inner surface of the bottom hemisphere includes a concavity of less than about 0.40 mm (Figs. 8A-8B and Claim 4, see exact claim limitation). Singer and Douglas are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which includes fishing devices. 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 device body of Singer as modified by Pressey such that the substantially flat inner surface of the top hemisphere includes a concavity of less than about 0.40 mm, and wherein the substantially flat inner surface of the bottom hemisphere includes a concavity of less than about 0.40 mm in view of Douglas. The motivation would have been to provide some compression between the hemispheres, when the screw is fully inserted into the nut component, in order to better secure the fishing line in the device.
In regard to claim 8, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 1, the top hemisphere defines a cavity (Singer, Figs. 1-6, where the top hemisphere 15 defines a cavity (in which nut component 20 sits)). Singer as modified by Pressey is silent on each of the top hemisphere and the bottom hemisphere define a cavity. Douglas discloses each of the top hemisphere and the bottom hemisphere define a cavity (Claim 8, see exact claim limitation). Singer and Douglas are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which includes fishing devices. 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 device body of Singer as modified by Pressey such that each of the top hemisphere and the bottom hemisphere define a cavity in view of Douglas. The motivation would have been to have the screw be removable or adjustable, in order to replace or repair a damaged screw component.
In regard to claim 9, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 1. Singer as modified by Pressey is silent on the top and the bottom hemisphere are made of a compressible foam. Douglas discloses the top and the bottom hemisphere are made of a compressible foam (Claim 9, see exact claim limitation). Singer and Douglas are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which includes fishing devices. 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 device body of Singer as modified by Pressey such that the top and the bottom hemisphere are made of a compressible foam in view of Douglas. The motivation would have been to have the compressibility of the foam lock around the screw assembly to prevent movement and allow the hardware to create a friction fit.
In regard to claim 10, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 1, where the device floats on water (Singer, Claim 1). Singer as modified by Pressey is silent on the top and bottom hemisphere are made of a combination of low density materials. Douglas discloses the top and bottom hemisphere are made of a combination of low density materials (Claim 10, see exact claim limitation). Singer and Douglas are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which includes fishing devices. 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 device body of Singer as modified by Pressey such that the top and bottom hemisphere are made of a combination of low density materials in view of Douglas. The motivation would have been to use a material which is buoyant, on both sides of the device, to ensure the device floats while being used to fish.
In regard to claim 11, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 1, and the four-way screw (Pressey, Figs. 2-5). Singer as modified by Pressey is silent on the screw is set back into the bottom hemisphere and is adjustable, and made tighter or looser by compressing the four-way screw a corresponding degree into the compressible foam. Douglas discloses the screw is set back into the bottom hemisphere and is adjustable, and made tighter or looser by compressing the four-way screw a corresponding degree into the compressible foam (Claim 11, see exact claim limitation). Singer and Douglas are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which includes fishing devices. 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 device body of Singer as modified by Pressey such that the screw is set back into the bottom hemisphere and is adjustable, and made tighter or looser by compressing the four-way screw a corresponding degree into the compressible foam in view of Douglas. The motivation would have been to allow the position of the screw to be adjustable within the device, in order to better accommodate various sizes of fishing lines.
In regard to claim 12, Singer as modified by Pressey and Douglas discloses the strike indicator of claim 11 wherein the top and bottom hemisphere can frictionally lock around the fishing line at a range of diameters (Douglas, Paragraph [0040] and Claim 12, see exact claim limitation).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singer (U.S. Pat. 2764838) in view of Pressey (U.S. Pat. 2820396) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Hutson (U.S. Pat. 4300303).
In regard to claim 6, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 2. Singer as modified by Pressey is silent on the fishing line is redirected within the strike indicator, 90 degrees from an angle of entry. Hutson discloses the fishing line is redirected within the fishing device, 90 degrees from an angle of entry (Figs. 1-4, where the fishing line 44 is redirected within the fishing device 10 at least at 90 degrees from an angle of entry). Singer and Hutson are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which includes fishing devices. 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 device body of Singer as modified by Pressey such that the fishing line is redirected within the strike indicator, 90 degrees from an angle of entry in view of Hutson, since the fishing line of Singer as modified by Pressey can be redirected 90 degrees as shown in Hutson. The motivation would have been to prevent the fishing line from easily moving relative to the fishing device, when secured in the fishing device.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singer (U.S. Pat. 2764838) in view of Pressey (U.S. Pat. 2820396) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Scheffler et al. (U.S. Pat. 4893433)
In regard to claim 7, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 1. Singer as modified by Pressey is silent on the rigid inner component is made of plastic. Scheffler et al. discloses the rigid inner component is made of plastic (Figs. 1-5 and Column 3 line 66 – Column 4 line 21, where the rigid inner component 26 is made of plastic). Singer and Scheffler et al. are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which includes fishing devices. 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 device body of Singer as modified by Pressey such that the rigid inner component is made of plastic in view of Scheffler et al. The motivation would have been to use a durable and resilient component for the screw mechanism, thereby relatively reducing wear on the components from repeated use.
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singer (U.S. Pat. 2764838) in view of Pressey (U.S. Pat. 2820396) as applied to claim 13, and further in view of Douglas (U.S. Pub. 20220279769).
In regard to claim 17, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 13. Singer as modified by Pressey is silent on the top and the bottom hemisphere are made of a compressible foam. Douglas discloses the top and the bottom hemisphere are made of a compressible foam (Claim 9, see exact claim limitation). Singer and Douglas are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which includes fishing devices. 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 device body of Singer as modified by Pressey such that the top and the bottom hemisphere are made of a compressible foam in view of Douglas. The motivation would have been to have the compressibility of the foam lock around the screw assembly to prevent movement and allow the hardware to create a friction fit.
In regard to claim 18, Singer as modified by Pressey and Douglas discloses the strike indicator of claim 17, wherein the top and bottom hemisphere are made of a low density material, other than compressible foam (Douglas, Claim 10, see exact claim limitation). 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 device body of Singer as modified by Pressey and Douglas such that the top and bottom hemisphere are made of a low density material, other than compressible foam. The motivation would have been to use a material which is buoyant, on both sides of the device, to ensure the device floats while being used to fish.
In regard to claim 19, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 13, and the four-way screw (Pressey, Figs. 2-5). Singer as modified by Pressey is silent on when the two hemispheres are rotated in a closed position with the line passing freely through the slot in the screw, the concave surfaces of the hemispheres are still compressed to prevent the threads from being unscrewed. Douglas discloses when the two hemispheres are rotated in a closed position with the line passing freely through the slot in the screw, the concave surfaces of the hemispheres are still compressed to prevent the threads from being unscrewed (Figs. 8A-8B, Claim 4, and Paragraph [0043], where when the two hemispheres 104/106 are rotated in a closed position with the line 114 passing freely through the slot in the screw, the concave surfaces of the hemispheres are at least still compressed to prevent the threads from being unscrewed). Singer and Douglas are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which includes fishing devices. 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 device body of Singer as modified by Pressey such that when the two hemispheres are rotated in a closed position with the line passing freely through the slot in the screw, the concave surfaces of the hemispheres are still compressed to prevent the threads from being unscrewed in view of Douglas. The motivation would have been to provide some compression between the hemispheres, when the screw is fully inserted into the nut component, in order to better secure the fishing line in the device.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singer (U.S. Pat. 2764838) in view of Pressey (U.S. Pat. 2820396) as applied to claim 13, and further in view of Hutson (U.S. Pat. 4300303).
In regard to claim 20, Singer as modified by Pressey discloses the strike indicator of claim 13. Singer as modified by Pressey is silent on the fishing line is redirected within the strike indicator, 90 degrees from an angle of entry. Hutson discloses the fishing line is redirected within the fishing device, 90 degrees from an angle of entry (Figs. 1-4, where the fishing line 44 is redirected within the fishing device 10 at least at 90 degrees from an angle of entry). Singer and Hutson are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which includes fishing devices. 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 device body of Singer as modified by Pressey such that the fishing line is redirected within the strike indicator, 90 degrees from an angle of entry in view of Hutson, since the fishing line of Singer as modified by Pressey can be redirected 90 degrees as shown in Hutson. The motivation would have been to prevent the fishing line from easily moving relative to the fishing device, when secured in the fishing device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892, Notice of References Cited, for the full list of prior art made of record. Particularly the references were cited because they pertain to the state of the art of fishing devices and screws.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN M DENNIS whose telephone number is (571)270-7604. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 7:30 am to 4:30 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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at (571) 272-6909. 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.
/KEVIN M DENNIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3647
/KIMBERLY S BERONA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3647