DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
2. Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 11 September 2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CN2023224701084 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-7 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.
The claims are replete with narrative, indefinite language that does not positively recite the structure of the claimed invention. For example, claim 1 recites a sliding component “is used to joint”, and a gas nozzle restrainer “is installed”. This language is passive in nature and fails to positively set forth the structure which goes to make up the invention. It is not clear if these limitations are intended to introduce new structural components, or merely functionally limit the structure recited in the preamble by reciting its potential interaction with other structure. Claims 2-7 recite similar language and are rejected for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schavone (US 2003/0056778 A1) in view of Kellgren (US 2021/0310758 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Schavone discloses (see Fig. 1) a toy rifle, comprising:
a grip and a grip protector (20), a front frame, and a rear frame (see Fig. 4);
a sliding component (sliding pivot 76) is used to joint the front frame and the rear frame, wherein the sliding component comprises an inner tube (buffer tube 172), a silencer (as seen in Fig. 1), a sliding block and a cylinder (Par. 64 – see Fig. 23);
a gas nozzle restrainer is installed inside the first grip and the second grip and near one end of the front frame; a gas nozzle is attached to the gas nozzle restrainer; and a gas transmission unit is attached to one lower end of the gas nozzle restrainer (Par. 59);
a trigger is attached to the first grip and second grip (see Fig. 4; Par. 58);
a microswitch is arranged inside the first grip and second grip (selector switch – Par. 12, 58); and
a restrainer is set on lower end of the first grip and the second grip (see Fig. 1) (as per claim 1)
Schavone does not appear to disclose a first grip and a second grip, wherein the first grip and the second grip are connected with the grip protector and fixedly connected to the front frame and the rear frame. However, Kellgren discloses such a configuration of first and second grips (42 and 44) connected to the frame (see Par. 32). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teachings of Schavone by utilizing the two-piece grip of Kellgren. Such a modification would involve combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results associated with separable components.
Regarding claims 2-7, Schavone further discloses a frame connector (upper receiver portion 22) is arranged on a position where the front frame and the rear frame are connected, and the front frame and the rear frame are fixedly connected by the frame connector (Fig. 6) (as per claim 2),
the silencer is fixed on one end of the inner tube, and the inner tube is set in the front frame and the rear frame away from one end of the silencer, and the sliding block and cylinder are mounted on one end of the inner tube away from the silencer, and the cylinder is connected to the gas nozzle (see Fig’s. 1, 23; Par. 64) (as per claim 3),
the inner tube is provided with a baffle and a correction rubber ring on one end near the silencer, and the inner tube is covered with a second reset spring, wherein ends of the second reset spring respectively connect to the frame connector and the sliding block, and the front frame is mounted with a sight component, and the rear frame is installed with a front grip and a button component (Par. 59) (as per claim 4),
an O-shaped sealing ring is fixed on a position where the gas nozzle and the cylinder are connected, the trigger is connected to the microswitch, and a first reset spring (92) is arranged inside the first grip and the second grip to connect with the trigger (Par. 59) (as per claim 5),
one end of the second reset spring is fixed to the frame connector and other end of the second reset spring is fixed to the sliding block (Par. 59) (as per claim 6), and
the inner tube is slidably fixed inside the frame connector (Par. 60; see Fig. 5) (as per claim 7).
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER EGLOFF whose telephone number is (571)270-3548. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Peter R Egloff/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715