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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 26 February 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 5 fails to recite a claim that it is dependent upon.
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 6, 8-11, 13, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Airtech in view of Bentley (5752339).
In reference to claim 6, Airtech discloses an adapter for attaching a recoil absorption device to a hollow stock of a firearm, comprising:
an adapter body configured to be inserted into a hollow portion of the hollow stock of the firearm, the adapter body having a front fact, a back face, and an outer edge, as claimed (the plate, set forth above in the reference to claim 1, maps to the adapter body, the two sides being the front and back faces, and there clearly being an outer edge delineated as being between the faces and traversing the entire adapter body, i.e., the perimeter edge of the body);
the adapter body having a tapered profile that matches an internal wall shape of the hollow portion of the hollow stock (pages 1-6 of the provided reference; the video from 2:03-2:11 discloses wide and narrow ends of the plate, corresponding to wide and narrow end of the internal space of the hollow stock);
the adapter body having an upper and a lower screw hole for attaching the recoil absorption device to the adapter body using screws (pages 1-6, screw holes);
the adapter body having a central bore for, i.e., capable of, accepting a feature of the recoil absorption device (pages 1-6, either of the two large central holes shown extending through the plate; on page 6, said large central holes are shown with a user’s finger therein);
wherein an outer edge of the adapter body is configured to be wedged behind a lip of the hollow stock after installation into the hollow portion of the hollow stock and is therefore held within the hollow portion of the hollow stock by the lip (pages 3-6, the top and bottom portions of the outer edge are shown in abutment with and wedged behind the lip; the claim does not require that the entire outer edge be wedged behind the lip; also see video from 2:00- 3:05); and
wherein the outer edge of the adapter is configured to rest behind the lip at a butt end of the hollow stock when the adapter body is in a final position of the installation, thereby securing the adapter within the hollow portion of the shotgun stock (pages 4-6; video from 2:00- 3:05 discloses the adapter body being drawn into abutment with a lip at a butt end of the stock to secure the body relative to the stock).
It is noted that claim 6 does not positively require the buttstock, and, thus, the claimed adapter body must merely be capable of being inserted into a hollow portion of a shotgun stock, the shotgun stock being any hollow shotgun stock, known or unknown. Further, the profile of the adapter body must merely match such an unclaimed shotgun stock, i.e., any hollow shotgun stock, known or unknown. Further, the outer edge of the adapter body must merely be capable being compressed by such an unclaimed shotgun stock such that the adapter body is held in place within the hollow portion of such an unclaimed shotgun stock. Further, the tapered profile of the adapter must merely be capable of resting against a lip at a butt end of such an unclaimed shotgun stock when the adapter body is in a final position, thereby securing the adapter within the hollow portion of the unclaimed shotgun stock. It is clear that the adapter of body Airtech is capable of all of the above relative to some hypothetical hollow shotgun stock, known or unknown.
Thus, Airtech discloses the claimed invention, except for fails to explicitly disclose that the mounting holes are threaded. To this point, said mounting holes (screw holes) clearly interact with screws in a threaded fashion in order to secure a recoil absorption device (recoil pad) to the plate (watch video from 2:00- 5:00; also see pages 1-10, see screw holes and screws). However, it is unclear whether said holes are pre-threaded vis-a-vis being threaded only once the screws are installed (i.e., the holes being tapped by the screws). Bentley teaches within the context of the art to pre-thread mounting holes in order to facilitate easier installation of a threaded fastener (screw), e.g., see Bentley, threaded holes 33 and/or 56. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the mounting holes of Airtech as pre-threaded mounting holes, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to facilitate easier installation of the screws.
In reference to claim 8, Airtech in view of Bentley makes obvious the claimed invention, since it is possible to insert the adapter body into a hollow stock at a 90-degree angle relative to the stock, and then rotate the body into its final position, e.g., by inserting the wide end directly, perpendicularly into the hollow interior of a stock, and then rotating the body into its final position following the steps shown in the video (2:03-2:40).
In reference to claim 9, Airtech in view of Bentley makes obvious the claimed invention, as set forth above in the reference to claims 1 and 6.
In reference to claim 10, Airtech in view of Bentley makes obvious the claimed invention, as set forth above in the references to claim 6 (also see the video from 2:32-2:40; pages 4-6 of the provided reference).
In reference to claim 11, Airtech in view of Bentley makes obvious the claimed invention (Airtech, pages 1-10: any of the other holes in the Airtech plate reads on the at least one secondary hole, as claimed).
In reference to claim 13, Airtech in view of Bentley makes obvious the claimed invention, following the same rationale presented in the reference to claim 8, but with the steps reversed.
In reference to claim 17, Airtech in view of Bentley makes obvious the claimed invention, as set forth above in the references to claims 1, 6, 8, 9, and 13. It is noted that the body of Airtech is shown to have four holes formed there-through from the front face to the back face, in addition to the two screw holes (pages 1-6, either of the large generally circular holes reads on the claimed central bore, whereas any of the other holes apart from the screw holes can be considered the first and second alignment holes; all of these hole are capable of the intended uses set forth in the claim). The claim does NOT positively require a recoil absorption device. Also, see Airtech, pages 1-2, which indicate the chamfers along at least portions of the perimeter of the body.
Claims 1-3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Airtech in view of Bentley, and further in view of Vignaroli et al. (2004/0144011; “Vignaroli”).
In reference to claim 1, Airtech discloses an adapter for use with a firearm hollow stock to affix a recoil absorption device, the adapter comprising:
a plate, the plate having an outer edge, front face, and a back face (see provided reference, page 1, the plate is shown with the back face facing out of the page; pages 1-2, 7, and 9, the plate having a wide end and a narrow end, and a screw hole through each of the ends);
a chamfer along a junction between the back face and the outer edge, creating a chamfered edge (pages 1 and 2, the plate having chamfer at each end along a junction between the back face the outer edge);
the plate held within the firearm hollow stock by a lip of the firearm hollow stock engaged with the outer edge (pages 3-6, esp. page 6);
two mounting holes through the plate (pages 1-6, screw holes, i.e., mounting holes);
each mounting hole configured to affix a recoil absorption device to a rear of the firearm hollow stock (pages 8 and 10, recoil pad accessory affixed via the screw holes; the recoil absorption device is not positively claimed);
a central hole capable of accepting a feature of the recoil absorption device (pages 1-6, either of the two large central holes shown extending through the plate; on page 6, said large central holes are shown with a user’s finger therein);
wherein the chamfered edge is configured for insertion of the plate into the firearm hollow stock and then to be rotated into place within the firearm hollow stock with less deformation of the firearm hollow stock than if the plate lacked the chamfer (see video from 2:10-2:30, which discloses that the wide end of the plate is inserted into the wide end of a hollow buttstock, and then the narrow end of the plate is pushed into the narrow end of the buttstock, which rotates the plate into the buttstock; the push is made easier by the chamfer at the narrow end).
Thus, Airtech discloses the claimed invention, except for fails to explicitly disclose that the mounting holes are threaded. Airtech further fails to disclose the chamfer being along an entire junction between the back face and the outer edge.
Regarding the mounting holes, said holes interact with screws in a threaded fashion in order to secure a recoil absorption device (recoil pad) to the plate (watch video from 2:00- 5:00; also see pages 1-10, see screw holes and screws). However, it is unclear whether said holes are pre-threaded vis-a-vis being threaded only once the screws are installed (i.e., the holes being tapped by the screws). Bentley teaches within the context of the art to pre-thread mounting holes in order to facilitate easier installation of a threaded fastener (screw), e.g., see Bentley citations above. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the mounting holes of Airtech as pre-threaded mounting holes, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to facilitate easier installation of the screws.
Regarding the chamfer, Vignaroli teaches it is known to form the outer edge of an adapter plate such that the entire outer edge conforms to the inner shape of a hollow buttstock, wherein a chamfer is formed along an entire junction between a back face of the plate and the outer edge, in order to provide full engagement of the outer edge with an inner lip (internal raised portion) of the hollow buttstock for a more secure fitment (figure 7: plate 125, chamfer 127; paragraphs 44, 45, and 48). It is noted that the outer edge of the plate of Airtech does not provide as much engagement with the inner lip due to the geometry of said outer edge (e.g., see page 6).
Thus, 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 plate of Airtech such that the entire outer edge conforms to the inner shape of a hollow buttstock, wherein a chamfer is formed along an entire junction between a back face of the plate and the outer edge, in order to provide full engagement of the outer edge with the inner lip of the hollow buttstock, with a reasonable expectation of success, for a more secure fitment of the plate in the hollow buttstock.
In reference to claim 2, Airtech in view of Bentley and further in view of Vignaroli (the modified Airtech) makes obvious the claimed invention, as set forth above (Airtech: also see pages 1-6 of the provided reference; the video from 2:03-2:11 discloses wide and narrow ends of the plate, corresponding to wide and narrow end of the internal space of the hollow stock).
In reference to claim 3, the modified Airtech makes obvious the claimed invention (Airtech, pages 1-10: any of the other holes in the Airtech plate reads on the at least one secondary hole, as claimed).
In reference to claim 7, the modified Airtech makes obvious the claimed invention, as set forth above in the reference to claim 1, following the same rationale based on the teachings of Vignaroli.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 26 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Specifically, Applicant argues that the plate (body) of Airtech is flexible, and, thus, will deform and pull out of the stock. The examiner agrees that the plate of Airtech is somewhat flexible, but the video shows that the plate is pulled into abutment with, and wedged behind, the lip of a hollow stock when the recoil pad is secured to the body via the screws (see video from 2:00- 3:05). The presenter of the video explicitly notes that the body prevents the assembly (recoil pad, body, screws) from being pulled out of the stock (video: 1:58- 2:04, 2:30- 2:40, and 3:42- 3:57). Thus, Applicant’s argument is directly contradicted by Airtech.
Applicant also argues that the claimed adapter is solid (except for the holes), whereas the adapter of Airtech is not solid. The examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that this argument is moot, since the claims do NOT recite a limitation requiring the adapter to be solid except for the holes.
Additionally, Applicant argues that the entire outer edge of Airtech is not chamfered. The examiner notes that this limitation is only required by claims 1-3 and 7. Further, the examiner acknowledges that the entire outer edge of Airtech is not chamfered. This is why the examiner relies upon Vignaroli to teach that it is known to form a chamfer along the entire outer edge of an adapter plate (see above-rejection).
Applicant argues that Vignaroli constitutes an improper teaching reference, since the disclosed device is not intended for a hollow buttstock, but rather a wooden stock as in column 2, lines 47-50. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The term “wood” or “wooden” does not appear anywhere in the Vignaroli reference. Further, the examiner is unsure of where Applicant is pointing to with the citation of column 2, lines 47-50, since Vignaroli is organized by paragraph, not column and line. Further, the examiner directs Applicant’s attention to paragraphs 44, 45, and 48, which clearly disclose that the adapter portion (107) snaps into a seat of a plastic stock, i.e., it is snapped into a hollow portion at the rear of a plastic stock. Thus, Vignaroli clearly constitutes analogous art, and provides teachings that are relevant to both Applicant’s invention and that of Airtech.
Applicant goes on to argue that one cannot combine Vignaroli with Airtech, as the adapter plate portion of Vignaroli cannot rotate 90 degrees for insertion into a buttstock. In response to applicant's argument against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Modifying the adapter of Airtech to have a profile and chamfer like the adapter plate portion of Vignaroli would result in an adapter that can rotate 90 degrees for insertion into a buttstock. It doesn’t matter if the device of Vignaroli can rotate as claimed, since it is the combination of Airtech in view of Vignaroli that is relied upon.
Further, Applicant argues that the adapter plate (body) of Airtech does not includes the various holes, as claimed. The examiner respectfully disagrees and directs Applicant’s attention to the above-rejections. The plate of Airtech clearly includes six holes, two of which are screw holes. Further, it is noted that the claims do NOT require a recoil absorption device, but merely require that the holes are capable of receiving screws or portions of a recoil absorption device. The examiner asserts that the screw holes of Airtech are clearly capable of receiving screws in order to affix a recoil absorption device (e.g., a recoil pad) to the plate (see Airtech, pages 1-10; see video). Further, the examiner asserts that the other four holes of Airtech are clearly capable of receiving portions of some hypothetical, unclaimed recoil absorption device, known or unknown, i.e., a recoil pad different from that shown in Airtech, e.g., a recoil pad having a gas piston or springs that extend into or through the adapter plate.
It is also noted that none of the claims require the entire outer edge of the adapter plate (body) to be in contact with the lip of the buttstock, and, thus, the relevant limitations are satisfied by the prior art if at least a portion of the outer edge is wedged behind and in contact with the lip of the buttstock. Thus, the examiner asserts that the claims are clearly rendered obvious by the prior art, as set forth above in the rejections of claims 1-3, 5-11,13 and 17.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIEL J KLEIN whose telephone number is (571)272-8229. The examiner can normally be reached 11:30am-8pm.
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, Troy Chambers can be reached at 571-272-6874. 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.
GABRIEL J. KLEIN
Examiner
Art Unit 3641
/Gabriel J. Klein/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641