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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed April 24th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-4 remain pending in the application. Claims 1-4 are currently amended. Applicant’s amendments to the disclosure and claims have overcome the objections to the disclosure and claims and the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112 and 35 U.S.C. 103 previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed December 29th, 2025.
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 2-3 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.
Regarding Claim 2,
Claim 2, Ln. 2-4, “the U-shaped spring member comprises a bent portion having an arc shape and straight portions respectively continuous with both ends of the bent portion” is unclear and indefinite. Amended claim 1 recites “the U-shaped spring member comprises a bent portion, a first straight portion attached to the body and extending from one end of the bent portion, and a second straight portion biased toward the inside having the U-shape,” (Claim 1, Ln. 13-18) and claim 2 is a dependent of claim 1. The limitations “a bent portion,” (Claim 2, Ln. 3), “straight portions,” (Claim 2, Ln. 3), and “the bent portion,” (Claim 2, Ln. 4) appear to refer to previously recited “a bent portion,” “a first straight portion,” and “a second straight portion,” (Claim 1, Ln. 13-18), but it is unclear if new component references are being defined in claim 2. For examination purposes, Examiner has assumed that the component recitation in claim 2 corresponds to the component recitation in claim 1. If this interpretation is correct, Examiner suggests “a bent portion,” (Claim 2, Ln. 3) should read --the bent portion-- and “straight portions,” (Claim 2, Ln. 3) should read --the first straight portion and the second straight portion--
Claim 2, Ln. 5, “a distal end side of the straight portion” is unclear and indefinite. It is unclear which straight portion is being referred to. For examination purposes, Examiner has assumed that “the straight portion,” (Claim 2, Ln. 5) refers to “a first straight portion,” (Claim 1, Ln. 16). If this interpretation is correct, Examiner suggests “the straight portion,” (Claim 2, Ln. 5) should read --the first straight portion--
Regarding Claim 3,
Claim 3, Ln. 2, “one of the straight portions” is unclear and indefinite. It is unclear which straight portion is being referred to. For examination purposes, Examiner has assumed that “one of the straight portions,” (Claim 3, Ln. 2) refers to “a first straight portion,” (Claim 1, Ln. 16). If this interpretation is correct, Examiner suggests “one of the straight portions,” (Claim 3, Ln. 2) should read --the first straight portion--
Claim 3, Ln. 4, “another of the straight portions” is unclear and indefinite. It is unclear which straight portion is being referred to. For examination purposes, Examiner has assumed that “another of the straight portions,” (Claim 3, Ln. 4) refers to “a second straight portion,” (Claim 1, Ln. 18). If this interpretation is correct, Examiner suggests “another of the straight portions,” (Claim 3, Ln. 4) should read --the second straight portion--
Claim 3, Ln. 5, “the one of the straight portions” is unclear and indefinite. It is unclear which straight portion is being referred to. For examination purposes, Examiner has assumed that “the one of the straight portions,” (Claim 3, Ln. 5) refers to “a first straight portion,” (Claim 1, Ln. 16). If this interpretation is correct, Examiner suggests “the one of the straight portions,” (Claim 3, Ln. 5) should read --the first straight portion--
Claim 3 is also rejected due to its dependency on rejected claim 2
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shinji (JP H11-9158 A, citations reference Espacenet translation provided as NPL) in view of Iwama (JP S55-155474 U, citations reference Espacenet translation provided as NPL).
PNG
media_image1.png
292
311
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1. Annotated Figure 23 from Shinji
Regarding Claim 1, Shinji, Figures 19-23 and annotated Figure 1 above, teaches a fishing spinning reel comprising:
a rotor 7 configured to rotate forward by a winding operation of a handle 2 (See Shinji, Para. 0009-0011);
a reverse rotation prevention device (reverse rotation prevention device; See Shinji, Para. 0012, Ln. 1) configured to prevent reverse rotation of the rotor 7 (See Shinji, Para. 0012); and
a switching mechanism 12 configured to switch between a reverse rotation prevention state and a reverse rotation permission state in the reverse rotation prevention device (See Shinji, Para. 0012-0013), wherein
the switching mechanism 12 comprises a support shaft 20 rotatably supported by a body 1 of a reel main body (reel body; See Shinji, Para. 0009, Ln. 1), an operation lever 22 attached to the support shaft 20, and a U-shaped spring member 24 attached to the body 1,
an inside 24a of the U-shaped spring member 24, the inside 24a being recessed in a U-shape,
the U-shaped spring member 24 comprises
a bent portion 24b,
a first straight portion 24c attached to the body 1 and extending from one end of the bent portion 24b, and
a second straight portion 24d, abutting on an outer surface 20’ of the support shaft 20 and extending from another end of the bent portion 24b, and
the support shaft 20 is convex, has a triangular portion 20’’ and is configured to be held at a reverse rotation prevention position when the reverse rotation prevention device is in the reverse rotation prevention state (See Shinji, Fig. 20, Para. 0059) and to be held at a reverse rotation permission position when the reverse rotation prevention device is in the reverse rotation permission state (See Shinji, Fig. 21, Para. 0060) by abutment of the second straight portion 24d with the triangular portion 20’’ (See Shinji, Para. 0057).
Shinji teaches all the elements of the fishing spinning reel except for the support shaft being in an inside of the spring member and the second straight portion being biased toward the inside of the U shape.
PNG
media_image2.png
218
231
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2. Annotated Figure 4 from Iwama
However, Iwama, Figures 1-6 and annotated Figure 2 above, teaches the support shaft 9 is in an inside of the U-shaped spring member 11, and
a second straight portion 11a biased toward the inside having the U-shape (“A square rectangular neck is formed on the rotating rod [9] at the rear of the operating cam (7), and a U-shaped leaf spring [11] is fitted to clamp onto this rectangular [neck]. The tip of the leaf spring [11] is pressed inward”; See Iwama, Pg. 5, Ln. 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Shinji and Iwama to provide a support shaft inside the spring member and the second straight portion being biased toward the inside having the U-shape, as taught by Iwama, for the purpose of device size reduction (See Iwama, Pg. 3, Ln. 12-15).
Regarding Claim 2, Shinji in view of Iwama are advanced above.
Shinji further teaches wherein the U-shaped spring member 24 comprises
a bent portion 24b having an arc shape and straight portions 24c, 24d respectively continuous with both ends of the bent portion 24b, and
is attached to the body 1 from a distal end side of the straight portion 24c (See Figure 1 above).
Regarding Claim 3, Shinji in view of Iwama are advanced above.
Shinji further teaches wherein one of the straight portions 24c abuts on a wall surface 1a in the body 1 and is held by the body 1 (See Figure 1 above), and
another of the straight portions 24d abuts on the outer surface 20’ of the support shaft 20 (See Figure 1 above) and is configured to hold rotation of the support shaft 20 between the reverse rotation prevention position and the reverse rotation permission position (See Shinji, Para. 0057, 0059-0060, 0062).
Iwama further teaches another of the straight portions 11b abuts on the outer surface 20’ of the support shaft 20 from a side opposite to the one of the straight portions 11a (See Figure 2 above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Shinji and Iwama to provide another one of the straight portions abutting on the outer surface of the support shaft on a side opposite to the one of the straight portions, as taught by Iwama, for the purpose of device size reduction (See Iwama, Pg. 3, Ln. 12-15).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shinji (JP H11-9158 A) in view of Iwama (JP S55-155474 U), as applied to claims 1-3 above, and further in view of Matsuda (JP 201565900 A), hereinafter Matsuda ‘900, and Shimizu (JP 6871142 B2).
Regarding Claim 4, Shinji in view of Iwama are advanced above.
PNG
media_image3.png
428
447
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 3. Annotated Figure 1 from Iwama
Iwama, annotated Figure 3 above, teaches a lid member 100 attached to the body 1 from a side of the body 1 and supporting one end side of a drive gear shaft 2 to which the handle 200 is attached (See Iwama, Pg. 3, Ln. 6-7), three screw holes 300 in the body 1 and into which fixing screws 400 for fixing the lid member 100 are screwed, and wherein
one 300a of the three screw holes 300 is on a front side of the U-shaped spring member 11 in the body 1.
Although Iwama is silent regarding the illustrated lid member, screw holes, and fixing screws, closing a component enclosure by utilizing a lid affixed to the enclosure via holes in the body of the enclosure and mating screws is a commonly used protective technique in general applications as well as in fishing reels specifically. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Shinji and Iwama to provide a lid member, three screw holes, fixing screws wherein one of the screw holes is on a front side of the u-shaped spring member, as taught by Iwama, for the purpose of protecting the internal components of the reel from damage.
PNG
media_image4.png
561
538
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Figure 4. Annotated Figure 11 from Matsuda '900
Additionally, Matsuda ‘900, Figures 11-12 and annotated Figure 4 above, teaches a lid member 1A attached to the body 1b from a side of the body 1b and supporting one end side of a drive gear shaft 2 to which the handle 2A is attached, and three screw holes 1B’ that are in the body 1b and into which fixing screws 1B for fixing the lid member 1A are screwed, wherein
the three screw holes 1B’ are at equal intervals around the drive gear shaft 2 to which the handle 2A is attached (See Matsuda ‘900, Para. 0053, Ln. 4-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Shinji, Iwama, and Matsuda ‘900 to provide a lid member, three screw holes, and fixing screws, as taught by Iwama and Matsuda ‘900, one of the screw holes being on a front side of the u-shaped spring member, as taught by Iwama, and equally spaced screw holes, as taught by Matsuda ‘900, for the purpose of sealing the reel body without making the handle difficult to rotate (i.e. “prevent the intrusion of foreign matter such as moisture into the reel body and bearings with a simple structure, and that does not reduce the operating feel when rotating the handle”) (See Matsuda ‘900, Para. 0007, Ln. 2-4).
Shinji in view of Iwama and Matsuda ‘900 teach all the elements of the fishing spinning reel except for the switching mechanism being at the lower portion of the body.
However, Shimizu, Figures 1-7, teaches wherein the switching mechanism 30 is at a lower portion of the body 1A.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Shinji in view of Iwama and Matsuda ‘900 with a switching mechanism disposed at a lower portion of the body, as taught by Shimizu, for the purpose of reducing weight and preventing damage to the switching mechanism (i.e. “the switching operation part that activates the reverse prevention device is rotatably disposed within the contour of the side of the reel body, in an area opposite the rod attachment part relative to the handle shaft, and is not exposed to the outside, reducing the possibility of damage due to external forces during actual fishing, when moving to a fishing spot, or during transportation. In addition, the switching operation unit is connected via a connecting part (shaft) to a reverse prevention mechanism (such as a one-way clutch) located on the front side of the reel body, but by arranging it within the contour of the side of the reel body, it is possible to shorten the length of the connecting part, which improves strength and stability of operation during switching operation and prevents the unit from becoming too heavy”) (See Shimizu, Para. 0008, Ln. 1-10).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see Pg. 6-8, filed April 24th, 2026, have been fully considered.
Regarding the objections to the Drawings and Claims, Applicant has submitted acceptable amendments. Therefore, the objections have been withdrawn.
Regarding the rejection of Claims 1-4 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), Applicant has amended the claims. The amendments are sufficient to overcome the previously set forth rejections. Therefore, these rejections have been withdrawn. However, new rejections for claims 2-3 have been set forth under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) based on the amended claims.
Regarding the rejection of Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103, Applicant has amended the claim. The amendments are sufficient to overcome the previously set forth rejection. Therefore, this rejection has been withdrawn. However, a new ground of rejection has been set forth under 35 U.S.C. 103 based on the amended claim.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Shinji in view of Iwama are utilized in the current rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 (See Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 above).
Regarding the rejections of Claims 2-4, the claims are dependents of rejected claim 1 and Applicant has provided no additional arguments. Therefore, these claims are also rejected based on the new ground of rejection presented above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 TIFFANY DOMONIQUE JEFFERSON whose telephone number is 571-272-0403. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:30am-7:30pm ET.
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, Victoria Augustine can be reached at 313-446-4858. 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.
/T.D.J./Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/Victoria P Augustine/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights