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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species FF in the reply filed on 26 January 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that at least some of the embodiments identified by the examiner contain similar features and can be examined without serious search burden on the examiner. This is not found persuasive because the elected species contains distinct features that are not found in the other identified species argued by the applicant and the search terms would be different to locate such features in the prior art and additionally some of the specific features are located in different subgroups in the classification picture for ammunition, which would require the examiner to greatly increase the references searched. This increased search is clearly a burden on the examiner.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 5-8, 13-15, and 17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 23 January 2026. The examiner has withdrawn the aforementioned claims because they contain features that are clearly not shown in the elected species.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 08 August 2024, 13 March 2025, and 24 January 2026 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
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 9-10 and 19 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.
It is unclear how the tip can be part of an insert that is a separate element when the independent claims require that the nose is integrally interconnected with the cylindrical portion. The metes and bounds of the claims cannot be properly determined to allow for meaningful examination and comparison to the prior art in their current condition.
The term “about” in claims 2, 12, 18, and 20 is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. There is no separate definition in the specification to narrow the scope of the term “about” to allow a person of ordinary skill in the art to determine what is included or excluded by the use of the term and prevents a clear understanding of the metes and bounds of the claim.
The term “approximately” in claims 2 and 12 is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term “approximately” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. There is no separate definition in the specification to narrow the scope of the term “approximately” to allow a person of ordinary skill in the art to determine what is included or excluded by the use of the term and prevents a clear understanding of the metes and bounds of the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by French Patent Document FR 2647201 A1 by Seguin (Seguin).
Regarding claim 1, Seguin discloses a projectile for use in a handheld weapon (See Figures, clearly illustrated and denoted throughout the specification to apply the teachings to projectiles having a caliber less than or equal to 40mm), comprising: a front end having a tip (See at least Figure 1, element 2); a rear end having a base and positioned opposite the front end (See at least Figure 1, element 4); a longitudinal axis extending from the tip to the base (See at least Figure 1, clearly illustrated) ; a boat tail portion extending from the rear end to a first point between the front end and the rear end (Element 4, See at least Figure 1, clearly illustrated), wherein the boat tail portion tapers inwardly toward the longitudinal axis such that the rear end has an end diameter that is smaller than a first diameter at the first point (Element 4, See at least Figure 1, clearly illustrated); a cylindrical portion integrally interconnected on a first end to the boat tail portion at the first point, the cylindrical portion extending from the first point to a second point between the front end and the first point, wherein the cylindrical portion comprises: a plurality of angled driving bands; and a plurality of angled relief cuts (Element 3, See at least Figure 1, clearly illustrated), wherein each angled driving band in the plurality of angled driving bands is positioned between two angled relief cuts in the plurality of angled relief cuts, wherein each angled driving band in the plurality of angled driving bands has a rounded peak and a driving band diameter measured at a top of the rounded peak, wherein each angled relief cut in the plurality of angled relief cuts has a rounded valley having a radius of curvature and a relief cut diameter measured at a bottom of the rounded valley, and wherein each driving band diameter is larger than each relief cut diameter (Elements 3-9, See at least Figures 1 and 4, clearly illustrated); and a nose portion tapering outward from the tip to the second point, wherein the nose portion is integrally interconnected to the cylindrical portion at the second point (Element 2, See at least Figure 1, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 2, Seguin further discloses wherein an angle between each angled driving band in the plurality of angled driving bands and each angled relief cut in the plurality of angled relief cuts is between about 7 degrees and about 10 degrees relative to the longitudinal axis (See at least Figure 4, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 3, Seguin further discloses wherein the plurality of angled relief cuts comprises at least three angled relief cuts and the plurality of angled driving bands comprises at least two angled driving bands (See at least Figure 1, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 11, Seguin further discloses wherein the cylindrical portion has a first length, and wherein the nose portion has a second length that is greater than the first length (See at least Figure 1, clearly illustrated).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 4, 12, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seguin.
Regarding claim 4, Seguin further discloses wherein a projectile diameter is measured at the cylindrical portion and each driving band diameter is approximately the same as the projectile diameter (See at least Figure 1, clearly illustrated).
Seguin discloses the claimed invention except for the difference between the diameters of the relief cuts and driving bands. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide that each relief cut diameter is approximately 0.01 inch smaller than each driving band diameter, since applicant has not disclosed that such a difference in diameters solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with different varied diameters for the specified elements.
Regarding claim 12, Seguin discloses a bullet adapted for insertion into a casing filled with an explosive propellant (See Figures, clearly illustrated), comprising: a front end having a rounded tip (2, See at least Figure 1, clearly illustrated); a rear end having a base and positioned opposite the front end (4, See at least Figure 1, clearly illustrated); a longitudinal axis extending from the rounded tip to the base; a boat tail portion extending from the base to a first point between the front end and the rear end, wherein the boat tail portion tapers inwardly from the first point to the rear end at a boat tail angle measured relative to the longitudinal axis (4, See at least Figure 1, clearly illustrated); a cylindrical portion integrally interconnected on a first end to the boat tail portion at the first point, the cylindrical portion extending from the first point to a second point between the front end and the first point, wherein a projectile diameter is measured at the cylindrical portion, wherein the cylindrical portion comprises: a plurality of angled driving bands; and a plurality of angled relief cuts, wherein each angled driving band in the plurality of angled driving bands is positioned between two angled relief cuts in the plurality of angled relief cuts, wherein each angled driving band in the plurality of angled driving bands has a rounded peak and a driving band diameter measured at a top of the rounded peak, wherein each driving band diameter is approximately the same as the projectile diameter, wherein each angled relief cut in the plurality of angled relief cuts has a rounded valley having a radius of curvature and a relief cut diameter measured at a bottom of the rounded valley (Element 3, See at least Figure 1, clearly illustrated), and wherein an angle between each angled driving band in the plurality of angled driving bands and each angled relief cut in the plurality of angled relief cuts is between about 7 degrees and about 10 degrees relative to the longitudinal axis (See at least Figure 1, clearly illustrated); and a nose portion tapering from the rounded tip to the cylindrical portion at the second point, wherein the nose portion is integrally interconnected to the cylindrical portion at the second point (See at least Figure 1, clearly illustrated).
Seguin discloses the claimed invention except for the difference between the diameters of the relief cuts and driving bands. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide that each relief cut diameter is approximately 0.01 inch smaller than each driving band diameter, since applicant has not disclosed that such a difference in diameters solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with different varied diameters for the specified elements.
Regarding claim 18, Seguin discloses a projectile for use in a handheld weapon, comprising: a tip on a first end; a base on a second end opposite the tip; a longitudinal axis extending from the tip to the base; a nose portion extending from the tip; a cylindrical portion connected to an end of the nose portion, wherein the cylindrical portion comprises a plurality of angled relief cuts and a plurality of angled driving bands, wherein each angled relief cut in the plurality of angled relief cuts is positioned between two angled driving bands in the plurality of angled driving bands, wherein an angle between each angled driving band and each relief cut is between about 7.0 degrees and 10.0 degrees relative to the longitudinal axis, and wherein an upper portion of each angled driving band has a curved convex shape when viewed in cross-section and a lower portion of each angled relief cut has a curved concave shape when viewed in cross-section, and a tapered boat tail connected to an end of the cylindrical portion and terminating at the base, wherein the tapered boat tail tapers inwardly from the cylindrical portion to the base (See at least Figures 1 and 4, all aspects clearly illustrated, and see previous rejections).
Seguin discloses the claimed invention except for the nose length, difference between the diameters of the relief cuts and driving bands, and the taper angle of the boat tail. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the nose length between about 0.75 inches and about 1.0 inches, make the height measured between the lower portion of each angled relief cut and the upper portion of each angled driving band be about 0.009 inch, and have the boat tail taper at an angle between about 6.5 degrees and about 8.0 degrees, since applicant has not disclosed that the nose length, height between the angled relief cut and driving band, or the boat tail taper angle solve any stated problems or are for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with a wide variety of other measurements for the aforementioned elements.
Regarding claim 20, Seguin further discloses wherein the nose portion has a tangent ogive (See at least Figures 1 and 4, clearly illustrated).
Seguin discloses the claimed invention except for radius of curvature of the nose portion or the length from the tip to the base. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the radius of curvature of the nose be between about 3.0 inches and about 4.0 inches and the length from the tip to the base be between about 1.25 inches and about 1.75 inches, since applicant has not disclosed that such measurements solve any stated problems or are for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with a wide variety of other measurements for the aforementioned elements.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seguin in view of French Patent Document FR 2610715 A1 by Sommet (Sommet).
Regarding claim 16, Seguin does not disclose a cavity and insert.
Sommet, a related prior art reference, discloses a cavity and an insert, wherein the insert is positioned in the cavity, wherein the insert includes an apex at a first end opposite a base at a second end and a plurality of arcuate-shaped cutout portions extending proximate to the apex of the insert to a point between the apex and the base (See at least Figure 1, clearly illustrated).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the noted teachings of Seguin with the noted teachings of Sommet. The suggestion/ motivation for doing so would have been to improve ballistic performance as taught by Sommet.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892 Form for a listing of applicable prior art references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN C WEBER whose telephone number is (571)270-5377. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM EST.
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.
/Jonathan C Weber/Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 3641
JONATHAN C. WEBER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3641