DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the second end of the second retention element removeably coupled to the first retention element and the second end of the third retention element removeably coupled to the first retention element (claims 21, 30, 39) and removing the second or third retention element from the first retention element (claim 40) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. See the Section 112(a) rejection below for more discussion.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 21-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 21, 30 and 39, the disclosure fails to describe the second end of the second retention element removeably coupled to the first retention element and the second end of the third retention element removeably coupled to the first retention element. The first and second retention elements are consistently described as connecting to the body (see for example Figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 40, the disclosure similarly fails to describe removing the second or third retention element from the first retention element.
Claims 22-29 and 31-38 depend from the above claim(s) and are rejected for the above reason as they do not cure the deficiency.
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.
REJECTION BASED ON GREEN
Claim(s) 21-23, 26-27 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 5,941,434 to Green in view of US Patent 2,176,052 to Beyer.
Regarding claim 21, Green discloses a retention system, comprising: a body (14) comprising a first surface (surface facing the held object) and a second surface (surface facing away from the held object) and defined by a perimeter wall (perimeter wall of 14 – Fig. 1); a first retention element (19A/B) comprising a first elongate body having a first end and a second end, wherein the first end of the first retention element is permanently coupled to a first portion of the perimeter wall (at 29, left side – Fig. 1) and the second end of the first retention element is permanently coupled to a second portion of the perimeter wall (at 29, right side – Fig. 1), and wherein the first retention element is configured to be coupled to a weapon system to maintain the weapon system in a fixed position with respect to the body (the first retention element is capable of this function, for example by wrapping around the weapon system or threading through a portion of the weapon system); a second retention element (20A) comprising a second elongate body and having a first end and a second end, wherein the first end of the second retention element is permanently coupled to a third portion of the perimeter wall (at 29, left side – Fig. 1) and the second end of the second retention element is removeably coupled to the first retention element (second end of 20A is removeably coupled to 19A/B via 20B and 14) and configured to overlap a first portion of the weapon system in a retention position (the second end is capable of this function); and a third retention element (18A) comprising a third elongate body and having a first end and a second end, wherein the first end of the third retention element is permanently coupled to a fourth portion of the perimeter wall (at bottom of 14 in Fig. 1) and the second end of the third retention element is removeably coupled to the first retention element (second end of 18A is removeably coupled to 19A/B via 18B and 14) and configured to overlap a second portion of the weapon system in the retention position (the second end is capable of this function). To the extent the permanent nature of the coupling is in doubt, Beyer discloses securing a strap to a carrier using sewing (Fig. 1 – near side). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have used sewing to attach the ends of the retention elements in Green because the modification only involves a simple substitution of one known, equivalent strap securing method for another to obtain predictable results.
Regarding claim 22, the combination from claim 21 discloses wherein the second surface of the body is configured to be coupled to a concealable surface (the second surface is capable of coupling to a concealable surface using any known method, including adhesive and one or more straps).
Regarding claim 23, the combination from claim 21 discloses wherein the concealable surface is selected from a group consisting of: a surface of an article of clothing, a surface of an item of furniture, a surface of a vehicle, a surface of a container, and a surface of a structure (the second surface is capable of coupling to any of these surfaces).
Regarding claim 26, the combination from claim 21 discloses wherein the first retention element, the second retention element, and the third retention element are flexible straps (Green Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 27, the combination from claim 21 discloses wherein the second retention element and the third retention element are placed in the retention position with hook and loop fasteners (Green Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 29, the combination from claim 21 discloses wherein the first retention element comprises a flexible strap (Green Figs. 1-3) and is configured to be coupled to the weapon system by wrapping the flexible strap about the weapon system (Green Figs. 1-3 – the first retention element is capable of wrapping about the outer surface of the weapon system).
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Green and Beyer, further in view of US Design Patent D374,767 to Leach.
Regarding claim 24, the combination from claim 21 fails to disclose the claimed configuration of the retention elements. However, Leach discloses a holder that uses three aligned holding straps (Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have used three horizontal holding straps in the combination instead of two because the modification only involves a mere duplication of known elements having only predictable results. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Further, using three horizontal holding straps would hold the object more securely. The combination discloses wherein the first retention element is permanently coupled to the perimeter wall between the second retention element and the third retention element (the first retention element would be in the middle).
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Green, Beyer and Leach, further in view of US Patent 5,887,774 to Bethune.
Regarding claim 25, the combination from claim 24 fails to disclose the first retention element being shorter. However, Green notes holding a variety of objects, including water bottles (Col. 1, lines 20-23), and Bethune discloses a water bottle having a top portion and bottom portion that are larger than a central portion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have used the holder to carry water bottles having dimensions similar to that of Bethune because it would allow for hands-free carrying of the water bottle. In the combination, the first retention element would be secured tighter on the smaller portion of the water bottle (and therefore would be shorter) than the second and third retention elements.
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Green and Beyer, further in view of US Patent 8,192,336 to Jacob.
Regarding claim 28, the combination from claim 21 fails to disclose snap fasteners. However, Jacob discloses a carrier that uses snap fasteners (32) to adjustably secure a strap (Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have used snap fasteners to secure the retention elements because the modification only involves a simple substitution of one known, equivalent strap fastening element for another to obtain predictable results.
REJECTION BASED ON YOUNG
Claim(s) 30, 33-34 and 36-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Published Application 2003/0205595 to Young in view of Green and Beyer.
Regarding claim 30, Young discloses a system, comprising: an article of clothing (pants 50); and a retention system coupled to the article of clothing, the retention system comprising: a body (Fig. 4 – rear half of holster 11) comprising a first surface (surface facing outward in Fig. 4) and a second surface (surface facing inward in Fig. 4); and a first retention element (front half of holster 11). Young fails to disclose the claimed details of the body and retention elements. However, Green discloses a personal carrier including a body (14) comprising a first surface (surface facing the held object) and a second surface (surface facing away from the held object) and defined by a perimeter wall (perimeter wall of 14 – Fig. 1); a first retention element (19A/B) comprising a first elongate body having a first end and a second end, wherein the first end of the first retention element is permanently coupled to a first portion of the perimeter wall (at 29, left side – Fig. 1) and the second end of the first retention element is permanently coupled to a second portion of the perimeter wall (at 29, right side – Fig. 1), and wherein the first retention element is configured to be coupled to a weapon system to maintain the weapon system in a fixed position with respect to the body (the first retention element is capable of this function, for example by wrapping around the weapon system or threading through a portion of the weapon system); a second retention element (20A) comprising a second elongate body and having a first end and a second end, wherein the first end of the second retention element is permanently coupled to a third portion of the perimeter wall (at 29, left side – Fig. 1) and the second end of the second retention element is removeably coupled to the first retention element (second end of 20A is removeably coupled to 19A/B via 20B and 14) and configured to overlap a first portion of the weapon system in a retention position (the second end is capable of this function); and a third retention element (18A) comprising a third elongate body and having a first end and a second end, wherein the first end of the third retention element is permanently coupled to a fourth portion of the perimeter wall (at bottom of 14 in Fig. 1) and the second end of the third retention element is removeably coupled to the first retention element (second end of 18A is removeably coupled to 19A/B via 18B and 14) and configured to overlap a second portion of the weapon system in the retention position (the second end is capable of this function). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have used Green’s body/retention element in Young because doing so only involves a simple substitution of one known, equivalent holding element for another to obtain predictable results. To the extent the permanent nature of the coupling is in doubt, Beyer discloses securing a strap to a carrier using sewing (Fig. 1 – near side). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have used sewing to attach the ends of the retention elements in the combination because the modification only involves a simple substitution of one known, equivalent strap securing method for another to obtain predictable results.
Regarding claim 33, the combination from claim 30 discloses wherein the first retention element, the second retention element, and the third retention element are flexible straps (Green Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 34, the combination from claim 30 discloses wherein the second retention element and the third retention element are placed in the retention position with hook and loop fasteners (Green Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 36, the combination from claim 30 discloses wherein the first retention element comprises a flexible strap (Green Figs. 1-3) and is configured to be coupled to the weapon system by wrapping the flexible strap about the weapon system (Green Figs. 1-3 – the first retention element is capable of wrapping about the outer surface of the weapon system).
Regarding claim 37, the combination from claim 30 discloses wherein the article of clothing comprises a concealment feature (releasable flap in Young Fig. 2) configured to be transitioned from a first position (flap open – Young Fig. 2) in which the retention system is visible to a second position (flap closed) in which the retention system is concealed by the concealment feature.
Regarding claim 38, the combination from claim 30 discloses wherein the concealment feature comprises a first coupling element (half of zipper – Young Fig. 2) and the article of clothing comprises a second coupling element (other half of zipper – Young Fig. 2), and wherein the first coupling element and the second coupling element are configured to releasably couple a portion of the concealment feature to the article of clothing (Young Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 39, the combination from claim 30 discloses a method comprising: coupling a weapon system to a retention system (Young/Green) with a first retention element (19A/B – Green), the retention system having a body (14 – Green) comprising a first surface (surface facing the held object – Green) and a second surface (surface facing away from the held object – Green) and defined by a perimeter wall (perimeter wall of 14 – Green Fig. 1), wherein the first retention element comprises a first elongate body having a first end (one end of 19A/B – Green) permanently coupled (Beyer) to a first portion of the perimeter wall and a second end (other end of 19A/B – Green) permanently coupled (Beyer) to a second portion of the perimeter wall; fixing the weapon system to the retention system in a retention position (securing the firearm to the body) with a second retention element (20A – Green), the second retention element comprising a second elongate body and having a first end and a second end, wherein the first end (one end of 20A – Green) of the second retention element is permanently coupled to a third portion of the perimeter wall (at 29, left side Fig. 1 – Green, as modified by Beyer) and the second end of the second retention element is removeably coupled to the first retention element (second end of 20A is removeably coupled to 19A/B via 20B and 14) and configured to overlap a first portion of the weapon system (the second end is capable of overlapping as claimed); and fixing the weapon system to the retention system in the retention position (securing the firearm to the body) with a third retention element (18A – Green), the third retention element comprising a third elongate body and having a first end and a second end, wherein the first end (one end of 18A – Green) of the third retention element is permanently coupled to a fourth portion of the perimeter wall (at 29, bottom – Fig. 1 – Green, as modified by Beyer) and the second end (other end of 18A – Green) of the third retention element is removeably coupled to the first retention element (second end of 18A is removeably coupled to 19A/B via 18B and 14) and configured to overlap a second portion of the weapon system (the second end is capable of this function as claimed).
Regarding claim 40, the combination from claim 39 discloses removing at least one of the second retention element or the third retention element from the first retention element (removing 20A from 20B/14 or removing 18A from 18B/14 – Green Fig. 1); and removing the weapon system from the first retention element (Green Figs. 1-3 – removing the object (the weapon) from the holder).
Claim(s) 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Young, Green, and Beyer, further in view of Leach.
Regarding claim 31, the combination from claim 30 fails to disclose the claimed configuration of the retention elements. However, Leach discloses a holder that uses three aligned holding straps (Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have used three horizontal holding straps in the combination instead of two because the modification only involves a mere duplication of known elements having only predictable results. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Further, using three horizontal holding straps would hold the object more securely. The combination discloses wherein the first retention element is permanently coupled to the perimeter wall between the second retention element and the third retention element (the first retention element would be in the middle).
Claim(s) 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Young, Green, Beyer and Leach, further in view of US Published Application 2015/0144673 to Dahl.
Regarding claim 32, the combination from claim 31 fails to disclose the first retention element being shorter than the second and third retention elements. However, Dahl discloses a weapon which has a barrel that is relatively smaller than the trigger guard and handle portions of the gun. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have used the combination to hold the gun from Dahl because the modification only involves a simple substitution of one known, equivalent firearm for another to obtain predictable results. In the combination, the first retention element (holding the barrel) would be shorter than the second retention element (holding the trigger guard) and the third retention element (holding the handle).
Claim(s) 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Young, Green, and Beyer, further in view of Jacob.
Regarding claim 35, the combination from claim 30 fails to disclose snap fasteners. However, Jacob discloses a carrier that uses snap fasteners (32) to adjustably secure a strap (Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have used snap fasteners to secure the retention elements because the modification only involves a simple substitution of one known, equivalent strap fastening element for another to obtain predictable results.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/20/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As to applicant’s argument that the prior art fails to disclose the new claim language (page 8 of arguments), see the Section 112(a) rejection above. See also the prior art rejection, in which the second and third retention elements are indirectly coupled to the first retention element.
As to applicant’s argument that the rejection of claims 22-23 takes Official Notice (page 10 of arguments), the rejection is describing how the surface is “configured to be coupled to a concealable surface” by being capable of this intended use. The rejection is not taking Official Notice.
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 SCOTT T MCNURLEN whose telephone number is (313)446-4898. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Nathan Newhouse can be reached at 571-272-4544. 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.
/SCOTT T MCNURLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
