DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/1/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 39 is objected to because it should read “fixing the weapon system to the retention system” at line 12. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21-26, 29-33 and 36-38 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 3 of U.S. Patent No. 12,082,683.
Regarding claims 21-26, 29-33 and 36-37, claim 1 of the ‘683 Patent discloses all of the recited elements of these claims. It is noted that (a) the configuration claimed in the ‘683 Patent would be capable of coupling to the surfaces recited in claim 23 and (b) the first retention element recited in the ‘683 Patent would be capable of wrapping about the weapon as recited in claims 29 and 36 by placing the weapon within the closed loop.
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/B) 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 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/B) 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 top of 14 in Fig. 1) and the second end of the third retention element is 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 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) 30-31, 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, Beyer and Leach.
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/B) 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 configured to overlap a first portion of the weapon system in a 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. The combination fails to disclose a third retention element. 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 because it only involves a simple substitution of one known, equivalent strap holding configuration for another to obtain predictable results. The combination discloses a third retention element 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 (Green/Beyer) and the second end of the third retention element is configured to overlap a second portion of the weapon system in the retention position (the second end is capable of this function).
Regarding claim 31, the combination from claim 30 discloses wherein the first retention element is permanently coupled to the perimeter wall between the second retention element and the third retention element (the middle strap is considered the first retention element for this claim (Green/Leach), and it is permanently coupled to the perimeter wall (Beyer)).
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/B – 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/B) of the second retention element is permanently coupled (Beyer) to a third portion of the perimeter wall and the second end of the second retention element is 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 (third horizontal strap – Green/Leach), the third retention element comprising a third elongate body (strap – Green) and having a first end and a second end, wherein the first end (one end of strap – Green) of the third retention element is permanently coupled (Beyer) to a fourth portion of the perimeter wall and the second end (other end of strap – Green) of the third retention element is 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 weapon system; and removing the weapon system from the first retention element (Green Figs. 1-3 – removing the object (the weapon) from the holder).
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 dimensions of the weapon, or the relative lengths of the straps. 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, Beyer and Leach, 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited references disclose configurations similar to that disclosed by applicant.
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