Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/794,806

SELECTABLE RELEASE TRIGGER WITH RESET

Non-Final OA §102§112§DP
Filed
Aug 05, 2024
Examiner
KLEIN, GABRIEL J
Art Unit
3641
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allow Rate
624 granted / 950 resolved
+13.7% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
981
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
39.6%
-0.4% vs TC avg
§102
27.8%
-12.2% vs TC avg
§112
22.6%
-17.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 950 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112 §DP
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 Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121: I. Claims 1-19, drawn to a trigger assembly, classified in F41A 19/24. II. Claims 20-21, drawn to a trigger assembly, classified in F41A 19/10. The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because: Inventions I and II are related as combination and subcombination. Inventions in this relationship are distinct if it can be shown that (1) the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed for patentability, and (2) that the subcombination has utility by itself or in other combinations (MPEP § 806.05(c)). In the instant case, the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed because the combination does not require a twisting switch housing including, extending along a length between open top and bottom ends, an interior space having an internal step and at least first and second diametrically opposed channels aligned with the length; and rotatably/twistably mounted within the twisting switch housing, a switch including: a sear engagement end protruding from the interior space at the top and having a side surface concavity; a trigger end protruding from the interior space at the bottom end; an external step between the sear engagement end and the trigger end; and a pin projecting from a surface of the switch configured for receipt in the channel; and a spring provided between the internal and external steps and configured to urge the external step away from the internal step and the pin into the one of the first and second channels; and wherein upon compression of the spring sufficient to liberate the pin from the first channel, the switch is configured for twisting between a first switch orientation with the surface concavity facing a first direction and a second switch orientation with the surface concavity facing a first direction and in which the compression spring will urge the pin into the second channel. The subcombination has separate utility such as a trigger assembly for use in a more complete trigger assembly absent a firing pin retainer, e.g., a more complete trigger assembly that relies upon a hammer for effecting firing pin actuation. The examiner has required restriction between combination and subcombination inventions. Where applicant elects a subcombination, and claims thereto are subsequently found allowable, any claim(s) depending from or otherwise requiring all the limitations of the allowable subcombination will be examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. See MPEP § 821.04(a). Applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply: the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification (a search for invention I would require searching in F41A 19/24, whereas a search of invention II would not; a search for invention II would require searching in F41A 19/10, whereas a search for invention II would not; the inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries). Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention. The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention. Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention. During a telephone conversation with Michael Priddy on 30 October 2025 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute invention I, claims 1-19. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 20 and 21 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention. The remainder of the instant Office Action is directed to claims 1-19. Claim Objections Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: the term “angel” should read “angle.” Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claim 3 is 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. The term “distal/external” renders the claim indefinite, since it is unclear what effect the slash mark is intended to have upon said term. For purposes of examination, the examiner will consider said term as reading “distal and external.” Correction and/or clarification are required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. Claims 1, 3, 9, 11, 14, 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Keene (GB 623804 A). In reference to claim 1, Keene discloses a trigger assembly, comprising: a trigger housing body (figures 1 and 2, stock 1 constitutes a trigger housing body, since it is a body that houses a trigger); mounted to the trigger housing body near a top thereof so as to pivot about a transverse axis, a firing pin retainer (18); mounted to the trigger housing body so as to pivot about a transverse axis, a first trigger sear (28+30) configured to selectively support the firing pin retainer to retain a firing pin (when element 32 of the firing pin retainer 18 is located in notch 31 of element 30); a twisting switch housing at least partially contained by the trigger housing body (figures 1 and 2, element 85); and mounted within the twisting switch housing, a twisting switch (35+84+86) having proximal and distal ends and being configured to, at a first twist angle, set a first firing mode for the trigger assembly and, at a second twist angle, set a second firing mode for the trigger assembly (figure 1, each of positions 87, 88, and 89 are at different twist angles of the twisting switch and effect first, second, and third firing modes, respectively). In reference to claim 3, Keene discloses the claimed invention (figure 1, element 86 indicates firing mode by pointing at the selected position 87, 88, or 89). In reference to claim 9, Keene discloses the claimed invention (figures 1 and 10, when the twisting switch is at a first angle of rearward pivot, pointing rearward at element 88, the switch disengages the first trigger sear via disengagement of elements 31 and 32). In reference to claim 11, Keene discloses the claimed invention (second trigger sear 44). In reference to claim 14, Keene discloses the claimed invention, as set forth above in the reference to claim 1. Regarding the last clause of the claim, Keene discloses that the twisting switch (35+84+86) is configured to, at a first twist angle, disengage the first trigger sear from the firing pin retainer at a first angle of pivot of the twisting switch distal end (figures 1 and 10, the first angle of pivot is when the switch points at element 88; the distal end of the switch is element 86) and, at a second twist angle, disengage the first trigger sear from the firing pin retainer at a second angle of pivot of the twisting switch distal end less than the first angle of pivot (figure 1, the second angle of pivot is when the switch points at element 89; the angle of pivot can be considered as measured from the 12 o’clock position of the switch an increasing clockwise). In reference to claim 15, Keene discloses the claimed invention (the twisting switch supports the firing pin retainer 18 via element 44 at the first twist angle, which corresponds to the first angle of pivot of the distal end, per page 4, paragraph bridging columns 1 and 2). In reference to claim 19, Keene disclose the claimed invention (figures 1 and 10, the twisting switch, per se, is not in contact with the firing pin retainer when the twisting switch is at the second twist angle corresponding to the second angle of pivot of the distal end). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2, 4-8, 10, 12, 13, and 16-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: see attached Notice of References Cited. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 05, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12590773
MAGAZINE DISCONNECT MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12560397
RIFLE BIPOD ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12560407
TARGET LEAD ESTIMATION BASED ON LAUNCHER SLEW
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12540805
REVERSE-SABOTED SIDEARM SYSTEMS, AND RELATED SIDEARMS, AMMUNITION, AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12540786
MODULAR AR-TYPE SAFETY SELECTOR WITH LEVER MOUNTING PINS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
66%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+24.1%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 950 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month