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 .
Status of the Application
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on the merits. As of the date of this application, no Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) has been filed on behalf of this case.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-17 and 19-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Dependent claims 2-17 each recite “An assembly according to…”. This should read “The fishing rod holder assembly according to…” (emphasis added).
Claims 5 and 6 each recite “the staking member”. This should read “the upper staking member” (emphasis added).
Dependent claims 19-20 each recite “A method according to…”. This should read “The method of assembly a fishing rod holder according to…” (emphasis added).
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 6, 10-11, are 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gould (US 4,486,968).
In regards to Claim 1, Gould discloses a fishing rod holder assembly comprising: a rod holding portion (Gould: Fig. 1; 18, 23-27, 29-36) comprising a body (Gould: Fig. 1; 26) having a rod passage for receiving a handle end of a fishing rod; and a staking assembly comprising: an upper staking member (Gould: Fig. 1-2; 15) having a first end (Gould: Fig. 1-2; 22) for connecting to the rod holding portion and a second end (Gould: Fig. 1; 16) for connecting to another upper staking member or a ground staking member; and a ground staking member (Gould: Fig. 1-2; 10) having a first end for connecting to an upper staking member and a second end for engaging a ground surface, wherein: the second end of the upper staking member is releasably connected to the first end of the ground staking member, the first end of the upper staking member is releasably connected to the rod holding portion.
In regards to Claim 6, Gould discloses an assembly according to claim 1, wherein the first end of the ground staking member (Gould: Fig. 1-2; 10) is received within the second end of the staking member (Gould: Fig. 1-2; 15).
In regards to Claim 10, Gould discloses an assembly according to claim 1, wherein the second end of the ground staking member (Gould: Fig. 1-2; 10) for engaging the ground surface is tapered or conical.
In regards to Claim 11, Gould discloses an assembly according to claim 1, wherein the passage of the body (Gould: Fig. 1; 26) of the rod holding portion is open at least at one end for receiving a handle end of a fishing rod.
In regards to Claim 17, Gould discloses an assembly according to claim 1, wherein the ground staking member comprises a fin (Gould: Fig. 1, 4; 11-14) connected thereto to limit rotation of the ground staking member when engaged with the ground.
In regards to Claim 18, Gould discloses a method of assembling a fishing rod holder, the method including: providing a staking assembly comprising an upper staking member (Gould: Fig. 1-2; 15) having a first end (Gould: Fig. 1-2; 22) and a second end (Gould: Fig. 1; 16) and a ground staking member (Gould: Fig. 1-2; 10) having a first end and a second end; providing a rod holding portion (Gould: Fig. 1; 18, 23-27, 29-36), the rod holding portion including a body (Gould: Fig. 1; 26) having a rod passage configured to receive a handle end of a fishing rod, wherein the rod holding portion is connected to the first end of the upper staking member; connecting the second end of the upper staking member to the first end of the ground staking member (Gould: Col. 1, Ln. 51-60); and engaging the second end of the ground staking member with a ground surface to secure the fishing rod holder in position (Gould: Col. 1, Ln. 38-50).
In regards to Claim 19, Gould discloses a method according to claim 18, wherein the method includes connecting the first end (Gould: Fig. 1-2; 22) of the upper staking member (Gould: Fig. 1-2; 15) to the rod holding portion (Gould: Fig. 1; 18, 23-27, 29-36).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gould (US 4,486,968) in view of Braga (US 11,472,348).
In regards to Claim 2, Gould discloses an assembly according to claim 1, but fails to disclose the rod holding portion comprises a removable resilient collar that abuts or receives an end of the body of the rod holding portion defining the rod passage and wherein the resilient collar defines a passage for receiving a handle end of a fishing rod therethrough such that, in use, the handle end of the fishing rod passes through the passage of the resilient collar and is received within the rod passage.
However, Braga teaches a rod holding portion that comprises a removable resilient collar (Braga: Fig. 2; 18) that abuts or receives an end of a body (Braga: Fig. 2; 7) of a rod holding portion defining the rod passage and wherein the resilient collar defines a passage for receiving a handle end of a fishing rod therethrough such that, in use, the handle end of the fishing rod passes through the passage of the resilient collar and is received within the rod passage.
Gould and Braga are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor or a similar problem solving area e.g. rod/pole supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the body in Gould with the resilient collar from Braga, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a means of protecting the rods and assembly from wear (Braga: Col. 6, Ln. 4-17).
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gould (US 4,486,968) in view of Andrews (US 2,607,398).
In regards to Claim 5, Gould discloses an assembly according to claim 1, but fails to disclose a foothold connected to the staking assembly and oriented substantially perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the staking member.
However, Andrews teaches a foothold (Andrews: Fig. 1-2, 4; 18) connected to a staking assembly and oriented substantially perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of a staking member (Andrews: Fig. 1-2, 4; 10).
Gould and Andrews are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor or a similar problem solving area e.g. rod/pole supports and ground-mounted supports; and securing articles to the ground. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the staking assembly in Gould with the foothold from Andrews, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a means for a user to select the depth of insertion of the staking assembly while also limiting forward and side tilting (Andrews: Col. 1, Ln. 50-55; Col. 2, Ln. 1-5), thereby improving the adjustability and stability of the assembly as well as providing a fixed surface for a user to press on when inserting the staking assembly.
In regards to Claim 14, Gould, as modified, teaches an assembly according to claim 5, wherein the foothold (Andrews: Fig. 1-2, 4; 18) is adjustably positionable along the staking assembly.
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gould (US 4,486,968) in view of Acker (5,501,027).
In regards to Claim 5, Gould discloses an assembly according to claim 1, but fails to disclose a foothold connected to the staking assembly and oriented substantially perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the staking member.
However, Acker teaches a foothold (Acker: Fig. 1; 30, 32) connected to a staking assembly and oriented substantially perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of a staking member (Acker: Fig. 1; 38).
Gould and Acker are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor or a similar problem solving area e.g. rod/pole supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the staking assembly in Gould with the foothold and clip from Acker, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a user with a means of driving the staking assembly into the ground that can also be used to support additional accessories, thereby making installation of the assembly easer as well as expanding its functionality (Acker: Col. 3, Ln. 35-37; Col. 5, Ln. 4-10).
In regards to Claim 15, Gould, as modified, teaches an assembly according to claim 5, wherein a clip (Acker: Fig. 1; 92, 94) is removably attachable to the foothold for connecting to and holding an external accessory.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gould (US 4,486,968) in view of Schmitt et al. (US 2013/0125445).
In regards to Claim 8, Gould discloses an assembly according to claim 1, but fails to disclose the rod holding portion comprises visual indicia on an exterior surface.
However, Schmitt teaches a rod holding portion comprises visual indicia on an exterior surface (Schmitt: [0021]).
Gould and Schmitt are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor or a similar problem solving area e.g. rod/pole supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rod holding portion in Gould with the visual indicia from Schmitt, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a means of increasing visibility of the device from a greater distance, as well as in low light environments and inclement weather, thereby helping prevent the device and its user from being lost (Schmitt: [0021]).
In regards to Claim 9, Gould, as modified, teaches an assembly according to claim 8, wherein the visual indicia comprises reflective tape thereby helping prevent the device and its user from being lost (Schmitt: [0021]).
Claims 7, 16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gould (US 4,486,968) in view of Krasnicki (US 2009/0189030).
In regards to Claim 7, Gould discloses an assembly according to claim 1, wherein the upper staking member (Gould: Fig. 1-2; 15) is at least partially hollow to receive the first end of the ground staking member therein.
Gould fails to explicitly disclose a ground staking member that is substantially solid. However, Krasnicki teaches a ground staking member (Krasnicki: Fig. 8; 58) that is substantially solid.
Gould and Krasnicki are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor or a similar problem solving area e.g. ground-mounted supports; and securing articles to the ground. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the staking member in Gould solid structure as taught by Krasnicki, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a specific solid material to fabricate the ground staking member from (Krasnicki: [0053]), thereby ensuring the ground staking member has increased strength for withstanding ground penetration.
In regards to Claim 16, Gould discloses an assembly according to claim 1, further but fails to disclose an extension member and an additional upper staking member, wherein the extension member connects the upper staking member to the additional upper staking member, and the additional upper staking member is connected to the ground staking member.
However, Krasnicki teaches an extension member (Krasnicki: Fig. 8; 50) and an additional upper staking member (Krasnicki: Fig. 8; 52), wherein the extension member connects an upper staking member (Krasnicki: Fig. 8; 30) to the additional upper staking member, and the additional upper staking member is connected to a ground staking member (Krasnicki: Fig. 8; 58).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the staking assembly in Gould with the extension member and additional upper staking member as taught by Krasnicki, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a means of a user to selectively adjust the height of the assembly beyond that provided by only one staking member, thereby increasing the utility of the device (Krasnicki: [0064]).
In regards to Claim 20, Gould discloses a method according to claim 18, but fails to disclose the method including: providing an extension member and an additional upper staking member; wherein connecting the second end of the upper staking member to the first end of the ground staking member includes connecting the upper staking member to the additional upper staking member, and connecting the additional upper staking member to the ground staking member whereby the additional upper staking member connects the upper staking member to the ground staking member.
However, Krasnicki teaches a method including: providing an extension member (Krasnicki: Fig. 8; 50) and an additional upper staking member (Krasnicki: Fig. 8; 52); wherein connecting the second end of the upper staking member (Krasnicki: Fig. 8; 30) to the first end of a ground staking member (Krasnicki: Fig. 8; 58) includes connecting the upper staking member to the additional upper staking member, and connecting the additional upper staking member to the ground staking member whereby the additional upper staking member connects the upper staking member to the ground staking member (Krasnicki: Fig. 3). [Note: See the rejection of claim 16 for motivation and/or rationale.]
Claims 1, 3-4, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chestnut (US 4,497,129) in view of Moses (US 7331139).
In regards to Claim 1, Chestnut discloses a fishing rod holder assembly comprising: a rod holding portion comprising a body (Chestnut: Fig. 1-4; 16, 18, 20) having a rod passage (Chestnut: Fig. 1-4; 16) for receiving a handle end of a fishing rod; and a staking member (Chestnut: Fig. 1-4; 12) having a first end for connecting to the rod holding portion and a second end for engaging a ground surface.
However, Krasnicki teaches a staking assembly (Moses: Fig. 5-6; 16) comprising: an upper staking member (Moses: Fig. 5-6; 20) having a first end for connecting to the rod holding portion and a second end for connecting to another upper staking member or a ground staking member; and a ground staking member (Moses: Fig. 5-6; 18) having a first end for connecting to an upper staking member and a second end for engaging a ground surface; the second end of the upper staking member is releasably connected to the first end of the ground staking member, the first end of the upper staking member is releasably connected to a rod holding portion (Moses: Fig. 6).
Chestnut and are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor or a similar problem solving area e.g. rod/pole supports and ground-mounted supports; and securing articles to the ground. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the staking member and rod holding portion in Gould with the staking assembly and releasable connection as taught by Moses, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide an assembly that has an adjustable height and can be easily assembled for use and detached and packed for storage purposes, thereby increasing the utility and transportability of the assembly (Moses: Col. 4, Ln. 34-36; Col. 63-67; Col. 5, Ln. 1-3).
In regards to Claim 3, Chestnut, as modified, teaches an assembly according to claim 1, wherein the upper staking member (Moses: Fig. 5-6; 16) is releasably connected to the rod holding portion (Chestnut: Fig. 1-4; 16, 18, 20) via a connecting arrangement and the connecting arrangement comprises: a staking passage (Chestnut: Col. 2, Ln. 35-37) formed in the body of the rod holding portion; and a fastening assembly (Moses: Fig. 6; 24), wherein the upper staking member extends through the staking passage and the fastening assembly connects to the upper staking member for securing the rod holding portion to the upper staking member.
In regards to Claim 4, Chestnut, as modified, teaches an assembly according to claim 3, wherein the upper staking member is internally threaded at an end to threadedly engage with a fastener of the fastening assembly (Moses: Col. 4, Ln. 52-54).
In regards to Claim 12, Chestnut, as modified, teaches an assembly according to claim 1, wherein the rod holding portion further comprises a storage compartment (Chestnut: Fig. 2, 4; S) for receiving accessories therein.
In regards to Claim 13, Chestnut, as modified, teaches an assembly according to claim 12, wherein the storage compartment is a slot (Chestnut: Fig. 2, 4; S) formed in the body of the rod holding portion.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 for cited references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Taylor Morris whose telephone number is (571)272-6367. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 10AM-6PM PST / 1PM-9PM 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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at (571) 272-8227. 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.
/Taylor Morris/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631