Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 7/21/26 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-8, 11-13, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bow Spider Packing System - ATA 2020 (hereafter referred to as Bow Spider) in view of Hagino (US 4,718,586 A).
Regarding claim 1, Bow Spider discloses an equipment retention system, comprising: a receiver (R below) including a first component (back half portion) and a second component (front half portion) secured (via fasteners F) to the first component; and a mounting post (MP below) having a first end and a second end, the mounting post selectively engaged with the receiver via the first end and fixedly secured to an object (bow, object currently being claimed in combination due to positively structural recitation “secured to”) via the second, opposite, end; wherein the receiver defines a substantially Y-shaped opening (Y below) configured to selectively receive the first end of the mounting post; and wherein, upon insertion of the first end of the mounting post into the Y-shaped opening, the mounting post is locked within the Y-shaped opening (see “gravity locking system” from 0:10-0:16 and 1:10-1:16 in video) via engagement between a head (H below) of the mounting post and an angled protrusion (AP below) extending away from a surface of the second component of the receiver.
Bow Spider fails to disclose wherein the first component of the receiver defines an angled face extending away from the second component to permit removal of the first end of the mounting post from the Y-shaped opening. The corresponding face (EF below) of the Bow Spider first component appears to be flat to the best Examiner can tell.
Hagino teaches that it was already known in the art for this entry face (29) of a Y-shaped opening like that of Bow Spider to be angled rearwardly (see Figures 6 and 8) in order to guide the first end (58) of a mounting post (57) down into the opening (see col. 4 lines 55+).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time Applicant’s invention was effectively filed to have provided the entry face (EF below) of Bow Spider with a rearward angle, the motivation being to guide the first end of the mounting post down into the opening in the manner taught by Hagino.
This modified Bow Spider retention system would include both an angled protrusion, as originally taught by Bow Spider, and now an angled face, as taught by Hagino. These two elements, simply due to their existence adjacent one another, would inherently cooperate to permit removal of the first end of the mounting post from the Y-shaped opening when the mounting post is tilted away from the angled protrusion. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Here, the recitation of intended is permitting removal of the mounting post. This use is possible within the modified Bow Spider system and does not define or require any structure not found in Bow Spider as modified above.
PNG
media_image1.png
1084
1468
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1074
1460
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
1078
1462
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
1084
1474
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
1092
1464
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Bow Spider as modified above would include the equipment retention system of claim 1, wherein the Y-shaped opening includes a chamfered edge (CE above) to guide the first end of the mounting post into the Y-shaped opening.
Regarding claim 3, Bow Spider as modified above would include the equipment retention system of claim 2, wherein the Y-shaped opening includes a U-shaped slot (U above) to receive the first end of the mounting post.
Regarding claim 4, Bow Spider as modified above would include the equipment retention system of claim 1, wherein the receiver includes a slot (S above) to permit the insertion of a strap (strap not being claimed in combination due to the functional language “to permit”) through the receiver.
Regarding claim 5, Bow Spider as modified above would include the equipment retention system of claim 3, wherein the U-shaped slot includes an exterior wall (that which includes AP above) to retain the first end of the mounting post (see “gravity locking system” from 0:10-0:16 and 1:10-1:16 in video).
Regarding claim 6, Bow Spider as modified above would include the equipment retention system of claim 5, wherein the exterior wall defines a stepped profile, with an angled protrusion (AP above) configured to retain the first end of the mounting post within the receiver (see “gravity locking system” from 0:10-0:16 and 1:10-1:16 in video).
Regarding claim 7, Bow Spider as modified above would include the equipment retention system of claim 6, wherein rotation of the mounting post in a first direction (hanging under the weight of the bow, see position X above) locks the mounting post within the receiver via contact between the first end of the mounting post and the angled protrusion.
Regarding claim 8, Bow Spider as modified above would include the equipment retention system of claim 7, wherein rotation of the mounting post in a second direction (rotating the top of the bow toward the user, see position Z above) unlocks the mounting post from the receiver and reduces contact between the first end of the mounting post and the angled protrusion.
Regarding claim 11, the normal operation and use of the modified Bow Spider system as set forth above would include a method of using an equipment retention system, the method comprising: arranging a head of a mounting post (MP above) within a gap (Y above) defined between a first component and a second component of a receiver, the first component including an angled face, as taught by Hagino, extending away from the second component of the receiver, and the second component of the receiver including an angled portion (AP above) extending toward the first component of the receiver, the head (H above) of the mounting post positioned below the angled portion (AP above) of the second component of the receiver; releasing the mounting post to permit rotation of the head the mounting post within the gap of the receiver in a first direction to move the mounting post into a first position (when in position X above); and preventing removal of the mounting post from the gap of the receiver via contact between the head of the mounting post and the angled portion of the second component of the receiver when in the first position (see user jumping from 0:11-0:14 in video where the head stays in place within the slot due to gravity and the angled portion).
This modified Bow Spider retention system would include both an angled protrusion, as originally taught by Bow Spider, and now an angled face, as taught by Hagino. These two elements, simply due to their existence adjacent one another, would inherently cooperate to permit removal of the first end of the mounting post from the Y-shaped opening when the mounting post is tilted away from the angled protrusion. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Here, the recitation of intended is permitting removal of the mounting post. This use is possible within the modified Bow Spider system and does not define or require any structure not found in Bow Spider as modified above.
Regarding claim 12, the normal operation and use of the modified Bow Spider system as set forth above would include the method of claim 11, further comprising: rotating the mounting post in a second direction (to position Z above) to move the mounting post into a second position; when the mounting post is in the second position, moving the head of the mounting post out of contact with the angled portion of the second component of the receiver; and permitting removal of the mounting post from the gap of the receiver when in the second position.
Regarding claim 13, the normal operation and use of the modified Bow Spider system as set forth above would include the method of claim 11, wherein the receiver defines a substantially Y-shaped opening (Y above) configured to selectively receive the first end of the mounting post.
Regarding claim 16, Bow Spider as modified above would include an equipment retention system, comprising: a mounting post (MP above), including: a head (H above) defining a first end; a neck (secured within the thickness of Y above) secured to and extending away from the head; and a body (widest part of MP above) secured to and extending from the neck, the body defining a second end configured to retain an object (object not currently being claimed in combination due to the functional language “configured to retain); and a receiver (R above), the receiver to selectively receive and retain the mounting post, the receiver including: a first component (back half portion); and a second component (front half portion) secured (via fasteners F) to the first component, the first component and the second component together defining a gap (Y above) to receive the head of the mounting post, and the second component defining a chamfered edge (CE above) to guide the mounting post into the gap; wherein the first component includes an angled face, as taught by Hagino, extending away from the second component to widen the gap; and wherein the second component includes a stepped inner surface having an angled protrusion (AP above) extending within the gap, towards the first component, the angled protrusion to contact the head of the mounting post to selectively retain the mounting post within the gap (when in position X above, see “gravity locking system” from 0:10-0:16 and 1:10-1:16 in video).
This modified Bow Spider retention system would include both an angled protrusion, as originally taught by Bow Spider, and now an angled face, as taught by Hagino. The angled nature of the face would inherently widen the gap such that the mouthing post passes between the angled protrusion and the angled face during removal of the mounting post from the gap.
Regarding claim 17, Bow Spider as modified above would include the equipment retention system of claim 16, wherein the object is one of: an archery bow; a crossbow; a firearm; or an optic. The object is still not being claimed in combination but Bow Spider shows a bow.
Regarding claim 18, Bow Spider as modified above would include the equipment retention system of claim 16, wherein the head defines a first diameter (caught behind the slot, wider than the slot), the neck defines a second diameter (to fit within the slot, narrower than the slot), and the body defines a third diameter (outside of the receiver, also wider than the slot), and wherein the second diameter of the neck is smaller than the first diameter of the head and the third diameter of the body.
Regarding claim 19, Bow Spider as modified above would include the equipment retention system of claim 18, wherein, when the head is positioned within the gap, the neck extends through a U-shaped slot (U above) within the second component, with the head preventing movement of the mounting post in a first direction (perpendicular to the length of the slot).
Regarding claim 20, Bow Spider as modified above would include the equipment retention system of claim 19, wherein, when the head is positioned within the gap, contact between the head and the angled protrusion (in position X above) prevents movement of the mounting post in a second direction (see user jumping from 0:11-0:14 in video where the head stays in place within the slot due to gravity and the angled portion), when the mounting post is in a first position; and when the head is positioned within the gap, rotation of the mounting post into a second position (Z above) reduces contact between the head and the angled protrusion to permit movement of the mounting post in the second direction, but not the first direction.
6. Claims 9 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bow Spider Packing System - ATA 2020 (hereafter referred to as Bow Spider) in view of Hagino (US 4,718,586 A) as applied above, further in view of Swan (US 8,166,694 B2).
Regarding claim 9, Bow Spider as modified above would include the equipment retention system of claim 1, but so far fails to include wherein a second end of the mounting post includes a picatinny rail mounting system.
Regarding claim 14, the normal operation and use of the modified Bow Spider system as set forth above would include the method of claim 11, but so far fails to include wherein a second end of the mounting post includes a picatinny rail mounting system.
Swan teaches that it was also known in the art for a mounting post (217) like that of Bow Spider to include a second end with a picatinny rail mounting system (216) in order to mount to the rail of an assault rifle (see col. 4 lines 2-10). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time Applicant’s invention was effectively filed to have provided the second end of the mounting post of the modified Bow Spider system with a picatinny rail mounting system, the motivation being to allow a user to mount an assault rifle instead of a bow, where Swan teaches that such use was already known in the art.
7. Claims 10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bow Spider Packing System - ATA 2020 (hereafter referred to as Bow Spider) in view of Hagino (US 4,718,586 A) as applied above, further in view of Ray (US 10,378,855 B2).
Regarding claim 10, Bow Spider as modified above would include the equipment retention system of claim 9, but so far fails to include wherein a second end of the mounting post includes a hook and loop strap.
Regarding claim 15, the normal operation and use of the modified Bow Spider system as set forth above would include the method of claim 11, but fails to include wherein a second end of the mounting post includes a hook and loop strap.
Ray teaches that it was also known in the art for a mounting post (106) like that of Bow Spider to include a second end with a hook and loop strap (102 - see “Velcro” in col. 3 lines 50-60) in order to mount to the stock of a firearm. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time Applicant’s invention was effectively filed to have provided the second end of the mounting post of the modified Bow Spider system with a hook and loop strap, the motivation being to allow a user to mount to the stock of a firearm, where Ray teaches that such use was already known in the art.
Response to Arguments
8. Applicant’s arguments filed 7/21/26 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
9. Applicant has argued that the prior art fails to teach the functional relationship between an angled face and angled protrusion where they work together to permit removal of the first end of the mounting post from the Y-shaped opening when the mounting post is tilted away from the angled protrusion. The modified Bow Spider retention system would include both an angled protrusion, as originally taught by Bow Spider, and now an angled face, as taught by Hagino. These two elements, simply due to their existence adjacent one another, would inherently cooperate to permit removal of the first end of the mounting post from the Y-shaped opening when the mounting post is tilted away from the angled protrusion. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Here, the recitation of intended is permitting removal of the mounting post. This use is possible within the modified Bow Spider system and does not define or require any structure not found in Bow Spider as modified above.
10. Applicant has argued that there is no motivation to apply the angled face teaching of Hagino to the seemingly vertical face of Bow Spider because Hagino teaches the face being angled in order to guide the mounting post into the slot, not make easier the removal of the mounting post, where Bow Spider already has chamfered edges to guide the mounting post into the slot. Examiner notes that Hagino also discloses chamfered edges (30 and 31) that would inherently guide the mounting post into the slot yet he still teaches an additional angled face that guides the mounting post into the slot. Hagino shows that these features are already known to work together and are not redundant. Examiner maintains that it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time Applicant’s invention was effectively filed to have provided the entry face (EF below) of Bow Spider with a rearward angle, the motivation being to guide the first end of the mounting post down into the opening in the manner taught by Hagino.
Conclusion
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN MATTHEW LARSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8649. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7am-3pm. 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.
/JUSTIN M LARSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734 7/31/26
Prosecution Insights