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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/18/25 is noted. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the examiner is considering the information disclosure statement. Examiner has also considered the references cited on the Third-Party Submission Under 37 CFR 1.290.
Drawings
3. 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 mounting post including both a picatinny rail mounting system and a hook and loop strap, as currently required by claim 10, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). See paragraph 5 below. No new matter should be entered.
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 Objections
4. Claim 16 is objected to because the second to last line should read “to contact” instead of “to contract”.
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.
5. Claims 6-8 and 10 are 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.
Regarding claims 6-8, claim 6 recites “an angled protrusion” while claim 1, from which claim 6 ultimately depends, also recites “an angled protrusion”. As currently claimed it is not clear if these are the same protrusions or separate protrusions. Claim 7 and 8 then go on to recite “the angle protrusion” where, again, it seems two have been set forth. For the purpose of examination, it is assumed that these protrusions are one in the same.
Regarding claim 10, as it currently depends from claim 9, it seems to currently require the second end of the mounting post to include both a picatinny rail mounting system (claim 9) and a hook and loop strap (claim 10) at the same time. The specification seems clear that these are features of two separate embodiments (see paragraphs [0075]-[0077] and [0081]). As such, the actual scope of the claim is unclear. For the purpose of examination, it is assumed that these are in fact separate embodiments as Applicant has neither shown (see paragraph 3 above) nor described them being within the same embodiment. It is also assumed that claim 10 should in fact depend from claim 1 instead of claim 9.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. Claims 1-8, 11-13, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bow Spider Packing System - ATA 2020 (hereafter referred to as Bow Spider).
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.
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, Spider Mount discloses 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, Spider Mount discloses 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, Spider Mount discloses 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, Spider Mount discloses 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, Spider Mount discloses 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, Spider Mount discloses 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, Spider Mount discloses 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, Spider Mount discloses 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 by a receiver (R above), with the head (H above) of the mounting post positioned below an angled portion (AP above) of the gap 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 gap 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).
Regarding claim 12, Spider Mount discloses 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 gap of the receiver; and permitting removal of the mounting post from the gap of the receiver when in the second position.
Regarding claim 13, Spider Mount discloses 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, Spider Mount disclose 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 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).
Regarding claim 17, Bow Spider discloses 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 discloses 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 discloses 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 discloses 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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.
10. 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) as applied above in view of Swan (US 8,166,694 B2).
Regarding claim 9, Bow Spider discloses the equipment retention system of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein a second end of the mounting post includes a picatinny rail mounting system.
Regarding claim 14, Bow Spider discloses the method of claim 11, but fails to disclose 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 Bow Spider mounting post 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.
11. 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) as applied above in view of Ray (US 10,378,855 B2).
Regarding claim 10, Bow Spider discloses the equipment retention system of claim 9, but fails to disclose wherein a second end of the mounting post includes a hook and loop strap.
Regarding claim 15, Bow Spider discloses the method of claim 11, but fails to disclose 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 Bow Spider mounting post 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.
Conclusion
12. 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 3/3/26