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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species II and Sub-Species B in the reply filed on 7/6/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 12-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Claims 5 and 18 depend from allowable claims (see below) and therefore remain in the application.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7, 9-10 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 10,842,253 to Main.
Regarding claim 1, Main discloses a tactical pouch comprising: a single piece of material configured to be folded from an unfolded generally planar configuration (Fig. 1A) into a folded configuration (Figs. 1B-E) comprising a front surface, a bottom surface, a first side surface, a second side surface, and a rear surface (surfaces in Figs. 1B-E), wherein the tactical pouch is configured to be attached to a webbed material in the folded configuration (the pouch is capable of being attached to a webbed material, for example by slipping the pouch under one of the webs and securing the web between two of the protrusions (108 top/bottom, or 116 top/bottom) or by threading a connector through any of the holes and around one of the webs).
Regarding claims 7 and 15, Main discloses a plurality of folding lines (300, 302, 304, 305, 306).
Regarding claim 9, Main discloses wherein the webbed material is MOLLE webbing (Main is capable of attaching to MOLLE webbing (see claim 1 rejection)).
Regarding claim 10, Main discloses a tactical pouch for a firearm comprising: a single piece of material configured to be folded from an unfolded generally planar configuration (Fig. 1A) into a folded configuration (Figs. 1B-E) comprising a front surface, a bottom surface, a first side surface, a second side surface, and a rear surface (surfaces in Figs. 1B-E), wherein the tactical pouch is configured to be attached to a belt in the folded configuration (the pouch is capable of this intended use, for example by securing the belt around the pouch between two of the protrusions (108 top/bottom, or 116 top/bottom) or by threading a connector through any of the holes and around the belt).
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(s) 2 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Main in view of US Patent 5,991,925 to Wu.
Regarding claim 2, Main fails to disclose tabs. However, Wu discloses a pouch (Figs. 2-3) that includes a rear surface comprises a first rear tab (upper tab engaging 10 in Fig. 2) and a second rear tab (lower tab engaging 10 in Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have used Wu’s method for attachment to a tactical vest for Main because the modification only involves a simple substitution of one known, equivalent mounting method for another to obtain predictable results.
Regarding claim 11, Main fails to disclose tabs. However, Wu discloses a pouch (Figs. 2-3) that includes a rear surface comprises a first rear tab (upper tab engaging 10 in Fig. 2) and a second rear tab (lower tab engaging 10 in Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have used Wu’s method for attachment to a tactical vest for Main because the modification only involves a simple substitution of one known, equivalent mounting method for another to obtain predictable results.
Claim(s) 8 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Main in view of US Patent 10,835,005 to Buerck.
Regarding claim 8, Main fails to disclose slots on the front surface. However, Buerck discloses a tactical pouch with slots (36) on the front surface (Col. 4, lines 40-42). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have included slits in the front surface in Main because it would allow for attaching MOLLE PALS compatible accessories, as taught by Buerck (Col. 4, lines 40-43).
Regarding claim 16, Main fails to disclose slots on the front surface. However, Buerck discloses a tactical pouch with slots (36) on the front surface (Col. 4, lines 40-42). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have included slots in the front surface in Main because it would allow for attaching MOLLE PALS compatible accessories, as taught by Buerck (Col. 4, lines 40-43).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6 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.
Claims 17-20 are allowed.
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
Prosecution Insights