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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 3 should state “an exterior surface” instead of “and exterior surface”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 6 should state “the one or more gas tube channels” instead of “the one or more gas tube holes”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 2 should state “the one or more barrel nut screw holes” instead of “The one or more barrel nut screw holes”. 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 7, 9, 10, and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by U.S. Pre-Grant Publication 20180202759 by Samson et al (Samson).
Regarding claim 1, Samson discloses a handguard system for a firearm having a receiver, a barrel and a barrel nut for attaching the barrel to the receiver (See Figures, all aspects clearly illustrated), comprising: a handguard component (16); a first fastener (128, Figure 7); a second fastener (128, Figure 7); a plate (114), configured to accept the first fastener and the second fastener (See at least Figures 7-13, clearly illustrated), and further configured to apply pressure to the barrel nut of the firearm (See at least Paragraph 0035).
Regarding claim 2, Samson further discloses wherein: the handguard component includes an interior surface; the barrel nut includes an exterior surface; the plate includes first and second surfaces; and wherein the first fastener and the second fastener are configured to apply pressure to the first surface of the plate to drive the second surface of the plate against the exterior surface of the barrel nut (See at least Figures 7-13 and Paragraph 0035, all aspects clearly illustrated and disclosed).
Regarding claim 7, Samson further discloses wherein: the handguard system is aligned to the firearm independently of the barrel nut (See Figures, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 9, Samson further discloses wherein: the handguard component further includes a recess configured to hold the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener; and the first fastener, the second fastener, and the plate reside partially or fully within the recess (See at least Figures 7-13, all aspects clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 10, Samson further discloses wherein: the first fastener includes a first fastener tip and a first fastener shaft; the second fastener includes a second fastener tip and a second fastener shaft; a first tip diameter of the first fastener tip is larger than a first shaft diameter of the first fastener shaft; a second tip diameter of the second fastener tip is larger than a second shaft diameter of the second fastener shaft; the handguard component includes a first fastener hole, the first fastener hole having a first hole diameter larger than the first shaft diameter and smaller than the first tip diameter; and the handguard component includes a second fastener hole, the second fastener hole having a second hole diameter larger than the second shaft diameter and smaller than the second tip diameter (See at least Figures 7-13, all aspects clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 12, Samson further discloses wherein: the handguard component includes an interior handguard curved surface; the plate includes first and second surfaces; the second surface is curved; and the second surface is parallel to the interior handguard curved surface (See at least Figures 7-13, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 13, Samson further discloses wherein: The second surface remains generally parallel to the interior handguard curved surface when the first fastener and the second fastener are driven into the plate (See at least Figures 7-13, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 14, Samson further discloses wherein: the plate has a length and a width; the length is longer than the width (See at least Figures 7-13, clearly illustrated).
Claim(s) 1 and 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by U.S. Pre-Grant Publication 2018/0306551 by Reid (Reid).
Regarding claim 1, Reid discloses a handguard system for a firearm having a receiver, a barrel and a barrel nut for attaching the barrel to the receiver (See Figures, all aspects clearly illustrated), comprising: a handguard component (28); a first fastener (54); a second fastener (54); a plate (38), configured to accept the first fastener and the second fastener (See Figures, clearly illustrated), and further configured to apply pressure to the barrel nut of the firearm (See at least Paragraphs 0020-0024).
Regarding claim 3, Reid discloses wherein: the first fastener is a first threaded screw having a first drive; the second fastener is a second threaded screw having a second drive; and the plate has first and second threaded passages with threading corresponding to the threading of the first and second screws, respectively (See Figures and at least Paragraphs 0020-0024, all aspects clearly illustrated and disclosed).
Regarding claim 4, Reid further discloses wherein: the first screw is driven into the plate when the first drive is engaged by a first driver; the second screw is driven into the plate when the second drive is engaged by a second driver (See Figures and at least Paragraphs 0020-0024, all aspects clearly illustrated and disclosed).
Claim(s) 1, 5-6, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by U.S. Pre-Grant Publication 2017/0160048 by Galletta, II (Galletta).
Regarding claim 1, Galletta discloses a handguard system for a firearm having a receiver, a barrel and a barrel nut for attaching the barrel to the receiver (See Figures, all aspects clearly illustrated), comprising: a handguard component (106); a first fastener (604, Figure 6); a second fastener (604, Figure 6); a plate (602), configured to accept the first fastener and the second fastener (See at least Figure 7, clearly illustrated), and further configured to apply pressure to the barrel nut of the firearm (See at least Paragraphs 0031-0034).
Regarding claim 5, Galletta further discloses a threaded set screw, wherein the plate includes a threaded passage corresponding to the threading of the threaded set screw (604, See at least Figure 0031, third screw).
Regarding claim 6, Galletta further discloses wherein: the barrel nut includes a groove; the set screw is configured to mate with the groove when the barrel nut is fixedly attached to the barrel (See at least Figures 6-11, all aspects clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 8, Galletta further discloses wherein: the firearm further includes a gas tube; and the handguard system is aligned to the firearm independently of the gas tube (See Entire Disclosure, clearly stated).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Samson in view of U.S. Patent 3,124,190 issued to Cornell (Cornell).
Regarding claim 11, Samson does not the specific features of the fastener as claimed.
Cornell discloses wherein: the first fastener tip resides in the recess, between the handguard component and the plate; the second fastener tip resides in the recess, between the handguard component and the plate; the first fastener shaft extends through the first fastener hole; and the second fastener shaft extends through the second fastener hole (See at least Elements 18-24, clearly illustrated).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the noted teachings of Samson with the noted teachings of Cornell. The suggestion/ motivation for doing so would have been an obvious matter of design choice to utilize a particularly shaped fastener element, since applicant has not disclosed that the particular shape of the fastener solves any stated problems or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with a variety of different fasteners as indicated by Samson.
Claim(s) 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Samson in view of U.S. Patent 6,671,990 issued to Booth (Booth).
Regarding claim 15, Samson does not disclose barrel nut screws or their particular details.
Booth, a related prior art reference, discloses a barrel nut screw (60), wherein the barrel nut is configured to accept the barrel nut screw (62).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the noted teachings of Samson with the noted teachings of Booth. The suggestion/ motivation for doing so would have been to ensure aligned connection between the barrel nut and the handguard as taught by Booth.
Regarding claim 16, Booth further discloses wherein the handguard component includes a handguard barrel nut screw hole, and the barrel nut screw passes through the handguard barrel nut screw hole into the barrel nut (See Figures, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 17, Booth further discloses wherein: the barrel nut includes one or more gas tube channels (57); the barrel nut includes one or more barrel nut screw holes for accepting the barrel nut screw (62); and the handguard component is aligned: when a gas tube is able to pass through the one or more gas tube channels and function properly (Understood); the barrel nut screw is able to pass through the handguard barrel nut screw hole into a respective barrel nut screw hole of the one or more barrel nut screw holes (See Figures, clearly illustrated).
Regarding claim 18, Booth further discloses wherein: the one or more barrel nut screw holes are non-intersecting with the one or more gas tube holes (See at least Figure 4, clearly illustrated).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892 Form for a listing of applicable prior art references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN C WEBER whose telephone number is (571)270-5377. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM 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, 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.
/Jonathan C Weber/Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 3641
JONATHAN C. WEBER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3641