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 1 is objected to because “though” should be “through”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claims 2-3 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 claim 2, “the holster body portions” and “the access cover” lack antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 2, the term “much more rigid” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “much more” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is recommended that this be amended to read “
Claim 3 depends from the above claim(s) and is rejected for the above reason as it does not cure the deficiency.
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.
REJECTION BASED ON BARDY
Claim(s) 1-2, 7-9, 11 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 9,816,778 to Bardy.
Regarding claim 1, Bardy discloses a holster (Fig. 1) for a user’s weapon such as a handgun that has a trigger guard and a trigger, comprising: a holster body (Fig. 1 – all of holster except for strap 84) for receiving the weapon when it is holstered by the user, the holster body defining a chamber (inner cavity of holster) that includes a trigger area (Fig. 1 – interior area generally at 60) that receives the trigger guard and the trigger when the weapon is holstered, the trigger area having a bottom opening (Fig. 1 – portion of opening covered by 84) through which the trigger guard of a holstered weapon can be accessed; and an access guard (84) secured to the holster body adjacent to the trigger area, the access guard having a flexible portion extending across and covering the bottom opening of the trigger area (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 2, Bardy discloses wherein the holster body portions adjacent the trigger area are made from a material that is much more rigid than the flexible material of the access cover (Figs. 2C-D – the holster body portions are rigid and retain their shape while the strap is flexible to move over the opening).
Regarding claim 7, Bardy discloses wherein the location of the flexible wall portion with respect to the holster body is selected so that the flexible wall portion is engaged by the weapon grip when the weapon is holstered (Fig. 1 - the top edge of the strap 84 is capable of engaging a grip, depending on the size/shape of the held weapon (the weapon is not positively claimed)).
Regarding claim 8, Bardy discloses wherein the access guard has a generally U-shaped configuration including two legs secured to the holster body and a base extending between the legs and forming the flexible portion of the access guard (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 9, Bardy discloses wherein the U-shape extends substantially completely across the bottom opening of the trigger area (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 11, Bardy discloses an access guard for a holster body that has side walls on opposite sides of a trigger space that receives the trigger guard and trigger of a holstered weapon, the access guard comprising: a generally U-shaped body (84 – Fig. 1) including first and second legs (two ends of 84) and a flexible bottom wall (bottom portion of 84), the first and second legs for connection with the side walls of the holster body on opposite sides of the trigger space (Fig. 1), the flexible bottom wall extending between the first and second legs across a bottom opening of the trigger space (Fig. 1 – the guard is capable of this intended use).
Regarding claim 15, Bardy discloses an access guard for a holster whose dimensions are selected to fit a particular weapon thereby providing a trigger space and bottom opening of a particular dimensions, and wherein the dimensions of the access guard are selected to block access to that particular trigger space (the holster and strap are selected to fit a weapon that fits within the holster – see Fig. 4A for example).
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bardy in view of US Patent 3,583,611 to Theodore.
Regarding claim 3, Bardy discloses wherein the flexible portion of the access guard is movable by the user, when the user grips the holstered weapon, from a first position blocking access to the trigger area to a second position enabling access to the trigger area (the access guard is capable of being released and moved when the user grips the weapon). To the extent there is any doubt about this capability, Theodore discloses a holster in which the holding strap is releasable when the user is gripping the weapon (Fig. 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have made the snap able to be released with one finger because it would make releasing the strap easier for the user.
Claim(s) 10 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bardy in view of Rawhydleather.com (NPL #1).
Regarding claim 10, Bardy fails to disclose the thickness of the bottom wall. However, Rawhydleather discloses that it is known to make straps with thicknesses on the order of 1.2mm (0.0472in) (see third bullet point on the right side of image). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have made the strap with a thickness within the claimed range in Bardy because the modification only involves a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Regarding claims 12-13, Bardy fails to disclose the thickness of the bottom wall. However, Rawhydleather discloses that it is known to make straps with thicknesses on the order of 1.2mm (0.0472in) (see third bullet point on the right side of image). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have made the strap with a thickness of 0.0472in (which is about 0.040in) in Bardy because the modification only involves a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bardy and Rawhydleather, further in view of Youtube.com (NPL #2).
Regarding claim 14, Bardy fails to disclose using TPU for the access guard. However, Youtube discloses that it is known to use TPU for straps (see screenshot). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have used TPU for the strap in the combination because the modification only involves choosing from a finite number of predictable materials to use in a strap.
REJECTION BASED ON ROGERS
Claim(s) 1, 4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 4,694,980 to Rogers.
Regarding claim 1, Rogers discloses a holster (Fig. 3) for a user’s weapon such as a handgun that has a trigger guard and a trigger, comprising: a holster body (Fig. 1 – all of holster except for strap 14) for receiving the weapon when it is holstered by the user, the holster body defining a chamber (inner cavity of holster) that includes a trigger area (Figs. 3-4 – cavity area around the trigger guard) that receives the trigger guard and the trigger when the weapon is holstered, the trigger area having a bottom opening (Fig. 2 – opening covered by strap 14) through which the trigger guard of a holstered weapon can be accessed; and an access guard (14) secured to the holster body adjacent to the trigger area, the access guard having a flexible portion extending across and covering the bottom opening of the trigger area (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Rogers discloses wherein the holster body has first and second opposite side wall portions (sidewall portions of 11, 40) extending to a bottom wall (bottom portion where 11 and 40 are secured together) of the holster body, the side wall portions and the bottom wall at least partially defining the boundaries of the trigger area (Figs. 2-4), the side wall portions and the bottom wall defining the bottom opening of the trigger area (Figs. 2-4).
Regarding claim 6, Rogers discloses wherein the flexible portion of the access guard includes a section that forms a sloped ramp (Fig. 3 – strap 14 slopes inward at the trigger guard when moving from top to bottom in the figure) having an outer edge that engages a grip of a holstered weapon (the top edge of the strap 14 is capable of engaging a grip, depending on the size/shape of the held weapon (the weapon is not positively claimed)).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is 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.
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