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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figs. 18A, 18B, 25A-25C, 28E. 29 and 32 are blurry and the figures are unclear. 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.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6-8, 11-14 and 20 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 21, 23-24, 26-32 and 39 of copending Application No. 18/662,841 (“ ‘841”) in view of Rasor et al US 2010/0170488 (“Rasor”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 21 of ‘841 recites the limitations in the above claim 1, namely “A crossbow, comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis; a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a first cam rotatably coupled with the first flexible limb for rotation about a first axis, the first axis fixed relative to the first flexible limb; a second cam rotatably coupled with the second flexible limb for rotation about a second axis, the second axis fixed relative to the second flexible limb; a draw string coupled with the first cam and the second cam, the draw string configured to move between a released configuration and a drawn configuration; and an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of the center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string”, except “a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration and the drawn configuration”.
However, in a similar field of crossbow devices, Rasor discloses a string carrier slidably coupled with a center rail and configured to selectively engage with a draw string to move the draw string between a released configuration and a drawn configuration (a bowstring release 86 slides upon a center rail (frame 34) engages a bowstring 66, between a release configuration (e.g., Fig. 2A) and a drawn configuration (Fig. 2B))(at least paragraphs [0048]-[0056]; note also Figs. 1 and 3). Therefore, 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 to form ‘841 with a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration and the drawn configuration for the reason that a skilled artisan would have been motivated by Rasor’s suggestions “to provide a crossbow having a bowstring retraction device which is capable of repeatedly retracting the bowstring of the crossbow into firing position, by overcoming the approximately 100-200 pounds of draw force exerted by the bowstring; to provide a bowstring retraction device for a crossbow wherein the bowstring retraction device need not be removed or uncoupled before firing an arrow from the crossbow; to provide such a bowstring retraction device which does not add excessive weight or bulk to the crossbow; and to provide such a bowstring retraction device which is relatively light in weight, highly compact, easy to operate, durable, and relatively inexpensive; to provide such a bowstring retraction device that can be used to rapidly engage the bowstring in preparation for pull-back to the drawn position, and which can be used to quickly retract the bowstring to its fully-drawn position, thereby reducing the time between firing a first arrow and firing a second arrow “([0011]-[0013], [0015] and [0016]).
Claim 3 recites similar limitations as claim 23 of the ‘841.
Claim 4 recites similar limitations as claim 24 of the ‘841.
Claims 6-8 recites similar limitations as claim 26-28, respectively, of the ‘841.
Claims 11-14 recites similar limitations as claims 29-32, respectively, of the ‘841.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 39 of ‘841 recites the limitations in the above claim 20, namely “A crossbow, comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis; a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a first cam rotatably coupled with the first flexible for rotation about a first axis, the first axis fixed relative to the first flexible limb; a second cam rotatably coupled with the second flexible limb for rotation about a second axis, the second axis fixed relative to the second flexible limb; a draw string coupled with the first cam and the second cam, the draw string configured to move between a released configuration and a drawn configuration; and an arrow rest including: a support member configured to engage with a projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail in three degrees of freedom; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string”, except “a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration and the drawn configuration”.
However, Rasor discloses a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration and the drawn configuration (a bowstring release 86 slides upon a center rail (frame 34) engages a bowstring 66, between a release configuration (e.g., Fig. 2A) and a drawn configuration (Fig. 2B))(at least paragraphs [0048]-[0056]; note also Figs. 1 and 3). Therefore, 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 to form ‘841 with a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration and the drawn configuration for similar reasons discussed above.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/972,461 (“ ‘461”) in view of Rasor et al US 2010/0170488 (“Rasor”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of ‘461 recites the limitations in the above claim 1, namely ”a crossbow, comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis; a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a first cam rotatably coupled with the first flexible limb for rotation about a first axis, the first axis fixed relative to the first flexible limb; a second cam rotatably coupled with the second flexible limb for rotation about a second axis, the second axis fixed relative to the second flexible limb; a draw string coupled with the first cam and the second cam, the draw string configured to move between a released configuration and a drawn configuration; a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration and the drawn configuration” except “an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of the center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string”.
However, Rasor discloses an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of a center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string (arrow rest 80 to support an arrow above frame 34; as the arrow engages rest 80 and bowstring 66)(Fig. 1 and [0054]). Therefore, 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 to form’ 461 with an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of the center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string for the reason that a skilled artisan would have been motivated in utilizing known means to support an arrow/bolt above the crossbow’s rail in a firm and steady/stable manner ready to be fired therefrom.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claim 20 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 17 of copending Application No. 18/972,461 (“ ‘461”) in view of Hunt US 2013/0269668 (“Hunt”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 17 of ‘461 recites the limitations in the above claim 20, namely “a crossbow, comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis; a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a first cam rotatably coupled with the first flexible for rotation about a first axis, the first axis fixed relative to the first flexible limb; a second cam rotatably coupled with the second flexible limb for rotation about a second axis, the second axis fixed relative to the second flexible limb; a draw string coupled with the first cam and the second cam, the draw string configured to move between a released configuration and a drawn configuration; a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration and the drawn configuration” except “and an arrow rest including: a support member configured to engage with a projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail in three degrees of freedom; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string.”.
However, in a similar field of archery devices, Hunt discloses an arrow rest including: a support member configured to engage with a projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail in three degrees of freedom; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string (rest 200 with supports 230A and 230B, to be adjust in a rotational direction (either around axis 232A and/or 232B) about an axis parallel with arrow; embodiment of Figs. 9-12 and paragraphs [0050]-[0055] in conjunction to at least Figs. 4 and 5 regarding the position of arrow 100 within the rest). Therefore, 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 to form ’461 with and an arrow rest including: a support member configured to engage with a projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail in three degrees of freedom; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string for the reason that a skilled artisan would have been motivated by Hunt's suggestions to provide a rest that configure to be adjust for purposes of holding an arrow ready to be fired in optimized force, manner (e.g., in [0012] "An adjustable stop permits the minimum separation between the arrow supports to be adjusted. The adjustable stop permits the user to adjust the holding force applied to the arrow in the shooting position".) Such properties would have been much desired within the ’461 to enhance the manner of supporting an arrow ready to be launched.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/972,159 (“ ‘159”) in view of Rasor et al US 2010/0170488 (“Rasor”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of ‘159 recites the limitations in the above claim 1, namely ”a crossbow, comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis; a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a first cam rotatably coupled with the first flexible limb for rotation about a first axis, the first axis fixed relative to the first flexible limb; a second cam rotatably coupled with the second flexible limb for rotation about a second axis, the second axis fixed relative to the second flexible limb; a draw string coupled with the first cam and the second cam, the draw string configured to move between a released configuration and a drawn configuration; a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration and the drawn configuration” except “an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of the center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string”.
However, Rasor discloses an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of a center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string (arrow rest 80 to support an arrow above frame 34; as the arrow engages rest 80 and bowstring 66)(Fig. 1 and [0054]). Therefore, 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 to form’ 159 with an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of the center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string for similar reasons discussed above.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claim 20 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 17 of copending Application No. 18/972,159 (“ ‘159”) in view of Hunt US 2013/0269668 (“Hunt”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 17 of ‘159 recites the limitations in the above claim 20, namely “a crossbow, comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis; a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a first cam rotatably coupled with the first flexible for rotation about a first axis, the first axis fixed relative to the first flexible limb; a second cam rotatably coupled with the second flexible limb for rotation about a second axis, the second axis fixed relative to the second flexible limb; a draw string coupled with the first cam and the second cam, the draw string configured to move between a released configuration and a drawn configuration; a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration and the drawn configuration” except “and an arrow rest including: a support member configured to engage with a projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail in three degrees of freedom; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string.”.
However, in a similar field of archery devices, Hunt discloses an arrow rest including: a support member configured to engage with a projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail in three degrees of freedom; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string (rest 200 with supports 230A and 230B, to be adjust in a rotational direction (either around axis 232A and/or 232B) about an axis parallel with arrow )(embodiment of Figs. 9-12 and paragraphs [0050]-[0055] in conjunction to at least Figs. 4 and 5 regarding the position of arrow 100 within the rest). Therefore, 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 to form ’159 with and an arrow rest including: a support member configured to engage with a projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail in three degrees of freedom; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string for similar reasons discussed above.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/972,187 (“ ‘187”) in view of Rasor et al US 2010/0170488 (“Rasor”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of ‘187 recites the limitations in the above claim 1, namely ”a crossbow, comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis; a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a first cam rotatably coupled with the first flexible limb for rotation about a first axis, the first axis fixed relative to the first flexible limb; a second cam rotatably coupled with the second flexible limb for rotation about a second axis, the second axis fixed relative to the second flexible limb; a draw string coupled with the first cam and the second cam, the draw string configured to move between a released configuration and a drawn configuration; a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration and the drawn configuration” except “an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of the center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string”.
However, Rasor discloses an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of a center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string (arrow rest 80 to support an arrow above frame 34; as the arrow engages rest 80 and bowstring 66)(Fig. 1 and [0054]). Therefore, 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 to form’ 187 with an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of the center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string for similar reasons discussed above.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claim 20 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 17 of copending Application No. 18/972,187 (“ ‘187”) in view of Hunt US 2013/0269668 (“Hunt”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 17 of ‘461 recites the limitations in the above claim 20, namely “a crossbow, comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis; a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a first cam rotatably coupled with the first flexible for rotation about a first axis, the first axis fixed relative to the first flexible limb; a second cam rotatably coupled with the second flexible limb for rotation about a second axis, the second axis fixed relative to the second flexible limb; a draw string coupled with the first cam and the second cam, the draw string configured to move between a released configuration and a drawn configuration; a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration and the drawn configuration” except “and an arrow rest including: a support member configured to engage with a projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail in three degrees of freedom; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string.”.
However, in a similar field of archery devices, Hunt discloses an arrow rest including: a support member configured to engage with a projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail in three degrees of freedom; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string (rest 200 with supports 230A and 230B, to be adjust in a rotational direction (either around axis 232A and/or 232B) about an axis parallel with arrow )(embodiment of Figs. 9-12 and paragraphs [0050]-[0055] in conjunction to at least Figs. 4 and 5 regarding the position of arrow 100 within the rest). Therefore, 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 to form ’187 with and an arrow rest including: a support member configured to engage with a projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail in three degrees of freedom; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string for similar reasons discussed above.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claim 1 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 17 of U.S. Patent No. 10,254,075 (“ ‘075”) in view of Rasor et al US 2010/0170488 (“Rasor”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 17 of ‘75 recites the limitations in the above claim 1, namely ”a crossbow, comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis; a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a first cam rotatably coupled with the first flexible limb for rotation about a first axis, the first axis fixed relative to the first flexible limb (equivalent to “a first string guide rigidly mounted to the first bow limb and rotatable around a first axis” of ‘075) ; a second cam rotatably coupled with the second flexible limb for rotation about a second axis, the second axis fixed relative to the second flexible limb (equivalent to “ a second string guide rigidly mounted to the second bow limb and rotatable around a second axis” of ‘075); a draw string coupled with the first cam and the second cam, the draw string configured to move between a released configuration and a drawn configuration; a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration and the drawn configuration” except “an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of the center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string”.
However, Rasor discloses an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of a center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string (arrow rest 80 to support an arrow above frame 34; as the arrow engages rest 80 and bowstring 66)(Fig. 1 and [0054]). Therefore, 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 to form’ 075 with an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of the center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string for similar reasons discussed above.
Claim 1 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 10,126,088 (“ ‘088”) in view of Rasor et al US 2010/0170488 (“Rasor”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 17 of ‘75 recites the limitations in the above claim 1, namely ”a crossbow, comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis; a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail; a first cam rotatably coupled with the first flexible limb for rotation about a first axis, the first axis fixed relative to the first flexible limb (equivalent to “a first string guide mounted to the first bow limb and rotatable around a first,” of ‘088) ; a second cam rotatably coupled with the second flexible limb for rotation about a second axis, the second axis fixed relative to the second flexible limb (equivalent to “ a second string guide mounted to the second bow limb and, rotatable around a second axis,” of ‘088); a draw string coupled with the first cam and the second cam, the draw string configured to move between a released configuration and a drawn configuration; a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration and the drawn configuration” except “an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of the center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string”.
However, Rasor discloses an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of a center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string (arrow rest 80 to support an arrow above frame 34; as the arrow engages rest 80 and bowstring 66)(Fig. 1 and [0054]). Therefore, 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 to form’ 075 with an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of the center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail; wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string for similar reasons discussed above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rasor et al US 2010/0170488 (“Rasor”).
As per claim 1, Rasor discloses a crossbow (crossbow 20)(Figs. 1-18A; paragraphs [0046]-[0087], comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis (frame 34)(Figs. 1-3; [0049]-[0050]); a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail (limb 50)(Figs. 1-2B; [0050]); a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail (limb 52)(Figs. 1-2B; [0050]); a first cam rotatably coupled with the first flexible limb for rotation about a first axis, the first axis fixed relative to the first flexible limb (cam 62)(Figs. 1-2B; [0051] and [0052]); a second cam rotatably coupled with the second flexible limb for rotation about a second axis, the second axis fixed relative to the second flexible limb (cam 64)(Figs. 1-2B; [0051] and [0052]); a draw string coupled with the first cam and the second cam (bowstring 66)(Fig. 1; [0052]), the draw string configured to move between a released configuration (Fig. 2A; [0056]) and a drawn configuration (Fig. 2B; [0056]); a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail (bowstring release 86 slides upon channel 87 of rail/frame 34)(Figs. 1 and 3; [0055]) and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration(Fig. 2A; [0056]) and the drawn configuration(Fig. 2B; [0056]); and an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of the center rail and configured to reposition the projectile relative to the center rail (arrow rest 80)(Fig. 1; [0054]); wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string (an arrow is supported by rest 80 and bowstring 66)([0054] in conjunction to Fig. 1).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2-5, and 8-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rasor as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Halamay US 5,261,383 (“Halamay”).
As per claim 2, Rasor is not specific regarding wherein the arrow rest includes: a support member configured to engage with the projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail.
However, in a field of archery devices utilizing an arrow rest, Halamay discloses an arrow rest includes: a support member configured to engage with a projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail (support members, such as sleeves 24-26-28, to engage arrow 14; Figs. 1 and 3, in conjunction to 2:38-48 and 3:3-19; supports 26 and 28 are adjustable relative to bow/handle 4 (i.e., a center rail) via screws 20; Fig. 3; 2:50-3:10 and 4:37-46; sleeve 24 is adjustable relative to bow/handle 4 (i.e., a center rail) via manipulation of yoke means 27; Fig. 3; 3:62-4:36). Therefore, 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 to form Rasor’s wherein the arrow rest includes: a support member configured to engage with the projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail for the reason that a skilled artisan would have been motivated by Halamay’s suggestions that such arrow rest adjustability is much desired to accommodate different arrows, suitable to a variety of archers, in 4:47+ (e.g., 5:68+” The arrangement described accommodates arrows of various diameters and enables an arrow to be easily inserted and securely retained by the device. The adjustable mounting feature of the bracket to the bow accommodates different arrow lengths and bow string draw distances to compensate for arrow overdraw, as is desireable for the safety of the archer. The adjustable mounting of the body to the bracket as described insures clearance between the arrow and the bow which varies for arrows of various diameters)
As per claim 3, with respect to wherein the support member includes a rotatable member configured to engage with the projectile, note Halamay’s Fig. 3 (3:11+) regarding rollers 30 (of support/sleeve 24) and rollers 44 and 46, of supports/sleeves 26 and 28, respectively, configure to engages arrow 14. Therefore, 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 to form Rasor’s wherein the support member includes a rotatable member configured to engage with the projectile for similar reasons discussed above with respect to claim 2.
As per claim 4, with respect to wherein the rotatable member is operatively coupled with a spring to bias the rotatable member toward the projectile axis, note Halamay’s Fig. 3 in conjunction to 3:42-61 regarding compression spring 52 biassing roller 44 and compression spring 56 biasing roller 46; note Fig. 3 and 4:3-23 regarding spring 64 biasing roller 30.
As per claim 5, with respect to wherein the rotatable member is configured to support the projectile, wherein the spring is compressed as the rotatable member supports the projectile, note Halamay’s Fig. 1 in conjunction to Fig. 3 as well as 4:24-56 as arrow 14 compressed as the rollers 30-34-36 are supporting arrow 14.
As per claim 8, with respect to wherein the rotatable member is a roller rotatable about a pin, note Halamay’s Fig. 3 (3:20+) roller 44 rotatable about axle 34 (construed as a pin); roller 46 rotate about axle/pin 36; and roller 30 rotates about yoke 27A/stud 27B (i.e., pin; see also 3:62+ regarding roller 30 means).
As per claim 9, with respect to wherein the roller is operatively coupled with a spring to bias the roller toward the projectile axis, note Halamay’s Fig. 3 in conjunction to 3:42-61 regarding compression spring 52 biassing roller 44 and compression spring 56 biasing roller 46; note Fig. 3 and 4:3-23 regarding spring 64 biasing roller 30.
As per claim 10, with respect to wherein the pin is received within a slot and configured to translate within the slot such that the roller is configured to translate away from the projectile axis responsive to a compression of the spring, note Halamay’s Fig. 3 (3:20+) regarding roller 44 rotatable about axle/pin 34 includes spring 54; roller 46 rotate about axle/pin 36 includes spring 56; and roller 30 rotates about yoke 27A/stud 27B includes spring 64. Note Figs. 3 and 4 as the pin (i.e., axles) are positioning within a slot (of respective sleeve 26 and 28; note Fig. 3 regarding sleeve 24 to include such slot for the yoke/stud).
As per claim 11, with respect to wherein the adjustment mechanism is configured to reposition the support member in at least one of a first direction, a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, or a rotational direction, the examiner construed the adjustment means of supports 26 and 28 that are adjustable relative to bow/handle 4 (i.e., a center rail) via screws 20; Fig. 3; 2:50-3:10 and 4:37-46; and sleeve 24 is adjustable relative to bow/handle 4 (i.e., a center rail) via manipulation of yoke means 27; Fig. 3; 3:62-4:36), as such “configure to be reposition in at least one of a first direction’ and/or a second direction”. Therefore, 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 to form Rasor’s wherein the adjustment mechanism is configured to reposition the support member in at least one of a first direction, a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, or a rotational direction for similar reasons discussed above with respect to claim 2.
As per claim 12, with respect to wherein the support member is a first support member configured to engage the projectile on a first side thereof, and wherein the arrow rest further includes a second support member configured to engage the projectile on a second side thereof opposite the first side, note Halamay Fig. 3 (in conjunction to Fig. 1 and 3:3-61; 4:24-36) regarding rollers 44 and 46, of supports/sleeves 26 and 28, respectively, configure to engages arrow 14 on opposite sides.
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rasor and Halamay as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Huang et al US 8,875,678 (“Huang”).
As per claim 6, Rasor - Halamay is not specific regarding wherein the support member includes a bearing disposed between the rotatable member and the spring, and wherein the bearing is configured to permit rotation of the rotatable member.
However, in a similar field of archery devices utilizing arrow rest, Huang discloses wherein a support member includes a bearing disposed between a rotatable member and a spring, and wherein the bearing is configured to permit rotation of the rotatable member (an inner ball bearings 34 is between a rotatable member (ball bearing 32) and a compression spring 36)(Figs. 2, 6 and 7; 3:16-32). Therefore, 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 to form Rasor- Halamay’s wherein the support member includes a bearing disposed between the rotatable member and the spring, and wherein the bearing is configured to permit rotation of the rotatable member for the reason that a skilled artisan would have been motivated in utilizing known mechanical arrangement that firmly supports an arrow yet reduces friction thereof, as suggested by Huang (e.g., 2:20+ ”to provide a tangent point arrow rest, which fully captures an arrow for both bows and crossbows; to provide a tangent point arrow rest, which supports the arrow shaft with ball bearings to provide point contact and reduce friction.”).
As per claim 7, with respect to wherein the support member includes a housing coupled with the center rail and the rotatable member, note Rasor’s Fig. 1 regarding the arrow rest 80 coupled to the center rail (frame 34); note Halamay’s Figs. 2 and 3 regarding any of rollers 30-44-46 coupled with housing thereof; with respect to wherein the spring and the bearing are at least partially disposed within the housing, note Huang’s Figs. 2, 6 and 7 (3:16-32); and wherein the rotatable member is configured to translate relative to the housing responsive to a compression of the spring, note Huang’s Figs. 2, 6, 7 and 8 in conjunction to at least 3:57+ as the compression of springs 36 while arrow 100 position within the arrow rest.
Claim(s) 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rasor and Halamay as applied to claims 11 and 12 above, and further in view of Hunt US 2013/0269668 (“Hunt”).
As per claim 13, Rasor- Halamay is not specific regarding wherein the adjustment mechanism is configured to reposition the first support member and the second support member in the second direction perpendicular to the projectile axis.
However, in a similar field of archery devices utilizing arrow rest, Hunt discloses wherein an adjustment mechanism is configured to reposition a first support member and a second support member in a second direction perpendicular to a projectile axis (rest 200 with supports 230A and 230B, to be adjust in a rotational direction (either around axis 232A and/or 232B) about an axis parallel with arrow; embodiment of Figs. 9-12 and paragraphs [0050]-[0055] in conjunction to at least Figs. 4 and 5 regarding the position of arrow 100 within the rest; note Figs. 9, 11 and 12 in conjunction to [0052]-[0055] as the position of supports 230A-230B in such relation within arrow rest 200 while arrow 100 positioned within the rest). Therefore, 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 to form Rasor- Halamay wherein the adjustment mechanism is configured to reposition the first support member and the second support member in the second direction perpendicular to the projectile axis for the reason that a skilled artisan would have been motivated by Hunt's suggestions to provide a rest that configure to be adjust for purposes of holding an arrow ready to be fired in optimized force, manner (e.g., in [0012] "An adjustable stop permits the minimum separation between the arrow supports to be adjusted. The adjustable stop permits the user to adjust the holding force applied to the arrow in the shooting position".) Such properties would have been much desired within the arrow rest of Rasor- Halamay to enhance the manner of supporting an arrow ready to be launched.
As per claim 14, with respect to wherein the adjustment mechanism is configured to reposition the first support member and the second support member between a first position and a second position, wherein a distance in the second direction between the first support member and the second support member is less in the second position than in the first position such that, when the first support member and the second support member are in the first position, a front end of the projectile is vertically lower than when the first support member and the second support member are in the second position, the adjustment of a first support (e.g., support 230A) and a second support (support 230B) via manipulation of adjustment screw (e.g., Figs. 9-12) to rotate the supports in a desired direction; (also [0050]-[0055]) as taught and suggested by Hunt, are construed as such. Therefore, 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 to form Rasor-Halamay’s wherein the adjustment mechanism is configured to reposition the first support member and the second support member between a first position and a second position, wherein a distance in the second direction between the first support member and the second support member is less in the second position than in the first position such that, when the first support member and the second support member are in the first position, a front end of the projectile is vertically lower than when the first support member and the second support member are in the second position for similar reasons discussed above with respect to claim 13.
As per claim 15, Rasor - Halamay is not specific regarding wherein the adjustment mechanism is configured to reposition the support member in the rotational direction about an axis parallel with the projectile axis.
However, Hunt discloses wherein an adjustment mechanism is configured to reposition a support member in a rotational direction about an axis parallel with a projectile axis (rest 200 with supports 230A and 230B, to be adjust in a rotational direction (either around axis 232A and/or 232B) about an axis parallel with arrow; embodiment of Figs. 9-12 and paragraphs [0050]-[0055] in conjunction to at least Figs. 4 and 5 regarding the position of arrow 100 within the rest; note Figs. 9, 11 and 12 in conjunction to [0052]-[0055] as the position of supports 230A-230B in such relation within arrow rest 200 while arrow 100 positioned within the rest). Therefore, 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 to form Rasor – Halamay’s wherein the adjustment mechanism is configured to reposition the support member in the rotational direction about an axis parallel with the projectile axis for similar reasons discussed above with respect to claim 13.
Claim(s) 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rasor as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yehle US 7,770,567 (“Yehle”).
As per claim 16, Rasor is not specific regarding wherein the string carrier includes a recess configured to receive at least a portion of the projectile when the projectile is engaged with the draw string and when the string carrier is engaged with the draw string.
However, in a similar filed of crossbow devices, Yehle discloses wherein a string carrier includes a recess configured to receive at least a portion of a projectile when the projectile is engaged with a draw string and when the string carrier is engaged with the draw string (a string carrier, construed as a trigger housing 10, includes a recess to receive a portion of a bolt/projectile 400, while it engages with a bowstring 200; the bowstring 200 engages with the string carrier 10)(Figs. 3 and 4; 4:19-55). Therefore, 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 to form Rasor’s wherein the string carrier includes a recess configured to receive at least a portion of the projectile when the projectile is engaged with the draw string and when the string carrier is engaged with the draw string for the reason that a skilled artisan would have been motivated in use of known technique to improve similar device (i.e., a string carrier) to accommodate a projectile and a bowstring in a firm and safe manner to support the projectile within the archery device (i.e., crossbow) and allow safe and secure travel as the projectile been shoot.
As per claim 17, with respect to wherein the string carrier includes a rotatable member and a spring operatively coupled with the rotatable member to bias the rotatable member toward the projectile axis, note Yehle’s Figs. 3 and 4 (3:55-4:55) regarding a rotatable lever/means 40 with bias means 40a to be bias towards arrow 400 (note 2:38-41, as such bias means includes a spring). Therefore, 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 to form Rasor’s wherein the string carrier includes a rotatable member and a spring operatively coupled with the rotatable member to bias the rotatable member toward the projectile axis for the reason that a skilled artisan would have been motivated by Yehle’s suggestions to provide such rotatable means to firmly hold a projectile prior to it been shoot as well as provide safety means (e.g., 4:5+).
As per claim 18, Rasor is not specific wherein the string carrier includes a first finger and a second finger configured to engaged with the draw string, and wherein the projectile is configured to engage with the draw string between the first finger and the second finger.
However, Yehle discloses wherein a string carrier includes a first finger and a second finger configured to engaged with the draw string (construed as caliper 62 of string carrier, trigger housing 10)(see at least Fig. 7 and 2:47-3:22 regarding the first and second fingers), and wherein a projectile is configured to engage with a draw string between the first finger and the second finger (note in particular Figs. 3 and 4, (4:19+) as caliper 62 engages bolt 400 while the bolt engages bowstring 200). Therefore, 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 to form Rasor’s wherein the string carrier includes a first finger and a second finger configured to engaged with the draw string, and wherein the projectile is configured to engage with the draw string between the first finger and the second finger for similar reasons discussed above with respect to claim 16.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rasor in view of Yehle.
As per claim 19, Rasor discloses a crossbow (crossbow 20)(Figs. 1-18A; paragraphs [0046]-[0087], comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis (frame 34)(Figs. 1-3; [0049]-[0050]); a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail (limb 50)(Figs. 1-2B; [0050]); a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail (limbs 52)(Figs. 1-2B; [0050]); a first cam rotatably coupled with the first flexible limb for rotation about a first axis, the first axis fixed relative to the first flexible limb (cam 62)(Figs. 1-2B; [0051] and [0052]); a second cam rotatably coupled with the second flexible limb for rotation about a second axis, the second axis fixed relative to the second flexible limb (cam 64)(Figs. 1-2B; [0051] and [0052]); a draw string coupled with the first cam and the second cam (bowstring 66)(Fig. 1; [0052]), the draw string configured to move between a released configuration (Fig. 2A; [0056]) and a drawn configuration (Fig. 2B; [0056]); a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail (bowstring release 86 slides upon channel 87 of rail/frame 34)(Figs. 1 and 3; [0055]) and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration(Fig. 2A; [0056]) and the drawn configuration(Fig. 2B; [0056]); and an arrow rest configured to engage with a projectile to suspend the projectile over at least a portion of the center rail along the projectile axis (arrow rest 80)(Fig. 1; [0054]); wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string (an arrow is supported by rest 80 and bowstring 66)([0054] in conjunction to Fig. 1).
Rasor is not specific regarding the string carrier including a recess configured to receive at least a portion of a projectile when the projectile is engaged with the draw string and when the string carrier is engaged with the draw string.
However, Yehle discloses wherein a string carrier includes a recess configured to receive at least a portion of a projectile when the projectile is engaged with a draw string and when the string carrier is engaged with the draw string (a string carrier, construed as trigger housing 10, includes a recess to receive a portion of a bolt/projectile 400, while it engages with a bowstring 200; the bowstring 200 engages with the string carrier 10)(Figs. 3 and 4; 4:19-55). Therefore, 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 to form Rasor’s wherein the string carrier includes a recess configured to receive at least a portion of the projectile when the projectile is engaged with the draw string and when the string carrier is engaged with the draw string for the reason that a skilled artisan would have been motivated in use of known technique to improve similar device (i.e., a string carrier) to accommodate the projectile and the bowstring in a firm and safe manner to support the projectile within the archery device (i.e., crossbow) and allow safe and secure travel as the projectile been shoot.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rasor in view of Hunt.
As per claim 20, Rasor discloses a crossbow (crossbow 20)(Figs. 1-18A; paragraphs [0046]-[0087], comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis (frame 34)(Figs. 1-3; [0049]-[0050]); a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail (limb 50)(Figs. 1-2B; [0050]); a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail (limbs 52)(Figs. 1-2B; [0050]); a first cam rotatably coupled with the first flexible limb for rotation about a first axis, the first axis fixed relative to the first flexible limb (cam 62)(Figs. 1-2B; [0051] and [0052]); a second cam rotatably coupled with the second flexible limb for rotation about a second axis, the second axis fixed relative to the second flexible limb (cam 64)(Figs. 1-2B; [0051] and [0052]); a draw string coupled with the first cam and the second cam (bowstring 66)(Fig. 1; [0052]), the draw string configured to move between a released configuration (Fig. 2A; [0056]) and a drawn configuration (Fig. 2B; [0056]); a string carrier slidably coupled with the center rail (bowstring release 86 slides upon channel 87 of rail/frame 34)(Figs. 1 and 3; [0055]) and configured to selectively engage with the draw string to move the draw string between the released configuration(Fig. 2A; [0056]) and the drawn configuration(Fig. 2B; [0056]); and an arrow rest (arrow rest 80)(Fig. 1; [0054]); wherein, during operation of the crossbow, the projectile engages the crossbow at two points of contact including the arrow rest and the draw string (an arrow is supported by rest 80 and bowstring 66)([0054] in conjunction to Fig. 1).
Rasor is not specific regarding the arrow rest including: a support member configured to engage with a projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail in three degrees of freedom.
However, Hunt discloses arrow rest including: a support member configured to engage with a projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail in three degrees of freedom (rest 200 with supports 230A and 230B, to be adjust in a rotational direction (either around axis 232A and/or 232B) about an axis parallel with arrow; embodiment of Figs. 9-12 and paragraphs [0050]-[0055] in conjunction to at least Figs. 4 and 5 regarding the position of arrow 100 within the rest; note Figs. 9, 11 and 12 in conjunction to [0052]-[0055] as the position of supports 230A-230B in such relation within arrow rest 200 while arrow 100 positioned within the rest; note the adjustment of a first support (e.g., support 230A) and a second support (support 230B) via manipulation of adjustment screw (e.g., Figs. 9-12) to rotate the supports in a desired direction). Therefore, 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 to form Rasor’s arrow rest including: a support member configured to engage with a projectile; and an adjustment mechanism configured to reposition the support member relative to the center rail in three degrees of freedom for the reason that a skilled artisan would have been motivated by Hunt's suggestions to provide a rest that configure to be adjust for purposes of holding an arrow ready to be fired in optimized force, manner (e.g., in [0012] "An adjustable stop permits the minimum separation between the arrow supports to be adjusted. The adjustable stop permits the user to adjust the holding force applied to the arrow in the shooting position".) Such properties would have been much desired within the arrow rest of Rasor to enhance the manner of supporting an arrow ready to be launched.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMIR ARIE KLAYMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7131. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday; 7:00 AM-4:30 PM.
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, Nicholas Weiss can be reached at 571-270-1775. 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.
/A.A.K/Examiner, Art Unit 3711 9/24/2026
/JOHN E SIMMS JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Prosecution Insights