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 under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “a stop” (e.g., claim 1), “first and second stops” (claim 11), “stop’s ridges” (claim 12) and “bracket’s extensions portion” (claim 20) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because Figs. 17A, 17B, 18A, and 18B are unclear “line drawings” that the structure is unclear and “a relevant indicia” to a specific part is not marked clearly. 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, 4-5 and 7 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5-6 and 8 of copending Application No. 18/972,248 (“ ‘248”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1, of ‘248 recites the above limitations of claim 1, namely “ a crossbow comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis, a first side, and a second side opposite the first side; 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; an upper cable anchor coupled to the center rail and positioned to the first side of the center rail, a lower cable anchor coupled the center rail and positioned to the first side of the center rail, the lower cable anchor positioned vertically beneath the upper cable anchor (equivalent to “first and second cable anchors” of ‘248); and a stop coupled to the center rail, the stop positioned adjacent the upper cable anchor and the lower cable anchor, the stop configured to contact the draw string with the draw string in the released configuration (equivalent to “first draw stop and second draw stop” of the ‘248). Every limitations in the above claim 1 is recited in claim 1 of ‘248, and thus claim 1 anticipated by claim 1 of ‘248.
Claim 4 recite similar limitations as claim 5 of the ‘248.
Claim 5 recite similar limitations as claim 6 of the ‘248.
Claim 7 recite similar limitations as claim 8 of the ‘248.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 1 and 5 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 4 of U.S. Patent No. 10,254,073 (“ ‘073”) in view of Islas US 2011/0308508 (“Islas”) and 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 ‘073 recites the above limitations of claim 1, namely “ a crossbow comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis, a first side, and a second side opposite the first side; 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; an upper cable anchor coupled to the center rail and positioned to the first side of the center rail, a lower cable anchor coupled the center rail and positioned to the first side of the center rail, the lower cable anchor positioned vertically beneath the upper cable anchor (equivalent to the “static attachment points” of the ‘073)” except “and a stop coupled to the center rail, the stop positioned adjacent the upper cable anchor and the lower cable anchor, the stop configured to contact the draw string with the draw string in the released configuration”.
However, Islas discloses a stop coupled to the center rail, the stop positioned adjacent the upper cable anchor and the lower cable anchor (pylons 32 attached to stock/beam 12 (Fig. 1); the portions of the pylons, closer to bowstring 22, construed as the “a stop”(Fig. 1; [0013]). Rasor discloses a crossbow 20, wherein a bowstring 66 contacts draw stop/s (stoppers 72 and 74) in the release configuration (Figs. 1 and 2A; [0053]). 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 ‘073 with a stop coupled to the center rail, the stop positioned adjacent the upper cable anchor and the lower cable anchor for the reason that a skilled artisan would have been motivated in utilizing a known crossbow arrangement of cams-to-cables configure to transfer energy to fire a projectile/arrow therefrom, and to ensure that a bowstring is in an optimum location in a release configuration (e.g., to reduce vibration thereof as the bowstring contacts stop means in the releases configuration).
Claim 5 recite similar limitations as claim 4 of the ‘ 073 (“a bracket” of above claim 5 is equivalent to “a power cable attachment” of the ‘073).
Claims 1-3 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3 of U.S. Patent No. 11,085,728 (“ ‘728”) in view of Islas US 2011/0308508 (“Islas”) and 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 ‘728 recites the above limitations of claim 1, namely “ a crossbow comprising: a center rail defining a projectile axis, a first side, and a second side opposite the first side; 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; an upper cable anchor coupled to the center rail and positioned to the first side of the center rail, a lower cable anchor coupled the center rail and positioned to the first side of the center rail, the lower cable anchor positioned vertically beneath the upper cable anchor (equivalent to the “a first pair of upper and lower attachment points” and “ a second pair of upper and lower attachment points” of the ‘728)” except “ and a stop coupled to the center rail, the stop positioned adjacent the upper cable anchor and the lower cable anchor, the stop configured to contact the draw string with the draw string in the released configuration”.
However, Islas discloses a stop coupled to the center rail, the stop positioned adjacent the upper cable anchor and the lower cable anchor (pylons 32 attached to stock/beam 12 (Fig. 1); the portions of the pylons, closer to bowstring 22, construed as the “a stop”(Fig. 1; [0013]). Rasor discloses a crossbow 20, wherein a bowstring 66 contacts draw stop/s (stoppers 72 and 74) in the release configuration (Figs. 1 and 2A; [0053]). 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 ‘728 with a stop coupled to the center rail, the stop positioned adjacent the upper cable anchor and the lower cable anchor for similar reasons discussed above.
Claims 2-3 recite similar limitations as respective claims2-3 of the ‘728.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 16, 19 and 20 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.
With respect to claim 16, further clarification is required what does applicant consider “plurality of ridges” of the stop.
With respect to claim 19, further clarification is required what does applicant consider “ a bracket’s extensions portion”.
With respect to claim 20, the claim is rejected based upon its dependency to claim 19.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-3 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Islas US 2011/0308508 (“Islas”) in view of Rasor et al US 2010/0170488 (“Rasor”).
As per claim 1, Islas discloses a crossbow (crossbow 10)(Figs. 1-4; paragraphs [0006] and [0011]-[0014]) comprising:
a center rail defining a projectile axis, a first side, and a second side opposite the first side (stock/beam 12)(Fig. 1; [0011]); a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail (a first limb 16 coupled to stock 12)(Fig. 1; [0011]); a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail (a second limb 16 coupled to stock 12)(Fig. 1; [0011]); 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 first cam 20 coupled to the first limb 16)(Fig. 1; [0011]); 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 second cam 20 coupled to the second limb 16)(Fig. 1; [0011]); 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 (draw string 22 coupled with the first and second cams 20 to move as such)(Fig. 1 in conjunction to [0006], and [0013]); an upper cable anchor coupled to the center rail and positioned to the first side of the center rail, a lower cable anchor coupled the center rail and positioned to the first side of the center rail, the lower cable anchor positioned vertically beneath the upper cable anchor (construed as pylons 32 coupled to stock 12 to anchor cables 26)(Fig. 1; [0013]); and a stop coupled to the center rail, the stop positioned adjacent the upper cable anchor and the lower cable anchor (construed as the pylons’ area closer to drawstring 22, as marked hereinafter in conjunction to Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
676
701
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Islas is not specific regarding the stop configured to contact the draw string with the draw string in the released configuration.
However, in the same field of crossbows, Rasor discloses a bowstring 66 contacts draw stops (stoppers 72 and 74) in the release configuration (Figs. 1 and 2A; [0053]). 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 Islas’ stop configured to contact the draw string with the draw string in the released configuration for the reason that a skilled artisan would have been motivated in utilizing a known arrangement to ensure the bowstring is in the optimum location in the release configuration (e.g., to reduce vibration thereof as the bowstring contacts stop means in the releases configuration). The proposed modification has a reasonable expectation of success as the combination will not frustrate the intended purpose of Islas to ensure the bowstring is in the optimum position in the released configuration.
As per claim 2, with respect to further comprising: an upper power cable engaged with the upper cable anchor; and a lower power cable engaged with the lower cable anchor, note Islas’ Fig. 1 regarding upper and lower cables 26 engages with upper and lower anchors of respective pylon 32.
As per claim 3, with respect to wherein: the upper power cable is coupled to a first side of the first cam and extends from the first cam to the center rail, the upper power cable including an end portion engaged with the upper cable anchor; and the lower power cable is coupled to a second side of the first cam and extends from the first cam to the center rail, the second side opposite the first side, the lower power cable including an end portion engaged with the lower cable anchor, note Islas’ Fig. 1 regarding upper and lower cables 26 engages with upper and lower anchors of respective pylon 32 coupled to a first and second side of center rail 12; note Figs. 2 and 3, in conjunction to [0013] as each power cable 26 is attached to a respective cam 20 (in particular in Fig. 2).
As per claim 15, with respect to wherein the draw string extends parallel to the stop in the released configuration, note Islas’ Fig. 1 regarding the drawstring 22 in relation to the pylons 32; note the examiner’s markings above with respect to claim 1, as the edge, peripheral area, of the pylons (closer to bowstring 22) is such a stop.
As per claim 16, with respect to wherein the stop comprises a plurality of ridges, to the best of his understanding the examiner construed Rasor’s stopers 72/71 as having “plurality of ridges” in at least Fig. 1. 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 Islas’1wherein the stop comprises a plurality of ridges for similar reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Claim(s) 4-7, 11-14 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Islas and Rasor as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of McPherson US 2014/0261357 (“McPherson”) .
As per claim 4, with respect to further comprising an attachment means coupled to the center rail, the upper cable anchor and the lower cable anchor coupled to the attachment means , wherein the stop is coupled to the attachment means vertically between the lower cable anchor and the upper cable anchor, note Islas’ Fig. 1 regarding upper and lower cables 26 engages with upper and lower anchors of respective pylon 32 (i.e., attachment means); note the examiner’s markings above regarding “the stop” as area of pylons 32 the closest to bowstring 22.
Islas is not specific regarding the attachment means is a bracket coupled to the center rail.
However, McPherson discloses a bracket coupled to a center rail (cable positioner 48 of cables 18-19, coupled to stock/rail 40)(Figs. 1-4; [0026]-[0032]). 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 Islas’ attachment means as a bracket coupled to the center rail for the reason that a skilled artisan would have been motivated in using a known mechanical arrangement to engages the power cables while the mechanical arrangement coupled to the crossbow’s rail. Islas discloses two separates pylons attached to the crossbow’s rail to engages with the power cables, whereas McPherson teaches a single bracket coupled with the rail while engaging the power cables, and utilizing a single bracket with Islas would have been obvious as such amount to merely using “a single piece” (e.g., a single bracket) instead of “separate pieces” (e.g., pylons) to perform the same, as means configure to engages power cable while such means are attached to a crossbow’s rail. To that end, it is noted that it has been held that where the only difference between a prior art product and a claimed product is the construction of the claimed product, the Federal Circuit have held “that the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice” In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965). The proposed modification has a reasonable expectation of success as the combination will not frustrate the intended purpose of Islas to include power cables engagement means coupled to the crossbow’s rail.
As per claim 5, with respect to further comprising an attachment means coupled to the center rail, the upper cable anchor and the lower cable anchor coupled to the attachment means, note Islas’ Fig. 1 regarding upper and lower cables 26 engages with upper and lower anchors of respective pylon 32 (i.e., attachment means).
Islas is not specific regarding the attachment means is a bracket coupled to the center rail and wherein the bracket straddles the center rail and the projectile axis.
However, McPherson discloses a bracket coupled to a center rail and wherein the bracket straddles the center rail and the projectile axis (cable positioner 48 of cables 18-19, coupled to stock/rail 40)(Figs. 1-4; [0026]-[0032]). 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 Islas’ attachment means as a bracket coupled to the center rail and wherein the bracket straddles the center rail and the projectile axis for similar reasons discussed above with respect to claim 4.
As per claim 6, with respect to wherein the stop is coupled to the bracket vertically between the lower cable anchor and the upper cable anchor, note the examiner’s markings above regarding “the stop” as area of pylons 32 the closest to bowstring 22 (as such “location/stop” between the upper and lower cable anchors of pylons-to-power cables). Within the Modified Islas by at least the teachings of McPherson such attachment means would have been a bracket coupled to the center rail, and obvious to incorporate within for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 4.
As per claim 7, with respect to further comprising: an upper power cable engaged with the upper cable anchor and coupled to the first cam; and a lower power cable engaged with the lower cable anchor and coupled to the second cam, note Islas’ Fig. 1 regarding upper and lower cables 26 engages with upper and lower anchors of respective pylon 32 coupled to a first and second side of center rail 12; note Figs. 2 and 3, in conjunction to [0013] as each power cable is attached to respective cam 20 (in particular in Fig. 2).
As per claim 11, with respect to wherein the stop is a first stop, the upper cable anchor is a first upper cable anchor, and the lower cable anchor is a first lower cable anchor, the crossbow further comprising: a second stop coupled to the attachment means and positioned to the second side of the center rail, note Islas’ Fig. 1 regarding upper and lower cables 26 engages with upper and lower anchors of respective pylon 32 (i.e., attachment means); note the examiner’s markings above regarding “the stop” as area of pylons 32 the closest to bowstring 22 (as such “location/stop” between the upper and lower cable anchors of pylons-to-power cables; thus the “right area of the stop/pylon” construed as “a first stop” and the “left area” construed as “a second stop”); a second upper cable anchor coupled to attachment means and positioned to the second side of the center rail (a second upper cable 26 attached to pylon/s 32 on a second side of the rail/stock 12)(Fig. 1, of Islas); and a second lower cable anchor coupled to attachment means and positioned to the second side of the center rail (a second lower cable 26 attached to a respective pylon 32 on a second side)(Fig. 1 of Islas); wherein the second stop is positioned adjacent the second upper cable anchor and the lower cable anchor (note Fig. 1 of Islas in conjunction to the examiner’s markings with respect to claim 1, as the position of the stops as such). With respect to the attachment means the bracket with the first and second stop and wherein the second stop is configured to contact the draw string with the draw string in the released configuration, note McPherson’s Figs. 1-3 regarding attachment means a bracket (positioner 48) and Rasor’s Figs. 1 and 2A; [0053] (regarding stoppers 72 and 74). 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 Islas’ attachment means the bracket with the first and second stop and wherein the second stop is configured to contact the draw string with the draw string in the released configuration for similar reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1 (regarding the stop-to-drawstring) and claim 5 (regarding attachment means as a bracket).
As per claim 12, with respect to further comprising: a first upper power cable coupled to the first cam and engaged with the first upper cable anchor; a first lower power cable coupled to the first cam and engaged with the first lower cable anchor; a second upper power cable coupled to the second cam and engaged with the second upper cable anchor; and a second lower power cable coupled to the second cam and engaged with the second lower cable anchor, note Islas’ Figs. 1-3 ([0011]-[0013]) regarding power cables 26 (i.e., upper and lower power cables on each side of stock/rail 12) engages with respective cams 20 having power cable cams 28a/28b (note in particular Figs. 2 and 3; as the power cables 26-to-cams 28a/28b); note Fig. 1 as each respective cable 26 coupled with a respective anchor (of pylons 32).
As per claim 13, with respect to wherein the first stop is positioned between the first upper power cable and the first lower power cable and the second stop is between the second upper power cable and the second lower power cable, note the examiner’s markings above regarding “the stop” as area of pylons 32 the closest to bowstring 22 (as such “location/stop” between the upper and lower cable anchors of pylons-to-power cables; thus the “right area of the stop/pylon” construed as “a first stop” and the “left area” construed as “a second stop”; the stops are position between the upper cable 26 and the lower cable 26 in Figs. 1 and 3.
As per claim 14, with respect to wherein the draw string is coupled to the first cam, extends from the first cam to the second cam (i) between the first upper power cable and the first lower power cable, (ii) across the projectile axis, and (iii) between the second upper power cable and the second lower power cable, and is coupled to the second cam, note Islas’ Figs. 1 and 3, as drawstring 22 coupled to cams 20 (bowstring cams 24); a cross from a projectile axis (of beam/stock 12) and between the cables 26.
As per claim 17, with respect to further comprising an attachment means coupled to the center rail, the upper cable anchor and the lower cable anchor coupled to the attachment means, note Islas’ Fig. 1 regarding upper and lower cables 26 engages with upper and lower anchors of respective pylon 32 (i.e., attachment means).
Islas is not specific regarding the attachment means is a bracket coupled to the center rail and the bracket further comprising: a first side coupled to the center rail and extending away from the projectile axis; a second side coupled to the center rail and extending away from the projectile axis; and a third side extending between the first side and the second side; wherein the stop is coupled to the first side and extends towards the second side. However, McPherson discloses a bracket coupled to a center rail (cable positioner 48 of cables 18-19, coupled to stock/rail 40) and the bracket further comprising: a first side coupled to the center rail and extending away from the projectile axis; a second side coupled to the center rail and extending away from the projectile axis; and a third side extending between the first side and the second side; wherein the stop is coupled to the first side and extends towards the second side (Figs. 1-4; [0026]-[0032]). 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 Islas’ attachment means as a bracket coupled to the center rail and the bracket further comprising: a first side coupled to the center rail and extending away from the projectile axis; a second side coupled to the center rail and extending away from the projectile axis; and a third side extending between the first side and the second side; wherein the stop is coupled to the first side and extends towards the second side for similar reasons discussed above with respect to claim 4.
Claim(s) 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Islas, Rasor and McPherson as applied to claims 7 above, and further in view of McPherson US 2015/0136105 (“McPherson I”).
As per claim 8, with respect to wherein the upper power cable is coupled to an upper attachment means on a first side of the first cam and the lower power cable is coupled to lower attachment means on a second side of the first cam, the first side opposite the second side, note Islas’ Figs. 2 and 3 in conjunction to [0013] as a respective power cable 26 (i.e., an upper power cable 26 and a lower power cable 26 attached to respective power cam 28a /28b).
Islas is not specific as such upper attachment means is an upper pivot post and lower attachment means is a lower pivot post. However, the use of attachment means of power cables as pivot post/s, is well known as taught by McPherson I in the embodiment of Figs. 16-18 ([0089]-[0093]; note in particular Fig. 18 as power cables 14-15 attached thereto cam via a pivot post). 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 Islas’ upper attachment means is an upper pivot post and lower attachment means is a lower pivot post for the reason that a skilled artisan would have been motivated in utilizing known attachment means in the form of a pivot post to firmly and securely attached the power cables to its respective power cam. The proposed modification has a reasonable expectation of success as the combination will not frustrate the intended purpose of Islas to attach a power cable to a respective power cam via any known attachment means.
As per claim 9, with respect to wherein the first cam comprises: an upper power cable attachment extending from a first side of the first cam; an upper “an end attachment” extending from the first side of the first cam; a lower power cable attachment extending from a second side of the second cam, the second side opposite the first side; and a lower “an end attachment” extending from the second side of the second cam; wherein the upper power cable extends from the upper cable anchor to the upper “an end attachment”, and from the “an end attachment” to the upper power cable attachment; and wherein the lower power cable extends from the lower cable anchor to the lower “an end attachment”, and from the lower “an end attachment” to the lower power cable attachment, note Islas’ Fig. 2 regarding each cam’s “power cable attachment” and “an end attachment”
PNG
media_image2.png
640
859
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Note Figs. 1 and 3 in conjunction to [0013], regarding the upper and lower power cable 26 attached to a respective power cams 28a and 28b (the above markings related to cam 28a, which is identical to cam 28b; thus, the opposite side includes the same attachment arrangement between the power cable/s and the power cam).
Islas is not specific regarding the upper power cable “end attachment” is an upper pivot, and the power cable lower “end attachment” is a lower pivot.
However, the use of pivot means for attaching power cables thereof is well known as taught by McPherson I embodiment of Figs. 16-18 ([0089]-[0093]; note in particular Fig. 18 as power cables 14-15 attached thereto cam via a pivot post). 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 Islas’ upper power cable “end attachment” is an upper pivot and power cable lower “end attachment” is a lower pivot for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 8.
As per claim 10, with respect to wherein the first cam further comprises: a draw string journal configured to receive the draw string; wherein the draw string is received within the draw string journal and extends between the upper power cable and the lower power cable, note Islas’ Figs. 3 and 4 ([0013]) regarding bowstring 22 within journal 24; note Figs. 1 and 3 as the bowstring 22 to be positioned between the upper and lower power cable 26.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Islas in view of McPherson and Rasor.
As per claim 18, Islas discloses a crossbow (crossbow 10)(Figs. 1-4; paragraphs [0006] and [0011]-[0014]) comprising:
a center rail defining a projectile axis, (stock/beam 12)(Fig. 1; [0011]); a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail (a first limb 16 coupled to stock 12)(Fig. 1; [0011]); a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail (a second limb 16 coupled to stock 12)(Fig. 1; [0011]); 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 first cam 20 coupled to the first limb 16)(Fig. 1; [0011]); 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 second cam 20 coupled to the second limb 16)(Fig. 1; [0011]); 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 (draw string 22 coupled with the first and second cams 20 to move as such)(Fig. 1 in conjunction to [0006], and [0013]); an upper cable anchor coupled to a first end attachment means, a lower cable anchor coupled to the first end of the attachment means, the lower cable anchor positioned vertically below the upper cable anchor (construed as pylons 32 coupled to stock 12 to anchor cables 26)(Fig. 1; [0013]); an upper power cable coupled to a first side of the first cam and engaged with the upper cable anchor (an upper power cable 26 attached with respective cam 20/power cable cams 28a/28b; and attached to a respective anchor, i.e., pylons 32 upon the rail)(Figs. 1-3; [0011]-[0013]); a lower power cable coupled to a second side of the first cam, the second side opposite the first side, the lower power cable engaged with the lower cable anchor (a lower power cable 26 attached with respective cam 20/power cable cams 28a/28b; and attached to a respective anchor, i.e., pylons 32 upon the rail)(Figs. 1-3; [0011]-[0013]); and a stop coupled with the attachment means between the upper cable anchor and the lower cable anchor (construed as the pylons’ area closer to drawstring 22, as marked above with respect to claim 1, in conjunction to Fig. 1); wherein the draw string extends between the upper power cable and the lower power cable (Figs. 1 and 3).
Islas is not specific regarding the attachment means is a bracket coupled with the center rail.
Islas is not specific regarding wherein the draw string is configured to contact the stop with the draw string in the released configuration.
With respect to the bracket means, McPherson discloses a bracket coupled to a center rail (cable positioner 48 of cables 18-19, coupled to stock/rail 40). 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 Islas’ attachment means as a bracket for similar reasons discussed above with respect to claim 4. Within the modified Islas by the teachings of McPherson the upper cable anchor (as taught by Islas ,e.g., Fig. 1) coupled to the first end of the bracket (as taught by McPherson; e.g., Figs. 1 and 2) ;the lower cable anchor (as taught by Islas) coupled to the first end of the bracket (as taught by McPherson); and the stop (as marked above with respect to claim 1, in conjunction to Islas’ Fig. 1) coupled with the bracket (as taught by McPherson) between the upper cable anchor and the lower cable anchor (as taught by Islas).
With respect to the drawstring-to-stop, Rasor discloses a bowstring 66 contacts draw stops (stoppers 72 and 74) in the release configuration (Figs. 1 and 2A; [0053]). 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 Islas’ wherein the draw string is configured to contact the stop with the draw string in the released configuration for similar reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Islas in view of McPherson.
As per claim 19, Islas discloses a crossbow (crossbow 10)(Figs. 1-4; paragraphs [0006] and [0011]-[0014]) comprising:
a center rail defining a projectile axis, (stock/beam 12)(Fig. 1; [0011]); a first flexible limb coupled with the center rail (a first limb 16 coupled to stock 12)(Fig. 1; [0011]); a second flexible limb coupled with the center rail (a second limb 16 coupled to stock 12)(Fig. 1; [0011]); 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 first cam 20 coupled to the first limb 16)(Fig. 1; [0011]); 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 second cam 20 coupled to the second limb 16)(Fig. 1; [0011]); 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 (draw string 22 coupled with the first and second cams 20 to move as such)(Fig. 1 in conjunction to [0006], and [0013]); an upper cable anchor coupled to an upper side attachment means, (construed as pylons 32 coupled to stock 12 to anchor cables 26)(Fig. 1; [0013]); an upper power cable engaged with the first cam and engaged with the upper cable anchor (an upper power cable 26 attached with respective cam 20/power cable cams 28a/28b; and attached to a respective anchor, i.e., pylons 32 upon the rail)(Figs. 1-3; [0011]-[0013]); and a stop coupled with the attachment means between the upper cable anchor and the lower cable anchor (construed as the pylons’ area closer to drawstring 22, as marked above with respect to claim 1, in conjunction to Fig. 1); wherein the draw string extends between the upper power cable and the lower power cable (Figs. 1 and 3).
Islas is not specific regarding the attachment means is a bracket coupled to the center rail and positioned to straddle the projectile axis, the bracket including an extension portion extending from the center rail and away from the projectile axis, the extension portion including an upper side and a lower side.
However, McPherson discloses a bracket coupled to the center rail and positioned to straddle the projectile axis, the bracket including an extension portion extending from the center rail and away from the projectile axis, the extension portion including an upper side and a lower side (cable positioner 48 of cables 18-19, coupled to stock/rail 40; to the best of his understanding the examiner construed the positioner’s top 25 as such “extension” in at least Fig. 2). 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 Islas’ attachment means as a bracket coupled to the center rail and positioned to straddle the projectile axis, the bracket including an extension portion extending from the center rail and away from the projectile axis, the extension portion including an upper side and a lower side for similar reasons discussed above with respect to claim 4. Within the modified Islas by the teachings of McPherson the upper cable anchor (as taught by Islas; e.g., Fig. 1) would have been coupled to the upper side of the extension portion of the bracket (as taught by McPherson; e.g., Figs. 1 and 2); and the stop (as taught by Islas; note the examiner’s markings above with respect to claim 1 in conjunction to Islas’ Fig. 1) to be coupled to the bracket and positioned between the upper side and the lower side of the extension portion (as taught by McPherson).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Islas and McPherson as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Rasor.
As per claim 20, Islas is not specific regarding wherein the stop is configured to contact the draw string with the draw string in the released configuration.
However, Rasor discloses a bowstring 66 contacts draw stops (stoppers 72 and 74) in the release configuration (Figs. 1 and 2A; [0053]). 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 Islas’ wherein the stop is configured to contact the draw string with the draw string in the released configuration for similar reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
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 9/29/2026
/JOHN E SIMMS JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Prosecution Insights