DETAILED ACTION
In the Non-Final Rejection mailed 12/23/2025:
Claims 1-20 were rejected.
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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
The amendment to the claims filed 3/22/2026 has been entered:
Claims 1-20 are active.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Applicant argues that Mezynski fails to disclose the limitation that the attachment arm pivots about an arm connection point carried by the lower section. However, the limitation was previously recited in claim 14, which was rejected over Mezynski in view of Hochstrate, and no arguments are presented by applicant as to why the combination of Mezynski and Hochstrate fails to teach the limitation.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 1/7/2025. These drawings are acceptable.
Specification
The substitute specification filed 3/22/2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 17 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 17, the colon (“:”) at the end of line 4 should be a semicolon (“;”).
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. In light of the below issues, claims 14-16 were examined only as their scope was best understood by the examiner.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “an arm connection point” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, since an arm connection point was already recited in line 6 of claim 10, from which claim 14 depends.
Claim 15 is rejected for depending from an indefinite claim.
Regarding claim 16, the limitation “a barrel clamp legs” in line 2 renders the claim indefinite, since it is impossible to determine whether applicant intended to claim a single barrel clamp leg (i.e., “wherein the barrel clamp includes a barrel clamp leg”) or multiple barrel clamp legs (i.e., “wherein the barrel clamp includes barrel clamp legs”). Clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 6-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mezynski et al. (US 2019/0162505), herein referenced ‘Mezynski’, and further in view of Hochstrate et al. (US 8051595), herein referenced ‘Hochstrate’.
Regarding claims 1-2, Mezynski discloses a firearm foregrip (100) comprising:
a lower section (210) hingeably attached (Fig. 9; par. 43) to an upper section (212);
an attachment arm (600) carried by the lower section (Fig. 6; par. 36) with an arm open position (par. 37; when wedge 600 is moved towards the lower section 210) and an arm closed position (par. 37; when wedge 600 is moved away from lower section 210), wherein the attachment arm is adapted to be received within a frame (214) of a firearm (104) securing the lower section to the frame when the attachment arm is in the arm open position (par. 35); and
a barrel clamp (200), connected to the lower section (Fig. 5B; par. 32), with a clamp open position (Fig. 3A) and a clamp closed position (Fig. 3B), wherein the barrel clamp is adapted to receive a barrel (206) of the firearm and secure the lower section to the barrel when the barrel clamp is in the clamp closed position (Figs. 3B and 5B; par. 28).
Mezynski does not expressly teach wherein the attachment arm is biased open by a spring connected to the attachment arm, or wherein transitioning from the closed position to the open position includes pivoting the attachment arm about an arm connection point carried by the lower section.
Hochstrate teaches a firearm comprising a handguard upper section (Fig. 26) removably attached to a handguard lower section (298), wherein an attachment arm (494, 500) is pivotally mounted about a pivot pin (516) carried by handguard lower section (col. 15 lines 8-10), wherein the attachment arm is biased by a spring (502) connected thereto to an open position of the attachment arm (Fig. 30) where the attachment arm is engaged in a pocket (512) in a receiver (296) of the firearm (Fig. 30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the attachment arm of Mezynski to be pivotally spring biased about an arm connection point carried by the lower section to the open position as taught by Hochstrate with a reasonable expectation of success in order to enable a user to unlock the lower section from the receiver in a single action with a readily available object such that the lower section is free to move (Hochstrate; col. 15 lines 13-22).
Regarding claim 3, the modified Mezynski discloses wherein the attachment arm can be held in the arm open position by a set screw (604) carried by the lower section (par. 38).
Regarding claim 4, the modified Mezynski discloses a second attachment arm (602) carried by the lower section (par. 36), wherein the second attachment arm is adaptable to be received within the frame of the firearm securing the lower section to the frame when the attachment arm and the second attachment arm are in the arm open position (Fig. 6C; par. 35).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Mezynski discloses wherein the lower section has an attachment rail (218) adapted to receive accessories selected from the group consisting of sights, scopes, lights, hand grips, bipods, sling mounts, lasers, grenade launchers, hand stops and any combination thereof (par. 24-25).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Mezynski discloses wherein the upper section has an attachment rail (220).
Regarding claim 8, the modified Mezynski discloses wherein a portion of the attachment rail extends beyond the lower section (Fig. 1; rail 220 of upper section 212 extends upward, beyond lower section 210).
Regarding claim 9, the modified Mezynski does not expressly teach a heat shield carried by the upper section and disposed between the barrel and the upper section, wherein the heat shield is secured to the upper section using one or more fasteners.
Hochstrate further teaches a firearm (Fig. 25) comprising a handguard upper section (40) removably attached to a handguard lower section (60), wherein a heat shield (472) is secured to the handguard upper section using one or more fasteners (col. 14 lines 2-4) between a barrel (36) and the handguard upper section (Fig. 25; col. 3 lines 65-66).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the upper section of the modified Mezynski with a heat shield as taught by Hochstrate with reasonable expectation of success in order to provide further cooling of the barrel while keeping the foregrip at a temperature sufficiently low for an operator, or as a guide for a piston assembly (Hochstrate; col. 13 lines 62-66).
Regarding claim 10 and 14, Mezynski discloses a firearm foregrip (100) comprising:
a lower section (210) disposed below (Fig. 1) a barrel (206) of a firearm (104);
an upper section (212) disposed above (Fig. 1) the barrel wherein the upper section is hingeably attached to the lower section (Fig. 9; par. 43);
an attachment arm (600) carried by the lower section (Fig. 6; par. 36) and adapted to secure the lower section to a frame (214) of the firearm (par. 35); and
a barrel clamp (200) connected to the lower section (Fig. 5B; par. 32) adapted to secure the lower section to the barrel (Figs. 3B and 5B; par. 28).
Mezynski does not expressly teach wherein the attachment arm is biased open by a spring connected to the attachment arm, or wherein transitioning from the closed position to the open position includes pivoting the attachment arm about an arm connection point carried by the lower section.
Hochstrate teaches a firearm comprising a handguard upper section (Fig. 26) removably attached to a handguard lower section (298), wherein an attachment arm (494, 500) is pivotally mounted about a pivot pin (516) carried by handguard lower section (col. 15 lines 8-10), wherein the attachment arm is biased by a spring (502) connected thereto to an open position of the attachment arm (Fig. 30) where the attachment arm is engaged in a pocket (512) in a receiver (296) of the firearm (Fig. 30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the attachment arm of Mezynski to be pivotally spring biased about an arm connection point carried by the lower section to the open position as taught by Hochstrate with a reasonable expectation of success in order to enable a user to unlock the lower section from the receiver in a single action with a readily available object such that the lower section is free to move (Hochstrate; col. 15 lines 13-22).
Regarding claims 11-12, the modified Mezynski does not expressly teach a heat shield carried by the upper section and disposed between the barrel and the upper section, wherein the heat shield is secured to the upper section using one or more fasteners.
Hochstrate further teaches a firearm (Fig. 25) comprising a handguard upper section (40) removably attached to a handguard lower section (60), wherein a heat shield (472) is secured to the handguard upper section using one or more fasteners (col. 14 lines 2-4) between a barrel (36) and the handguard upper section (Fig. 25; col. 3 lines 65-66).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the upper section of the modified Mezynski with a heat shield as taught by Hochstrate with reasonable expectation of success in order to provide further cooling of the barrel while keeping the foregrip at a temperature sufficiently low for an operator, or as a guide for a piston assembly (Hochstrate; col. 13 lines 62-66).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Mezynski discloses wherein the attachment arm includes a closed position (par. 37; when wedge 600 is moved away from lower section 210) and an open position (par. 37; when wedge 600 is moved towards the lower section 210), wherein in the open position the lower section can be secured to the frame (par. 35).
Regarding claim 15, the modified Mezynski wherein the attachment arm can be secured in the open position by a set screw (604) carried by the lower section (par. 38).
Regarding claim 16, the modified Mezynski discloses wherein the barrel clamp includes an open position (Fig. 3A) and a closed position (Fig. 3B), wherein transitioning from the open position to the closed position secures the lower section to the barrel (Figs. 3B and 5B; par. 28).
Regarding claims 17-18, Mezynski discloses a firearm (104) comprising:
a receiver (214);
a barrel (206) carried from the receiver (Fig. 2); and
a foregrip (100) attached to the receiver and the barrel (Fig. 1);
a lower section (210) of the foregrip hingeably attached (Fig. 9; par. 43) to an upper section (212) of the foregrip;
an attachment arm (600) carried by the lower section (Fig. 6; par. 36) engages the receiver (Fig. 6C; par. 35); and
a barrel clamp (200) connected to the lower section (Fig. 5B; par. 32) adapted to secure the lower section to the barrel (Figs. 3B and 5B; par. 28).
Mezynski does not expressly teach wherein the attachment arm is biased open by a spring connected to the attachment arm, or wherein transitioning from the closed position to the open position includes pivoting the attachment arm about an arm connection point carried by the lower section.
Hochstrate teaches a firearm comprising a handguard upper section (Fig. 26) removably attached to a handguard lower section (298), wherein an attachment arm (494, 500) is pivotally mounted about a pivot pin (516) carried by handguard lower section (col. 15 lines 8-10), wherein the attachment arm is biased by a spring (502) connected thereto to an open position of the attachment arm (Fig. 30) where the attachment arm is engaged in a pocket (512) in a receiver (296) of the firearm (Fig. 30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the attachment arm of Mezynski to be pivotally spring biased about an arm connection point carried by the lower section to the open position as taught by Hochstrate with a reasonable expectation of success in order to enable a user to unlock the lower section from the receiver in a single action with a readily available object such that the lower section is free to move (Hochstrate; col. 15 lines 13-22).
Regarding claim 19, the modified Mezynski wherein the attachment arm can be secured in the open position by a set screw (604) carried by the lower section (par. 38).
Regarding claim 20, the modified Mezynski does not expressly teach a heat shield carried by the upper section and disposed between the barrel and the upper section, wherein the heat shield is secured to the upper section using one or more fasteners.
Hochstrate further teaches a firearm (Fig. 25) comprising a handguard upper section (40) removably attached to a handguard lower section (60), wherein a heat shield (472) is secured to the handguard upper section using one or more fasteners (col. 14 lines 2-4) between a barrel (36) and the handguard upper section (Fig. 25; col. 3 lines 65-66).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the upper section of the modified Mezynski with a heat shield as taught by Hochstrate with reasonable expectation of success in order to provide further cooling of the barrel while keeping the foregrip at a temperature sufficiently low for an operator, or as a guide for a piston assembly (Hochstrate; col. 13 lines 62-66).
Claims 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mezynski et al. (US 2019/0162505) in view of Hochstrate et al. (US 8051595) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Freeman (US 936528), herein referenced ‘Freeman’.
Regarding claim 5, the modified Mezynski does not expressly teach a second barrel clamp in line with the first barrel clamp and carried by the lower section, wherein the second barrel clamp is adapted to straddle the barrel of the firearm and secure the lower section to the barrel.
Freeman teaches a firearm (Fig. 1) comprising: a foregrip (2) below a barrel (1) of the firearm, wherein a first barrel clamp (Figs. 1-2 and 4; proximal pair of arms 8) is connected to the foregrip (Fig. 2) and clamps the foregrip to the barrel (Fig. 3), and wherein a second barrel clamp (Figs. 1-2 and 4; distal pair of arms 8) is also connected to the foregrip in line with the first barrel clamp (Fig. 2) and clamps the foregrip to the barrel (Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the barrel clamp of the modified Mezynski to include first and second barrel clamps as taught by Freeman with a reasonable expectation of success, since it has been held that the mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Conclusion
Claims 1-20 are rejected.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN S GOMBERG whose telephone number is (571)272-4802. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Troy Chambers can be reached at (571)272-6874. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Troy Chambers/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3641
/BENJAMIN S. GOMBERG/
Examiner
Art Unit 3641
Prosecution Insights