Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim 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.
Claims 1-2 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent #2012/0325871 to Gallagher (Gallagher). Gallagher discloses:
With Respect to Claim 1
A holster for a handgun assembly that includes a handgun having a trigger guard with a lower surface, the holster including: the holster having side walls (central portions of 15 and 18), a top wall (spine 16), and an opposite bottom wall (wall formed at 19 by connection between 15 and 18), the holster walls together defining a chamber in the holster for receiving the handgun assembly (capable of this use which is also the intended use, see e.g. FIG. 3 and description); the holster having an entranceway into the chamber through which the handgun is movable in an insertion direction to holster the handgun, the handgun being removable from the chamber in an opposite withdrawal direction to draw the handgun (capable of this use which is also the intended use, see e.g. FIG. 3 and description); and a support mechanism (cam 11 and related structure) on the holster bottom wall for supporting the handgun in the chamber in a direction toward the top wall; (see, e.g. FIG. 6, [0014]) the support mechanism including a non-circular rotary (11, noting that the shape is eccentric rather than circular) supported for rotation on the holster bottom wall about an axis of rotation (see, e.g. FIGS. 5-6 and [0015-0016]), the rotary having a trigger guard engagement surface (11A) for engagement with the lower surface of the trigger guard when the handgun is holstered in the chamber, thereby to support the handgun in the chamber in a direction toward the top wall ([0014], FIG. 6).
With Respect to Claim 2
A holster as set forth in claim 1 wherein the rotary has a first position of rotation about the axis of rotation in which the engagement surface is presented toward the holster top wall for engagement with the lower surface of the trigger guard when the handgun is holstered in the chamber, thereby to support the handgun in the chamber in a direction toward the top wall ([0014], FIG. 6); the rotary being rotatable about the axis of rotation out of the first position of rotation in response to engagement with a portion of the handgun assembly other than the trigger guard, during insertion movement of the handgun assembly into the holster chamber (capable of this use, noting that engagement with an appropriately sized portion during insertion will rotate it beyond 11A and allow that portion to pass, similar to the inventive structure).
With Respect to Claim 7
A holster as set forth in claim 1 wherein the rotary is rotatable forward and backward about the axis of rotation during insertion and removal of the handgun assembly from the holster (capable of this use which is also the intended use, see e.g. FIGS. 3-6 and description).
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.
Claims 1-3 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent #5,944,239 to Rogers (Rogers). Rogers discloses:
With Respect to Claim 1
A holster for a handgun assembly that includes a handgun having a trigger guard with a lower surface, the holster including: the holster having side walls (substantially rigid sidewalls are disclosed), a top wall (noting 29” and 54”, it is Examiner’s position that there is clearly a top wall or to the degree some other interpretation might be possible such is clearly obvious), and an opposite bottom wall (13 and related structure), the holster walls together defining a chamber in the holster for receiving the handgun assembly (see, e.g. FIG. 1 and description); the holster having an entranceway into the chamber through which the handgun is movable in an insertion direction to holster the handgun, the handgun being removable from the chamber in an opposite withdrawal direction to draw the handgun; and a support mechanism (86, 88, and related structure) on the holster bottom wall for supporting the handgun in the chamber in a direction toward the top wall; the support mechanism including a non-circular rotary (86, 88) supported for rotation on the holster bottom wall about an axis of rotation (noting axis through 87), the rotary having a trigger guard engagement surface (surface of roller 88) for engagement with the lower surface of the trigger guard when the handgun is holstered in the chamber (Col. 6 lines 18-24, FIG. 9), thereby to support the handgun in the chamber in a direction toward the top wall (i.e. the biasing member biases the handgun in this direction and will therefore perform this function).
With Respect to Claim 2
A holster as set forth in claim 1 wherein the rotary has a first position of rotation about the axis of rotation in which the engagement surface is presented toward the holster top wall for engagement with the lower surface of the trigger guard when the handgun is holstered in the chamber, thereby to support the handgun in the chamber in a direction toward the top wall; the rotary being rotatable about the axis of rotation out of the first position of rotation in response to engagement with a portion of the handgun assembly other than the trigger guard, during insertion movement of the handgun assembly into the holster chamber (capable of this use).
With Respect to Claim 3
A holster as set forth in claim 1 including a spring (130) that acts between the holster body and the rotary to resiliently maintain the rotary in the first position of rotation, the spring allowing the rotary to rotate about the axis of rotation against the bias of the spring thereby to move the engagement surface in a direction away from the holster top wall to allow passage of a taller portion of the handgun assembly.
With Respect to Claim 6
A holster as set forth in claim 1 wherein the non-circular configuration of the rotatory includes a longer first dimension from the axis of rotation that is selected to cause the engagement surface to be in a position to engage the trigger guard when the rotary is in the first position of rotation, and includes a shorter second dimension from the axis that is selected to enable passage of a taller portion of the handgun assembly past the rotary during insertion of the handgun assembly into the holster when the rotary is in the second position of rotation about the axis of rotation, the rotary rotating about the axis of rotation against the bias of a spring between the two positions during insertion of the handgun assembly into the holster and withdrawal of the handgun assembly from the holster (capable of this use).
With Respect to Claim 7
A holster as set forth in claim 1 wherein the rotary is rotatable forward and backward about the axis of rotation during insertion and removal of the handgun assembly from the holster.
Claims 3, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent #2012/0325871 to Gallagher (Gallagher) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent #5,944,239 to Rogers (Rogers).
With Respect to Claim 3
A holster as set forth in claim 1 but does not disclose including a spring that acts between the holster body and the rotary to resiliently maintain the rotary in the first position of rotation, the spring allowing the rotary to rotate about the axis of rotation against the bias of the spring thereby to move the engagement surface in a direction away from the holster top wall to allow passage of a taller portion of the handgun assembly.
However, Rogers discloses forming a similar holster with a similar rotary for engaging the trigger guard of a gun in the holster with a spring that acts between the holster body and the rotary to resiliently maintain the rotary in the first position of rotation, the spring allowing the rotary to rotate about the axis of rotation against the bias of the spring thereby to move the engagement surface in a direction away from the holster top wall to allow passage of a taller portion of the handgun assembly.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of this application, given the disclosure of Rogers, to add a spring to bias the rotary into the first position as claimed, in order to secure it in position and prevent inadvertent dislodgement, and/or as doing so constitutes at most merely automating a manual activity which does not patentably distinguish over the prior art (MPEP 2144.04).
With Respect to Claim 6
A holster as set forth in claim 1 wherein the non-circular configuration of the rotatory includes a longer first dimension from the axis of rotation that is selected to cause the engagement surface to be in a position to engage the trigger guard when the rotary is in the first position of rotation, and includes a shorter second dimension from the axis that is selected to enable passage of a taller portion of the handgun assembly past the rotary during insertion of the handgun assembly into the holster when the rotary is in the second position of rotation about the axis of rotation, the rotary rotating about the axis of rotation against the bias of a spring (spring per Rogers) between the two positions during insertion of the handgun assembly into the holster and withdrawal of the handgun assembly from the holster.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent #2012/0325871 to Gallagher (Gallagher) in view of U.S. Patent #5,944,239 to Rogers (Rogers) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent #8,141,758 to Spielberger (Spielberger) and/or U.S. Patent #6,299,403 to Lee (Lee).
With Respect to Claim 8
A holster as set forth in claim 3 but does not disclose wherein the spring is a tension spring.
However, Spielberger discloses the use of a tension spring as a biasing member on a pivotal structure for securing a handgun in a holster.
Lee discloses the use of a tension spring as a biasing member for a similar non-circular rotary structure.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of this application, given the disclosure of Spielberger and/or Lee, to use a tension spring as the spring of Gallagher in view of Rogers (for clarity, Rogers provides motivation to use a spring, and Spielberger and/or Lee provides motivation to have that spring be a tension spring), for the art known benefits of tension springs, as a mere selection of an art appropriate spring structure to use or at most a mere substitution of one art known spring structure for another. For clarity as to the combination of both Spielberger and Lee, Spielberger provides motivation to use a tension spring on a holster locking structure and Lee provides evidence of a tension spring on a non-circular rotary and so the two in combination provide motivation to use a tension spring on the non-circular rotary of Gallagher/the combination.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record does not disclose or render obvious the subject matter of claim 4 in combination with the recitations of claim 1, noting that neither Gallagher nor Rogers discloses a one-piece rotary of spaced flanges with a spring pin and a tension spring connected between the spring pin and the holster bottom wall.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM J WAGGENSPACK whose telephone number is (571)270-7418. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-4:30.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nathan Newhouse can be reached at (571)272-4544. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ADAM J WAGGENSPACK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
