DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 24 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicants’ arguments that “Morrow’s Frame does not have a first and seconding upstanding frame member such that the fluid reservoir would be located between the first and second upstanding frame members” the examiner respectfully disagrees.
Morrow clearly discloses a first and second upstanding frame member 417, 413 (Par. 0052: “the rear and front vertical sections 413 and 417”; Fig. 9) and the container disposed between the first and second upstanding frame portions 417, 413 (Fig. 9).
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Morrow et al (US 2010/0236125) [hereinafter Morrow] in view of Schoonover et al (US 4,923,098)
Regarding claim 1, Morrow discloses a recoil-reducing shooting rest for use by a shooter when shooting a firearm, the firearm having a forward portion (near 403) and a rearward portion (near 402), the shooting rest comprising:
a frame 404;
a forward firearm support 403 connected to the frame and configured to support the forward portion of the firearm; a rear firearm support 402 connected to the frame and configured to support the rearward portion of the firearm, the rear firearm support including a stop 454 configured to inhibit rearward movement of the firearm with respect to the frame when the firearm is supported by the forward and rear firearm supports and fired; and
a liquid tank 405 (Par, 0058: “the support member 405 can have a different configuration. For example, the support member can be a reservoir configured to receive water, sand, lead shot, pellet-like material, and/or other material for adding weight to the shooting rest.”) formed separately from and supported by the frame (Fig. 9; support member 405 formed separate from frame), the liquid tank including a container having a top, a bottom, a front end, a rear end, and opposite left and right sides (defined by “reservoir”);
the container having an interior and configured to hold a volume of liquid in the interior to increase an effective mass of the shooting rest to reduce recoil felt by the shooter when the firearm is supported by the shooting rest and fired (Par, 0058: “the support member 405 can have a different configuration. For example, the support member can be a reservoir configured to receive water), the container including a liquid port in fluid communication with the interior of the container (applicant should note that the reservoir would inherently have a liquid port to be “configured to receive water”).
Morrow further discloses a first and second upstanding frame member 417, 413 (Par. 0052: “the rear and front vertical sections 413 and 417”; Fig. 9) and the container disposed between the first and second upstanding frame portions 417, 413 (Fig. 9).
Morrow does not expressly the liquid tank including a cover configured to selectively open and close the liquid port.
Schoonover teaches that it is known in the art of fluid reservoirs, which is pertinent to the particular problem at hand, to provide a cover 50 configured to selectively open and close the liquid port (Fig. 1; Col. 3, lines 58-61: “To use the container 10, the operator simply removes the cap 50 from the opening 48 in the upright position shown in FIG. 1 and dispenses fluid into the container 10”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Morrow such that the liquid tank including a cover configured to selectively open and close the liquid port, in view of Schoonover, to prevent water from being spilled after being filled into the reservoir.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-19 and 21-33 allowed.
Claims 2, 4-8, 10-11, 15-17 and 27-33 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: A terminal disclaimer filed 24 February 2026 brings the claims into allowance.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
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 JOSHUA E FREEMAN whose telephone number is (303)297-4269. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 5PM MST M-F.
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.
/JOSHUA E FREEMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641