DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Applicant's arguments filed 2/23/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant contends that element 41 of Rath does not constitute a “screw” and that element 41 is not “configured to couple the support portion to a receiver from which the barrel extends”. This is not persuasive in that a “screw” is defined as “a nail-shaped or rod-shaped piece with a spiral groove and a slotted or recessed head designed to be inserted into material by rotating and used for fastening pieces of solid material together” (merriam-webster.com). Applicant has not redefined the term and element 41 of Rath fits the definition of a “screw”, while the inside also performs as a gas transfer tube, element 41is a rod-shaped piece with a spiral groove (56) and a slotted or recessed head (60), designed to be inserted into material by rotating and used for fastening pieces of solid material together. (col. 4, lines 3-13) Element 41 has structure allowing it to couple the support portion to a receiver from which the barrel extends via elongated bar body 43.
Applicant further contends that Rath fails to disclose the claimed “stud” stating that element 62 is distinct from the claimed “stud”, however applicant’s arguments are narrower than the breadth of current claims. Claim 1 requires “a stud extending within the support portion, the stud extending substantially perpendicular to the screw”. Dictionary.com defines a “stud” as “a boss, knob, nail head, or other protuberance projecting from a surface or part, especially as an ornament” and “any of various projecting pins, lugs, or the like, on machines or other implements”. Under broadest reasonable interpretation element 62 of Rath fits the definition of a “stud”.
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) 1-6, 13, 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rath (US 4,056,038). Rath discloses a firearm comprising:
a support portion (33) extending substantially parallel with a barrel of the firearm through which a projectile is fired;
a screw (41) extending within the support portion, the screw extending substantially parallel to the barrel, the screw configured to couple the support portion to a receiver from which the barrel extends; (Fig. 2) and
a stud (62) extending within the support portion, the stud extending substantially perpendicular to the screw.
2. The firearm of claim 1, wherein the stud includes a sling attachment portion (69) extending outside the support portion and configured to attach to a sling for carrying the firearm.
3. The firearm of claim 2, wherein the sling attachment portion of the stud is an opening in the stud. (Fig. 3)
4, The firearm of claim 1, wherein the screw extends through the stud such that the stud is prevented from moving in a direction that is perpendicular to the barrel or rotating. (Fig. 1-3)
5. The firearm of claim 4, further comprising a screw sleeve (40) configured to surround at least a portion of the screw.
6. The firearm of claim 5, wherein the screw sleeve is configured to be pressed against the stud to prevent rotation of the stud. (Fig. 2)
13. The firearm of claim 1, wherein the firearm further comprises a gap between the support portion and the barrel. (see Fig. 2)
16. The firearm of claim 1, wherein the stud comprises a cavity configured to receive the screw (via taper 63).
17. The firearm of claim 16, wherein the stud is received in a borehole of the support portion (Fig. 2).
18. The firearm of claim 17, wherein the stud is not threadably engaged with the borehole. (col. 4, line 41)
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.
Claim(s) 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rath as applied to claim 1 above. Rath discloses the claimed invention but does not expressly disclose the support portion comprising solid wood or synthetic material. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to utilize the claimed solid wood or synthetic material, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice and solid woods and synthetic materials for gun stocks are well-known in the art of gun stocks.
8. Rath discloses the firearm of claim 7, wherein the screw and the stud extend within boreholes in the support portion. (Fig. 1 and 2)
9. Rath discloses the firearm of claim 7, wherein the support portion comprises a trough to extend around the barrel. (Fig. 1 and 2)
10. Rath discloses the firearm of claim 9, wherein the trough is configured with a depth such that there is a gap between the trough and the barrel. (Fig. 1 and 2)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 12, 14, 15 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 MICHELLE CLEMENT whose telephone number is (571)272-6884. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6.
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.
/MICHELLE CLEMENT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641
Prosecution Insights