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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the handgun hanger” in line 2 should read --the handgun hanger apparatus--. 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.
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.
Claim 6 is 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 regards to claim 6, the claim recites “one or more securing protrusions” (emphasis added). It is unclear how one securing protrusion can pass through receiving apertures because there is only one securing protrusion. It appears Applicant should recite --each for passing through a respective receiving aperture-- in line 2. Appropriate explanation or correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rogge et al. (US Pat. No. 5,078,276) in view of Courbon (US Pat. No. 7,878,477 B2).
In regards to claim 1, Rogge teaches a handgun hanger apparatus, comprising: a mounting plate (52, 58, 60); at least one barrel rod (80), the at least one barrel rod extending to form a vertical post (84), the vertical post configured to pass through a portion of the mounting plate; a spring (90) coupled to the vertical post; and a swivel mechanism (e.g.; 58, 66) configured to allow a user to selectively swivel the at least one barrel rod (Col 2, Lines 24-27).
Rogge does not teach the swivel mechanism comprising a detent mechanism having a fixed detent member and a dynamic detent member; wherein the fixed detent member comprises a plurality of protrusions configured to selectively mate with one or more apertures on the dynamic detent member.
Courbon teaches a swivel mechanism comprising a detent mechanism (12) having a fixed detent member (24) and a dynamic detent member (30); wherein the detent mechanism has cooperating protrusions (40) and apertures (26) that selectively mate with each other. Furthermore, mere reversal of working parts has been held to be an obvious modification (In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955)). In the instant case, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found reversal of the protrusions and apertures to be an obvious modification while maintaining the same function of the detent mechanism.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to modify Rogge’s hanger apparatus to have a swivel mechanism comprising a detent mechanism having a fixed detent member and a dynamic detent member; wherein the fixed detent member comprises a plurality of protrusions configured to selectively mate with one or more apertures on the dynamic detent member. The motivation would be for the purpose of providing a detent connection that will forgive misalignment between a mounting bracket and support arm as taught by Courbon (Col 2, Lines 4-6).
In regards to claim 2, in modifying Rogge, Courbon teaches the swivel mechanism comprises a pivot block (e.g.; the bottom hub of 24 of Courbon).
In regards to claim 5, in modifying Rogge, Courbon teaches the detent mechanism (Courbon: 12) is positioned on a first portion of a mounting plate (Courbon: 16) and a spring (Courbon: 55) is positioned on an opposite side of the first portion within an aperture (Courbon: 44) formed by the mounting plate.
In regards to claim 6, in modifying Rogge, Courbon teaches the fixed detent member comprises one or more securing protrusions for passing through receiving apertures in the first portion of the mounting plate (i.e.; the bottom hub of 24 of Courbon is received in aperture 44 of Courbon).
In regards to claim 8, modified Rogge teaches a safe track clip bracket (Rogge: 120) configured to couple to the mounting plate.
In regards to claim 10, modified Rogge teaches a shelf hanging bracket (Rogge: 120).
In regards to claim 11, Rogge teaches a handgun hanger apparatus, comprising: a mounting plate (52, 58, 60); at least one barrel rod (80), the at least one barrel rod extending to form a vertical post (84), the vertical post configured to pass through a portion of the mounting plate; and a detent mechanism (66) coupled to the vertical post (via 58), the detent mechanism configured to allow a user to selectively swivel the at least one barrel rod (Col 2, Lines 24-27).
Rogge does not teach the swivel mechanism comprising a detent mechanism having a fixed detent member and a dynamic detent member; wherein the fixed detent member comprises a plurality of protrusions configured to selectively mate with one or more apertures on the dynamic detent member.
Courbon teaches a swivel mechanism comprising a detent mechanism (12) having a fixed detent member (24) and a dynamic detent member (30); wherein the detent mechanism has cooperating protrusions (40) and apertures (26) that selectively mate with each other. Furthermore, mere reversal of working parts has been held to be an obvious modification (In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955)). In the instant case, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found reversal of the protrusions and apertures to be an obvious modification while maintaining the same function of the detent mechanism.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to modify Rogge’s hanger apparatus to have a swivel mechanism comprising a detent mechanism having a fixed detent member and a dynamic detent member; wherein the fixed detent member comprises a plurality of protrusions configured to selectively mate with one or more apertures on the dynamic detent member. The motivation would be for the purpose of providing a detent connection that will forgive misalignment between a mounting bracket and support arm as taught by Courbon (Col 2, Lines 4-6).
In regards to claim 13, in modifying Rogge, Courbon teaches the detent mechanism (Courbon: 12) is positioned on a first portion of a mounting plate (Courbon: 16) and a spring (Courbon: 55) is positioned on an opposite side of the first portion within an aperture (Courbon: 44) formed by the mounting plate.
In regards to claim 14, in modifying Rogge, Courbon teaches the fixed detent member comprises one or more securing protrusions for passing through one or more receiving apertures, respectively, in the first portion of the mounting plate (i.e.; the bottom hub of 24 of Courbon is received in aperture 44 of Courbon).
In regards to claim 16, modified Rogge teaches a safe track clip bracket (Rogge: 120) configured to couple to the mounting plate.
In regards to claim 18, modified Rogge teaches a shelf hanging bracket (Rogge: 120).
Claims 9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rogge et al. (US Pat. No. 5,078,276) and Courbon (US Pat. No. 7,878,477 B2), and in further view of Hartness (US Pat. No. 9,683,804 B2).
In regards to claims 9 and 17, Rogge, modified by Courbon, teaches the mounting plate couples to the safe track clip bracket via a hem (i.e.; bent portion 122 of Rogge) on the safe track clip bracket. Rogge does not teach a metal hem. Hartness teaches a mounting plate (2) coupled to a safe track clip bracket (6) via a metal hem (i.e.; bent portion 7) on the bracket.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to modify Rogge’s hem to be metal. The motivation would be for the purpose of using a high strength material that is durable as taught by Hartness (Col 3, Lines 45-47).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson (US Pat. No. 5,188,328) in view of Courbon (US Pat. No. 7,878,477 B2).
In regards to claim 19, Thompson teaches a method of using a handgun hanger apparatus, comprising: mounting the handgun hanger to a wall (10) directly; sliding a barrel (64) of a handgun over a barrel rod (51) so that the handgun is supported by the barrel on the barrel rod; and swiveling the handgun to a desired position (via sleeve 44; see positions A and B in Fig. 4; Col 3, Lines 21-23).
Thompson does not teaches swiveling via a fixed detent member and a dynamic detent member, wherein the fixed detent member comprises a plurality of protrusions configured to selectively mate with one or more apertures on the dynamic detent member.
Courbon teaches a swivel mechanism comprising a detent mechanism (12) having a fixed detent member (24) and a dynamic detent member (30); wherein the detent mechanism has cooperating protrusions (40) and apertures (26) that selectively mate with each other. Furthermore, mere reversal of working parts has been held to be an obvious modification (In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955)). In the instant case, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found reversal of the protrusions and apertures to be an obvious modification while maintaining the same function of the detent mechanism.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to modify Thompson’s method such that the swiveling is via a fixed detent member and a dynamic detent member, wherein the fixed detent member comprises a plurality of protrusions configured to selectively mate with one or more apertures on the dynamic detent member. The motivation would be for the purpose of providing a detent connection that will forgive misalignment between a mounting bracket and support arm as taught by Courbon (Col 2, Lines 4-6).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson (US Pat. No. 5,188,328) and Courbon (US Pat. No. 7,878,477 B2), and in further view of Brooks et al. (US Pat. No. 3,635,352).
In regards to claim 20, Thompson, modified by Courbon, does not teach sliding a plurality of handguns over a plurality of barrel rods, respectively, so that each handgun is supported via a respective barrel rod, and swiveling the plurality of handguns to a desired position.
Brooks teaches a plurality of swiveling rods (6) on a vertical rod (2) configured to have barrels (9) slid over the rods.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to further modify Thompson’s method to include a plurality of barrel rods, such that the method includes sliding a plurality of handguns over a plurality of barrel rods, respectively, so that each handgun is supported via a respective barrel rod, and swiveling the plurality of handguns to the desired position as similarly taught by Brooks’ invention. The motivation would be for the purpose of increasing the available storage of the device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of the claims have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the prior art discussed above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the PTO-892 for additional prior art related to Applicant’s disclosed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STANTON L KRYCINSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-5381. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:00AM-5:00PM ET.
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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at (571)272-8227. 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.
/Stanton L Krycinski/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Prosecution Insights