DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2 “slod” should be “slot”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-2, 7-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rogers et al. (US 5,622,297).
Regarding claims 1-2, 7-17, Rogers discloses a holster for a firearm, the holster comprising: a holster body 12/14/20/40 defining a receptacle configured to receive a portion of the firearm therein, the holster body comprising first and second lateral walls 12/14 and a slot 32 defined in each wall; two inserts 13/15 movably coupled to respective lateral walls of the body such that the inserts are at least partially within the receptacle, the inserts configured to selectively move along the slots 32 for adjusting the inserts relative to the holster body; a plurality of fasteners 16/17, wherein the inserts are movably coupled to the holster body by the fasteners, and wherein each of the fasteners extends through a respective slot in the respective lateral wall (Figure 1 and 2); and wherein each of the inserts comprises: a base 31 extending from a first end to a second end of the insert; and a pair of arms (see upper and lower portions on either side of tongue/base 31 as shown in Figure 1) coupled to the base and spaced apart from one another, each of the arms defining an opening extending therethrough (one opening defined at 22/23 and another opening defined in the upper arm by rivet 24.
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) 3-6 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rogers et al. (US 5,622,297).
Regarding claims 3-6 and 18-20, Rogers disclose the invention substantially as claimed, including: a holster body 12/14/20/40 defining a receptacle configured to receive a portion of the firearm therein, the holster body comprising first and second lateral walls 12/14 and a slot 32 defined in each wall; two inserts 13/15 movably coupled to respective lateral walls of the body such that the inserts are at least partially within the receptacle, the inserts configured to selectively move along the slots 32 for adjusting the inserts relative to the holster body; a plurality of fasteners 16/17, wherein the inserts are movably coupled to the holster body by the fasteners, and wherein each of the fasteners extends through a respective slot in the respective lateral wall (Figure 1 and 2); and wherein each of the inserts comprises: a base 31 extending from a first end to a second end of the insert; and a pair of arms (see upper and lower portions on either side of tongue/base 31 as shown in Figure 1) coupled to the base and spaced apart from one another, each of the arms defining an opening extending therethrough (one opening defined at 22/23 and another opening defined in the upper arm by rivet 24.
Rogers does not disclose each lateral wall defining a pair of slots. In contrast, Rogers only discloses a single slot 32 and that engages a single corresponding tongue 31 and fastener 16. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a two slots and two tongues on the lateral walls 12/14 , since it has been held that 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. The motivation would be to make the connection of portions 12/13 and 14/15 more secure and rigid.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COREY NELSON SKURDAL whose telephone number is (571)272-9588. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-4pm 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, 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.
/COREY N SKURDAL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Prosecution Insights