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 § 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.
Claim 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) 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.
Regarding claim 1, the build up of recitations is unclear at least because the term “notch” is not defined in applicant’s specification or figures. Claim 16 is unclear for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 9, the phrase “the opening” lacks antecedent basis.
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(s) 1-2 and 4-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reimer US 2018/0064087 in view of Nordhagen US 3,861,071.
Regarding claim 1, Reimer teaches an apparatus for retrieving fishing lures comprising:
an elongate body having a passage therethrough extending between first and second ends and having first and second sides (12 figure 1), the elongate body comprising a base portion (16) extending along a base plane and a tapered portion (14) oriented relative to the base plane to the first side;
wherein the second end of the passage terminates in a notch (40 figure 3),
wherein the first and second sides extend along continuous profiles to the notch (as shown to the same degree as applicant’s invention, as best understood by the Examiner); and
a retaining ring extending away from the first side of the base portion (22);
but does not specify the tapered portion oriented angularly relative to the base plane.
Nordhagen; however, does teach such an angular orientation (near 23). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide such an angle, in order to enhance lure capture, as demonstrated by Nordhagen.
Regarding claim 2, the references teach the apparatus of claim 1 wherein Nordhagen further teaches the retaining ring comprises a split ring (27/28). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide such a ring, in order to enhance lure capture, as demonstrated by Nordhagen.
Regarding claim 4, the references teach the apparatus of claim 1 wherein Reimer further teaches the retaining ring extends substantially orthogonally from the base portion (figure 2).
Regarding claim 5, the references teach the apparatus of claim 1 wherein Reimer further teaches the retaining ring is secured to a base member proximate to the first end of the elongate body (20).
Regarding claim 6, the references teach the apparatus of claim 1 wherein Reimer further teaches the retaining ring comprises a continuous member extending perpendicularly from base portion and transitioning to a circular portion (figures 1-2).
Regarding claim 7, the references teach the apparatus of claim 1 wherein Reimer further teaches the elongate body includes a connector at the first end thereof connectable to a retrieval line (36/34/38 figures 3-5).
Regarding claim 8, the references teach the apparatus of claim 7 wherein Reimer further teaches the connector comprises a tab extending therefrom with a bore therethrough (figures 3-4).
Regarding claim 9, the references teach the apparatus of claim 1 wherein Reimer further teaches the base portion comprises a semi-circular body, wherein the opening has a semi-circular shape through the elongate body (figures 3-4).
Regarding claim 10, the references teach the apparatus of claim 9 wherein Reimer further teaches the base portion comprises a base member and two side bodies extending thereform to the tapered proportion (figures 3-4).
Regarding claim 11, the references teach the apparatus of claim 10 wherein Reimer further teaches the tapered portion is formed of a pair of side taper members converging to a distal end (figures 3-4).
Regarding claim 12, the references teach the apparatus of claim 11 wherein Reimer further teaches the base portion has a substantially circular cross section (figure 2).
Regarding claim 13, the references teach the apparatus of claim 11 wherein Nordhagen further teaches the tapered portion includes an upward curvature towards the first side (figure 1).
Regarding claim 14, the references teach the apparatus of claim 13 wherein Reimer further teaches the tapered portion is formed of a member having a substantially circular cross section (figure 2).
Regarding claim 15, the references teach the apparatus of claim 10 but do not specify wherein the member forming the tapered portion tapers in cross section towards the second end of the elongate member.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide such a shape, in order to enhance lure capture, as suggested by Nordhagen’s tapered ends 24.
Regarding claim 16, the references teach a method for retrieving fishing lures comprising: locating a fishing line within a passage of an elongate body extending between first and second ends, wherein the second end of the passage terminates in a notch, the elongate body comprising a base portion extending along a base plane and a tapered portion angularly oriented relative to the base plane to a first side thereof, wherein the first and second sides extend along continuous profiles to the notch; locating the fishing line within a retaining ring extending to the first side of the base portion; permitting the elongate body to move down the fishing line to a stuck fishing lure at a distal end thereof; locating the fishing line within the notch; and pulling the elongate body with retrieval line secured thereto (see previous rejections).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reimer and Nordhagen in view of Bray US 2,397,916.
Regarding claim 3, the references teach the apparatus of claim 2 wherein Nordhagen further teaches the split ring overlaps itself at a distal end for introduction of a fishing line thereinto (figure 1);
but do not specify a gap between coils.
Bray; however, does teach such a gap (9b figure 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide such a gap, in order to enhance hook/lure capture functions, as suggested by Bray.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/2/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive because they are directed towards amended limitations which are addressed in the updated rejections above.
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 JESSICA WONG whose telephone number is (571)272-7889. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 8:00am to 4:30pm MST.
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, Timothy Collins can be reached at (571)272-6886. 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.
/JESSICA B WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3644
