DETAILED ACTION
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.
The claim language “the central cavity accessible only when the camera is removed from the camera grip” is given the filing date of January 30, 2025 but it not being given the benefit of the provisional application date of February 1, 2024. The specification of the provisional application does not disclose a central cavity accessible only when the camera is removed from the camera grip.
The applicant should note that the reference etischer has a publication date of September 23, 2024 which is after the filing date of the provisional application but before the filing date of the utility application.
Claim(s) 1-4, 14-15 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over etischer (3D Printed camera grip with AirTag hidden inside 3D Printed camera grip with AirTag hidden inside https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3V7kM6-4XII) in view of Ma (KR20-0486914).
Regarding claim 1, etischer teaches a camera grip for use with a handheld camera (figs. 1-2), the camera grip comprising: a baseplate having one or more access openings extending therethrough (fig. 6), the access openings having a larger area than a material portion of the baseplate; a handgrip extending upwardly from the baseplate (figs. 3-4), the handgrip mateable with the camera (figs. 1-3) and having a central cavity therein (fig. 5), the central cavity accessible only when the camera is removed from the camera grip (figs. 3-4), the central cavity configured to accommodate a geolocation device (figs. 4, 6). Etischer teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for the access openings having a larger area than a material portion of the baseplate. Ma teaches in fig. 4 that it was known to have access openings having a larger area than a material portion of the baseplate. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the features of Ma for the purpose of saving on material and creating a lighter weight product.
Regarding claims 2-3, tischer as modified teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for the handgrip removably attached to the upright. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the handle separable from the upright for the purpose of changing handles for different hand sizes. The applicant should note that the courts have held that it was known to make items which are integral as separable. In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961.
Regarding claim 4, fig. 6 shows the handgrip includes a contoured inner surface mateable with the camera.
Regarding claim 14, etischer teaches a camera grip for use with a handheld camera, the camera grip comprising: a baseplate having one or more access openings extending therethrough (see figs. 4, 6); a handgrip extending upwardly from the baseplate (see fig. 1), the handgrip mateable with the camera (see fig. 1) and having a central cavity (see fig. 5) therein, the central cavity accessible only when the camera is removed from the camera grip (compare figs. 4 and 5), the central cavity configured to accommodate a geolocation device (see fig. 6). Etischer teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for the access openings having a larger area than a material portion of the baseplate. Ma teaches in fig. 4 that it was known to have access openings having a larger area than a material portion of the baseplate. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the features of Ma for the purpose of saving on material and creating a lighter weight product.
Regarding claim 15, Ma teaches at least two access openings (12 and 33a) openings in the baseplate, the access openings having a larger area than a material portion of the baseplate.
Regarding claim 19, the central cavity of etischer is not visible from an exterior of the camera grip when mounted to a camera. See figs. 1-3.
Claim(s) 8 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over etischer (3D Printed camera grip with AirTag hidden inside 3D Printed camera grip with AirTag hidden inside https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3V7kM6-4XII) in view of Ma (KR20-0486914) and further in view of Fu (CN223662987). etischer as modified teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for at least one access opening in the baseplate includes a tapered edge, the tapered edge is provided adjacent at least one of media storage access and battery access of the camera. Fu teaches in fig. 2 at least one tapered edge (of 111) which is adjacent at least one of media storage access and battery access of the camera. (“In this embodiment, the bottom plate 11 is further provided with a battery avoiding opening 111 for the camera 3 to replace the battery”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the features of Fu for the purpose of easily replacing the battery.
Regarding claim 13, etischer as modified teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for the baseplate includes an engagement profile formed along at least one edge configured to engage with a mounting device. Fu teaches in fig. 2 that it was known to provide the baseplate to include an engagement profile formed along at least one edge configured to engage with a mounting device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the features of Fu for the purpose of quick connect/disconnect to tripods.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over etischer (3D Printed camera grip with AirTag hidden inside 3D Printed camera grip with AirTag hidden inside https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3V7kM6-4XII) in view of Ma (KR20-0486914) and further in view of Jackson (U.S. Publication No. 2015/0370149). etischer as modified teaches the salient features of the claimed invention except for an attachment ring including a central elongated opening extending perpendicular to the at least one access opening. Jackson teaches an attachment ring 9 including a central elongated opening extending perpendicular to the at least one access opening. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the features of Jackson for the purpose of attaching a strap or other accessory.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7, 9-11 and 16-18 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. Lenihan (U.S. Publication No. 2022/0333730) and Sidhu (U.S. Publication No. 2026/0079385) both teach access openings having a larger area than a material portion of the baseplate. Law (U.S. Publication No. 20090003820) teaches hiding a tracker in camera equipment.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E MAHONEY whose telephone number is (571)272-2122. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30.
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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER E MAHONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights