DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species B (Figs. 5-8), and asserts at least claims 1-24 encompass the elected invention, in the reply filed on 05/22/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
Claims 1-24 are 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 claims 1-3, 14-16, 23 and 24, it is unclear how the proximal end portion of the casing body can be interposed in nested conformance within the trench, absent the primer body comprising an outer primer portion trapping the end portion of the casing within the circumferential trench provided on the outer surface of an inner primer portion. Absent the outer primer portion, it is unclear how the end portion of the casing can be held in the trench.
In claims 3 and 16, the term, “thin-walled shell”, is a relative term, the scope of which cannot readily be determined, thus rendering the claims indefinite.
Claims 1-3, 14-16, 23 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: primer body comprising an outer primer portion and an inner primer portion, the trench provided on the outer surface of the inner primer portion.
Claims 1-5, 13-17, 23 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: an outer primer portion trapping the end portion of the casing within the circumferential trench provided on the outer surface of an inner primer portion.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 14-16 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by PENNELL et al. (US 2021/0041211 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Pennell et al. disclose an ammunition cartridge casing (Figs. 1, 2, 4), comprising: a primer body 1, 20, 60 having an outer surface providing a circumferential trench 6, 26, 46 having a radially outwardly extending first circumferential wall portion, a radially outwardly extending second circumferential wall portion, and an axially extending circumferential wall portion extending contiguously between the first circumferential wall portion and the second circumferential wall portion; and a casing body 31, 51, 64 having a distal end portion and a proximal end portion, the proximal end portion of the casing body interposed in nested conformance within the circumferential trench 26, 46 of the primer body 20, 60.
Regarding claim 2, Pennell et al. disclose that the proximal end portion of the casing body extends progressively along the radially outwardly extending first circumferential wall portion, the axially extending circumferential wall portion, and the radially outwardly extending second circumferential wall portion (see Figs. 2, 4).
Regarding claims 3 and 16, in Pennell et al, the end portion of the casing body meets the term, “thin-walled” (see the 112b section above regarding the indefinite nature of the term, “thin walled”).
Regarding claim 14, Pennell et al. disclose an ammunition cartridge casing (Figs. 1, 2, 4) comprising: a primer body 1, 20, 60 having an outer surface forming a circumferential trench 6. 26, 46 having a radially outwardly extending first circumferential wall portion, an axially extending circumferential wall portion, and a radially outwardly extending second circumferential wall portion; and a casing body 31, 51, 64 having a distal end portion and a proximal end portion, the proximal end portion of the casing body having an inner surface configured to interlock within the trench 26, 46.
Regarding claim 15, Pennell et al. disclose that the proximal end portion of the casing body extends progressively along the radially outwardly extending first circumferential wall portion, the axially extending circumferential wall portion, and the radially outwardly extending second circumferential wall portion (see Figs. 2, 4).
Regarding claim 24, Pennell et al. disclose that the interlocked axially extending circumferential wall portion of the casing body and the interlocked radially outwardly extending wall portion of the casing body extend at a right angle to one another (Figs 2, 4).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-24 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-24 of U.S. Patent No. 12,287,184 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-24 of the instant application are anticipated by or obvious in view of claim 1-24 of the ‘184 patent.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. see the attached PTO-FORM 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES S BERGIN whose telephone number is (571)272-6872. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5am.
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.
/JAMES S BERGIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641
Prosecution Insights