DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
While there is an attorney listed, there is no power of attorney on file.
Claim Objections
Claims 4, 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
For claim 4, “twice their” in line 2 should read –twice the--.
For claim 8, “adjacent a second” in line 3 should read –adjacent to a second—.
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.
Claims 1-20 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the top of the body" in line 8, and “the bottom of the body” in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For claims 5 and 15, the limitation “intersect the first group of channels” in line 3 is unclear what is intersecting the first group of channels.
For claims 6-7, the limitation “a material” in line 1 and “a bulk density” in line 2 is unclear because is it referring to a different material and bulk density than what was stated in claim 1, line 13? For examination purposes, the limitation will be treated as the same material and bulk density and it is recommended that --the-- be inserted before “material” and “bulk density” in claims 6-7.
For claim 8, the limitation “a back end” in line 2 is unclear because is it referring to a different back end than what was stated in claim 1, line 3? For examination purposes, the limitation will be treated as the same back end and it is recommended that --the-- be inserted before “back end” in claim 8.
Also, the limitation “a fishing line” in line 3 is unclear because is it referring to a different fishing line than what was stated in claim 1, line 6? For examination purposes, the limitation will be treated as the same fishing line and it is recommended that --the-- be inserted before “fishing line” in claim 8.
Also, claim 8 recites the limitation "the concave back end " in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For claims 9-10, the limitation “a sink rate in calm water” in lines 1-2 is unclear because is it referring to a different sink rate and calm water than what was stated in claim 1, line 15? For examination purposes, the limitation will be treated as the same sink rate and calm water and it is recommended that --the-- be inserted before “sink rate” and “calm water” in claims 9-10.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the density” in line 9, “the group” in line 10, “the water” in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Also, the limitation “plurality of projections” in line 11 is unclear because is it referring to a different plurality of projections than what was stated in claim 11, line 5? For examination purposes, the limitation will be treated as the same plurality of projections and it is recommended that --the-- be inserted before “plurality of projections” in claim 11.
For claims 16-17, the limitation “a material” in line 1 and “a bulk density” in line 2 is unclear because is it referring to a different material and bulk density than what was stated in claim 11, line 8? For examination purposes, the limitation will be treated as the same material and bulk density and it is recommended that --the-- be inserted before “material” and “bulk density” in claims 16-17.
For claims 18-19, the limitation “a sink rate” in lines 1-2 is unclear because is it referring to a different sink rate than what was stated in claim 11, line 13? For examination purposes, the limitation will be treated as the same sink rate and it is recommended that --the-- be inserted before “sink rate” in claims 18-19.
Claims 2-4, 12-14 and 20 rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-13, 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walter (US 20080066369 A1) in view of Cunningham (US 20100229453 A1) and Brink (US 20150282464 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Walter teaches a slow sinking fishing weight (100 [0014-0015] as 100 can be a drifting sinker which are known to be slow sinking) comprising: a body (100) having a rounded exterior (fig. 1) comprising: a central axis (fig. 1 depicts a central axis) that extends from a front end (102) to a back end (104) of the body; a central plate (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1) that extends between the front end and the back end of the body (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1), wherein the central plate extends from the central axis towards left and right sides of the body (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1); a mounting hole (105) configured to receive a fishing line therethrough ([0015]), the mounting hole extending between the front end and the back end of the body along the central axis (fig. 1 and [0015] as 105 is suitable to allow for the length of a fishing line to pass through and so will extend between the front end and the back end, also see fig. 2 and [0021] where the bore passes along from the front end to the back end as the bore 205 is similar to bore 105); top channels (108(1), 108(2) and the top channels on the backside of 100 [0015], also see channels 208(1), 208(2), 208(5) and 208(6) as these channels are the same as 108 in fig. 1) that extend from the top of the body towards the central plate (figs. 1-2); top projections (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1 and backside of 100 [0015] will have top projections) located between the top channels (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1); bottom channels (108(3) and bottom channels on the backside of 100 [0015], also see channels 208(3) and 208(4) as these channels are the same as 108 in fig. 1) that extend from the bottom of the body towards the central plate (figs. 1-2); bottom projections (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1 and backside of 100 [0015] will have bottom projections) located between the bottom channels (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1); wherein the fishing weight body is made from a material having a bulk density ([0015] as the drifting sinker will be made from a material having a bulk density to allow it to sink); and wherein the fishing weight has a sink rate in calm water ([0014-0015] as 100 is a sinker, and so will have a sink rate in calm water).
PNG
media_image1.png
698
1316
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Walter is silent wherein the bulk density is between about 1.08 g/cc and about 1.02 g/cc; and said sink rate which is less than about 30 cm per second.
Cunningham teaches the fishing weight body (10) wherein the bulk density is between about 1.08 g/cc and about 1.02 g/cc ([0026] as 10 can have a density greater than 1 g/cc, and so is between about 1.08 g/cc and about 1.02 g/cc).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the bulk density of Walter to be between about 1.08 g/cc and about 1.02 g/cc as taught by Cunningham in order to make the fishing weight body heavier than water so that the fishing weight body can sink ([0026] of Cunningham), since it has been held that where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Brink teaches wherein said sink rate is less than about 30 cm per second ([0038] as the sink rate of 30.5 cm in 2 seconds will be 15.25cm per second).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sink rate of Walter to be less than about 30 cm per second as taught by Brink in order to have the fishing weight body slowly descend from the surface of the water so as to mimic baitfish and attract the desired game fish ([0034-0035] of Brink), since it has been held that where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 2, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 1, and Walter further teaches wherein the top channels extend longitudinally along the body (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1) and wherein the projections comprise ribs (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1 as the top projections form ribs) that extend between the top channels longitudinally along the body (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 2, and Walter further teaches further comprising a transverse wall (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1) that intersects the top channels (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
698
1316
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 1, and Walter further teaches wherein the top channels comprise a first group of channels (108(1), 108(2), 208(1), 208(2)) that extend along the fishing weight body (figs. 1 and 2) and a second group of channels (top channels on the backside of 100 [0015] and 208(5) and 208(6)) that extend along the fishing weight body and intersect the first group of channels (figs. 1 and 2, see 112b above) and wherein the top projections comprise posts (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1 as the top projections form posts) located between the top channels (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
698
1316
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 1, and Cunningham further teaches wherein the body is made from a material that has a bulk density which is between about 1.02 g/cc and about 1.06 g/cc ([0026] as 10 can have a density greater than 1 g/cc).
Regarding claim 7, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 1, and Cunningham further teaches wherein the body is made from a material that has a bulk density which is about 1.04 g/cc ([0026] as 10 can have a density greater than 1 g/cc).
Regarding claim 9, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 1, and Brink further teaches wherein the slow sinking fishing weight has a sink rate in calm water which is between about 5 cm per second and about 20 cm per second ([0038] as the sink rate of 30.5 cm in 2 seconds will be 15.25cm per second).
Regarding claim 10, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 1, and Brink further teaches wherein the slow sinking fishing weight has a sink rate in calm water which is about 10 cm per second ([0038] as the sink rate of 30.5 cm in 3 seconds will be 10.16 cm per second which is about 10 cm per second).
Regarding claim 11, Walter teaches a slow sinking fishing weight (100 [0014-0015] as 100 can be a drifting sinker which are known to be slow sinking) comprising: a body (100) comprising: a central axis (fig. 1 depicts a central axis) that extends from a front end (102) to a back end (104) of the body; a plurality of channels (108(1), 108(2), 108(3) and the plurality of channels on the backside of 100 [0015], also see channels 208(1)-208(6) as these channels are the same as 108 in fig. 1) that each extend inwardly from an exterior of the body (figs. 1-2 [0015]); a plurality of projections (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1 and backside of 100 [0015] will have plurality of projections) located between the plurality of channels (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1); a mount (105) which receives a fishing line ([0015]) to thereby attach the slow sinking fishing weight to the fishing line ([0015]); wherein the fishing weight body is made from a material having a bulk density greater than the density of a water selected from the group consisting of fresh water and ocean water ([0015] as the drifting sinker will be made from a material having a bulk density greater than the density of a water selected from the group consisting of fresh water and ocean water to allow the slow sinking fishing weight to sink); and wherein the plurality of channels and plurality of projections comprise deep surface features (fig. 1 and [0015]) that create sufficient resistance to movement through the water (fig. 1 and [0015] as the plurality of channels and plurality of projections will create sufficient resistance when moving through the water) that the fishing weight has a sink rate in the water ([0014-0015] as 100 is a sinker, and so will have a sink rate).
PNG
media_image2.png
698
1307
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, Walter is silent wherein the bulk density is between about 2 percent and about 8 percent greater than the density of the water; and said sink rate which is less than about 30 cm per second.
Cunningham teaches the fishing weight body (10) wherein the bulk density is between about 2 percent and about 8 percent greater than the density of the water ([0026] as 10 can have a density greater than 1 g/cc, and so will have the bulk density be between about 2 percent and about 8 percent greater than the density of the water).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the bulk density of Walter to be between about 2 percent and about 8 percent greater than the density of the water as taught by Cunningham in order to make the fishing weight body heavier than water so that the fishing weight body can sink ([0026] of Cunningham), since it has been held that where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Brink teaches said sink rate which is less than about 30 cm per second ([0038] as the sink rate of 30.5 cm in 2 seconds will be 15.25cm per second).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sink rate of Walter to be less than about 30 cm per second as taught by Brink in order to have the fishing weight body slowly descend from the surface of the water so as to mimic baitfish and attract the desired game fish ([0034-0035] of Brink), since it has been held that where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 12, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 11, and Walter further teaches wherein the plurality of channels extend longitudinally along the body (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1) and wherein the plurality of projections comprises ribs (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1 as the plurality of projections form ribs).
Regarding claim 13, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 12, and Walter further teaches further comprising a transverse wall (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1) that intersects the plurality of channels (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1) and interrupts water flow through the plurality of channels (the transverse wall will interrupt water flow through the plurality of channels as the transverse wall will further direct water to the plurality of channels).
Regarding claim 15, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 11, Walter further teaches wherein the plurality of channels comprise a first group of channels (108(1), 108(2), 208(1), 208(2)) that extend along the fishing weight body (figs. 1 and 2) and a second group of channels (top channels on the backside of 100 [0015] and 208(5) and 208(6)) that extend along the fishing weight body (fig. 1) and intersect the first group of channels (figs. 1 and 2) and wherein the plurality of projections comprise posts (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1 as the plurality of projections form posts) located between the plurality of channels (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
698
1307
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 11, and Cunningham further teaches wherein the body is made from a material that has a bulk density which is between about 2 percent and about 6 percent greater than the water ([0026] as 10 can have a density greater than 1 g/cc, and so will have the bulk density between about 2 percent and about 6 percent greater than the water).
Regarding claim 17, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 11, and Cunningham further teaches wherein the body is made from a material that has a bulk density which is about 4 percent greater than the water ([0026] as 10 can have a density greater than 1 g/cc, and so will have the bulk density 4 percent greater than the water).
Regarding claim 18, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 11, and Brink further teaches wherein the slow sinking fishing weight has a sink rate in calm water which is between about 5 cm per second and about 20 cm per second ([0038] as the sink rate of 30.5 cm in 2 seconds will be 15.25cm per second).
Regarding claim 19, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 11, and Brink further teaches wherein the slow sinking fishing weight has a sink rate in calm water which is about 10 cm per second ([0038] as the sink rate of 30.5 cm in 3 seconds will be 10.16 cm per second which is about 10 cm per second).
Regarding claim 20, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 11, further comprising a central plate (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1) that extends between the front end and the back end of the (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1) and that extends from the central axis towards left and right sides of the body (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1), and wherein the plurality of projections comprises top projections (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1 and backside of 100 [0015] will have top projections) that extend from a top side of the central plate (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1) and bottom projections (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1 and backside of 100 [0015] will have bottom projections (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1 and backside of 100 [0015] will have bottom projections (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1 and backside of 100 [0015] will have bottom projections) that extend from a bottom side of the central plate (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
698
1307
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 4 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Walter (US 20080066369 A1 embodiment 300, hereon referred to as Walter’2).
Regarding claim 4, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 1, and Walter further teaches wherein the top channels have a depth which is at least twice their width (fig. 2).
However, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink is silent about wherein the top channels have a width which is about 2 mm or greater.
Walter’2 teaches wherein the top channels (304(1) and opposite side of 304(1) in fig. 3A) have a width which is about 2 mm or greater ([0029]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the top channels of Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink to have a width which is about 2 mm or greater as taught by Walter’2 based on the user’s preference to have the fishing weight provide a more natural drifting to mimic real bait as it is well known in the art, since it has been held that where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 14, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 11, and Walter further teaches wherein the plurality of channels have a depth which is at least twice their width (fig. 2).
However, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink is silent about wherein the plurality of channels have a width which is about 2 mm or greater.
Walter’2 teaches wherein the plurality of channels (304(1)-304(3) and opposite side of 304(1)-304(3) in fig. 3A) have a width which is about 2 mm or greater ([0029]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the plurality of channels of Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink to have wherein the plurality of channels have a width which is about 2 mm or greater as taught by Walter’2 based on the user’s preference to have the fishing weight provide a more natural drifting to mimic real bait as it is well known in the art, since it has been held that where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claims 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Canales (US 7546704 B1).
Regarding claim 8, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink teaches the slow sinking fishing weight of claim 1, Walter further teaches wherein the body has an ovoid outer shape (fig. 1) and wherein a back end of the body has a concave shape (fig. 1), and wherein a first slow sinking weight (100) may be attached to a fishing line ([0015]).
However, Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink is silent about the first sinking weight adjacent a second slow sinking fishing weight such that the front end of the first sinking fishing weight is nested inside the concave back end of the second slow sinking fishing weight.
Canales teaches the first sinking weight (7) adjacent a second slow sinking fishing weight (8 and abstract as the sinker lifter 8 will have a gravity slightly greater than water, and so will slowly sink) such that the front end of the first sinking fishing weight is nested inside the concave back end of the second slow sinking fishing weight (fig. 5 and Col. 3, lines 41-51).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the first sinking weight adjacent a second slow sinking fishing weight such that the front end of the first sinking fishing weight is nested inside the concave back end of the second slow sinking fishing weight as taught by Canales into the slow sinking fishing weight of Walter as modified by Cunningham and Brink in order to increase the length of the fishing weight (fig. 5 of Canales) so as to enhance the appearance of a more desirable bait to further attract larger fish as it is well known in the art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
FRISBIE (US 2228513 A) teaches a first weight nested in a second weight.
Sims (US 20040107626 A1) teaches a sinker with channels.
Frank (US 2599973 A) teaches a sinker with channels.
Park (KR 20220162498 A) teaches a first weight nested in a second weight.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAHAR ALMATRAHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2470. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30.
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, Peter Poon can be reached at 571-272-6891. 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.
/SAHAR ALMATRAHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3643
/DAVID J PARSLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643