DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-10 and 16-20 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10 JUL 26.
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.
Claims 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2020/0232737 to McClellan et al. (“MC”).
Re: claim 11, MC discloses the claimed invention including a laser sighting and decoy assembly comprising: a housing 102, e.g., Fig. 1, configured to be coupled with a firearm (“a device is provided that is attachable to a firearm,” ¶ [0020]; at least one laser sight assembly 108 (“a laser designator,” ¶ [0069]) operably coupled with the housing, e.g., Figs. 3-5, and configured to project a first laser from the housing (inherent in “laser designator” disclosed); and at least one decoy assembly configured to be selectively coupled with the housing. With respect to the last clause, MC discloses:
the secondary feature 108 may alternatively be or additionally include any other device that is mounted to a rail of a firearm such as, for example, a laser designator, an IR illuminator, a range finding, a video and/or audio capture, or less lethal capabilities, and any other unmentioned functionality applicable or desirable to be weapon mounted, (Emphasis added), ¶ [0069].
From this it is evident that MC fully contemplated two devices coupled to the housing.
Re: claim 12, MC further discloses wherein the at least one laser sight assembly and the at least one decoy assembly are positioned within the housing. This is asserted in view of the secondary feature 108 being shown fully incorporated into the housing in, e.g., Figs. 3-5. It follows then that any additional device would be similarly disposed, absent express disclosure against doing so by MC, which there does not appear to be.
Re: claim 13, MC further discloses further comprising: a motion sensor 1002, 1004, 1005, e.g., Fig. 7; a controller 208, e.g., Fig. 6, communicatively coupled with the at least one laser sight assembly and the at least one decoy assembly (via secondary functionality 206; see also ¶ [0082]), the controller comprising instructions stored in memory which, when executed by the controller, cause the controller to perform actions (see, e.g., ¶¶ [0020] – [0024]) comprising: communicating with the motion sensor to receive motion data, ¶ [0074]; communicating with the at least one decoy assembly to control a decoy component, id.; communicating with the at least one laser sight assembly to control a laser sight to produce the first laser, id.; and selectively actuating one of the decoy component and the laser sight individually or in a predetermined sequence, id. MC discloses, “the CPU 208 may control operation of any of the secondary functionality 206 based on inputs from the sensor array 202” (emphasis added), id. In view of the cited and previous disclosures, MC fairly anticipates the claim.
Re: claim 14, MC further discloses wherein the at least one decoy assembly includes one or more laser sight assemblies. This is asserted in view of the disclosure by MC of “additionally include any other device that is mounted to a rail system of a firearm,” ¶ [0069], “and any other unmentioned functionality applicable or desirable to be weapon mounted,” id., in view of “the secondary functionality 206 may include, for example, an IR illuminator 1012, laser 1013 for aiming, flashlight 1014 (e.g., LED flashlight), and/or any other feature desired,” ¶ [0082]. Having multiple lasers on a firearm is sufficiently well-known in the art (see, e.g., US 10,337,829 to Spielberger, US 8,459,822 to Lambert et al., US 8,104,186 to Raschella et al., US 2008/ 0060248 to Pine et al., all cited by Applicant), such that “any other feature desired” reasonably includes another laser, whether expressly disclosed by MC.
Re: claim 15, MC further discloses wherein the at least one decoy assembly includes one or more speakers 1006, light sources (see relevant discussion above), .
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.
Alternatively, claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MC.
Should the anticipatory basis of rejection above be held invalid, MC discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the at least one decoy assembly includes one or more laser sight assemblies, expressly. Because MC does positively disclose at least one laser, an additional laser becomes mere duplication of parts. It has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(B). Here, neither a new nor an unexpected result is produced by simply adding another laser.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to Bret Hayes at telephone number (571) 272 – 6902, fax number (571) 273-6902, or email address bret.hayes@uspto.gov, which is preferred, especially for requesting interviews, general questions, etc. Note, however, that return correspondence cannot be made in the event that information subject to the confidentiality requirement as set forth in 35 U.S.C. § 122 has been included. See MPEP §§ 502.03 and 713.01, I, regarding email communications. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays through Fridays from 5:30 AM to 1:30 PM, Eastern.
The Central FAX Number is 571-273-8300.
If attempts to contact the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Troy Chambers, can be reached at (571) 272 – 6874.
/Bret Hayes/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641
9-Sep-26
