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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS document submitted 12/15/2025 is acknowledged and has been considered.
Drawings
The drawings submitted 5/16/2025 are acknowledged and acceptable.
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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1, 5 and 6 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10,823,528. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the differences in language between the sets of claims do not differentiate the patentable subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-9, 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Crawford et al. (U.S. Patent 7,028,427).
In regards to claim 1, Crawford et al (henceforth referred to as Crawford) disclose a brace for stabilizing a handheld device against a user’s forearm, comprising:
an elongated body adapted to detachably engage a portion of the device. Crawford teaches a portion of a brace that fits over or engages a portion of a firearm and constitutes an elongated body (see item 12 of figure 2 of Crawford); and
an arm pivotably connected to the body. Crawford teaches an arm (item 18) that pivots relative to the body portion via a hinge (item 16);
the arm selectably moveable between a stowed position wherein the arm is substantially aligned with the body, and a deployed position wherein the arm provides a surface against which a user’s forearm is removably receivable to stabilize the handheld device when the body is engaged with the handheld device. As depicted, the Crawford arm pivots from a stowed position (not shown) that is “substantially aligned”, in the same manner as the instant invention, with the body portion to a rotated position where the arm stabilizes the device relative to a user’s forearm.
In regards to claim 2, Crawford discloses that the elongated body includes a body and a fixed arm. Note that the portion fixedly protruding from the semi-circular section (item 20) and is hinged to the pivoting arm constitutes a fixed arm (see figure 1).
In regards to claim 3, Crawford discloses that the arm is substantially adjacent the elongated body when the arm is in the stowed position. Crawford teaches that the arm is pivoted up and next the rifle stock and the body portion of the brace (col. 2, lines 16-27).
In regards to claim 4, Crawford discloses that the arm is vertically parallel with a portion of the elongated body when the arm is in the stowed position. The pivoting arm of the Crawford device is swung to a stowed position that is vertically parallel to a portion of the elongated member to the same degree shown in the instant invention.
In regards to claim 5, Crawford discloses that the arm is pivotably connected to a lower end portion of the elongated body. The pivoting arm is attached to a lower portion of the body at the hinge (item 16).
In regards to claim 7, Crawford discloses that the arm extends outwardly from a side of the elongated body when the arm is in the deployed position. The pivoting arm of the Crawford device swings to an extended position outwardly from the body as depicted.
In regards to claim 8, Crawford discloses that the arm is selectably moveable at least partially in a side direction away from the elongated body. The pivoting movement of the arm away from the body includes movement in a side direction.
In regards to claim 9, Crawford discloses that the arm is selectably moveable through a plane substantially normal to an axis extending between a forward surface and a rearward surface of the elongated body. The movement of the pivoting arm of the Crawford device is in/along a plane that is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the device.
In regards to claim 14, Crawford discloses that the elongated body includes an elongated extension portion extending from a forward surface of the elongated body; and the extension portion is adapted to detachably engage a portion of the device. The “elongated body” of the Crawford brace includes a portion protruding from the forward end that engages a portion of the device (rifle stock).
In regards to claim 15, Crawford discloses that a portion of the elongated body is configured to receive a portion of the handheld device at least partially therethrough. The curved portion of the brace of Crawford receives a rifle stock therethrough.
In regards to claim 16, Crawford discloses that the elongated body includes a passage in which a portion of the handheld device is telescopically receivable to attach the brace to the handheld device, the passage extending through at least a portion of the elongated body from a forward end of the elongated body toward a rearward end of the elongated body. The elongated body of the Crawford device includes a semi-circular section that creates a passage that allows a handheld device (rifle stock) to be telescopically received (slid through until protruding from the other side).
In regards to claim 17, Crawford discloses that the elongated body comprises a selectably releasable clamping member operable to releasably engage a portion of the handheld device to attach the brace to the handheld device. The semi-circular portion of the Crawford brace clamps onto a rifle stock.
In regards to claim 18, Crawford discloses that the handheld device is a firearm.
In regards to claim 19, Crawford discloses a firearm, comprising:
a rear end portion. Crawford teaches a rifle stock; and
a brace for stabilizing the firearm against a user’s forearm (see figure 1), the brace comprising:
an elongated body adapted to detachably engage the rear end portion of the
firearm. Crawford teaches a portion of a brace that fits over or engages a portion of a firearm and constitutes an elongated body (see item 12 of figure 2 of Crawford);
and
an arm pivotably connected to the body, the arm selectively moveable between a stowed position wherein the arm is substantially aligned with the elongated body, and a deployed position wherein the arm provides a surface against which a user’s forearm is removably receivable to stabilize the firearm when the elongated body is engaged with the rear end portion of the firearm. As depicted, the Crawford arm pivots from a stowed position (not shown) that is “substantially aligned”, in the same manner as the instant invention, with the body portion to a rotated position where the arm stabilizes the device relative to a user’s forearm.
In regards to claim 20, Crawford discloses a method of stabilizing a firearm, comprising:
providing a handgun and a brace for stabilizing the handgun against a user’s forearm. Crawford teaches using a rifle and attaching a brace, the brace comprising:
an elongated body adapted to detachably engage a rear end portion of the
handgun. Crawford teaches a portion of a brace that fits over or engages a portion of a firearm and constitutes an elongated body (see item 12 of figure 2 of Crawford), and
an arm pivotably connected to the elongated body. Crawford teaches an arm (item 18) that pivots relative to the body portion via a hinge (item 16);
the arm selectively moveable between a stowed position wherein the arm is substantially aligned with the elongated body, and a deployed position wherein the arm provides a surface against which a user’s forearm is removably receivable to stabilize the handgun when the elongated body is engaged with the rear end portion of the firearm. As depicted, the Crawford arm pivots from a stowed position (not shown) that is “substantially aligned”, in the same manner as the instant invention, with the body portion to a rotated position where the arm stabilizes the device relative to a user’s forearm; and
holding a grip portion of the handgun while the brace is engaged with the rear end portion of the handgun and the user’s forearm is received against the arm. Crawford teaches attaching the brace to a stock of a rifle and a user holding at least some portion of the rifle. Note that any portion of the rifle constitutes a grip portion.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-13 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 and submission of an approved Terminal Disclaimer.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: With respect to claim 10, the closest prior art fails to teach or make obvious, including all the limitations of claim 10, that the elongated body includes a slot in which the arm is removably receivable when the arm is in the stowed position.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN P LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-8968. The examiner can normally be reached between the hours of 8:30am and 5:00pm on Monday through Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Troy Chambers can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/BENJAMIN P LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641