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 .
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akiba US 2011/0239519.
Regarding claim 1, Akiba teaches a fishing line guide mountable to a fishing rod body to guide a fishing line, the fishing line guide comprising (figures 10-11):
a foam portion (25b figure 12D); and
a reinforced resin portion including a fiber-reinforced resin and covering a part of the foam portion, the reinforced resin portion being an external outer portion (3 as shown in figures 10-11 and described in paragraph 0051 as “The fishing line guide 1 is provided with a frame 3 made of a synthetic resin impregnated reinforced fiber, so called fiber reinforced resin”);
but does not specify the foam as foamed resin.
However, such material is very well known in the art; therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide such a resin type, in order to meet design preferences; since it has been held that a prima facie obviousness exists where the selection of a known material is based on its suitability for its intended use.
Regarding claim 2, Akiba teaches the fishing line guide according to claim 1, further comprising a guide ring configured to guide the fishing line (20a figure 11), and a guide frame holding the guide ring (as shown in figure 11) and being attached to the rod body (inherent), a part of the guide frame including the foam portion and the reinforced resin portion (figures 11 and 13).
Regarding claim 3, Akiba teaches the fishing line guide according to claim 2, wherein the guide frame comprises a mounting leg mountable to the rod body (6 of figure 11), a guide holder holding the guide ring (5 of figure 11), and a support leg connecting the mounting leg and the guide holder (7 of figure 11), and a part of the support leg including the foam portion and the reinforced resin portion (figures 11 and 13).
Regarding claim 4, Akiba teaches the fishing line guide according to claim 3, wherein the support leg includes a leg tip adjacent to the guide holder, the leg tip includes the foam portion and the reinforced resin portion (figures 11 and 13).
Regarding claim 5, Akiba teaches the fishing line guide according to claim 3, wherein the support leg includes a base part adjacent to the mounting leg, the base part includes the reinforced resin portion (figure 11).
Regarding claim 6, Akiba teaches the fishing line guide according to claim 2, wherein the guide frame comprises a mounting leg mountable to the rod body, a guide holder holding the guide ring, and a support leg connecting the mounting leg and the guide holder, and a part of the guide holder formed of the foam portion and the reinforced resin portion (see previous rejections).
Regarding claim 7, Akiba teaches the fishing line guide according to claim 6, wherein the guide holder includes a base part adjacent to the support leg, the base part includes the foam portion and the reinforced resin portion (figure 13).
Regarding claim 8, Akiba teaches the fishing line guide according to claim 6, wherein the guide holder includes a top portion away from the support leg, the top portion includes the reinforced resin portion (figure 13).
Regarding claim 9, Akiba teaches the fishing line guide according to claim 2, wherein the guide frame comprises a mounting leg mountable to the rod body, a guide holder holding the guide ring, and a support leg connecting the mounting leg and the guide holder, and the mounting leg, the guide holder, and the support leg include the foam portion and the reinforced resin portion (figure 11).
Regarding claim 10, Akiba teaches the fishing line guide according to claim 1, wherein the foam portion has a foam layer (as previously shown), and the reinforced resin portion comprises a first reinforced resin layer covering the foam layer on a rod tip side, and a second reinforced resin layer covering the foam layer on a rod butt side (shown between figures 11 and 12D where the wrapping provides the reinforced resin layer on both recited sides).
Regarding claim 11, Akiba teaches the fishing line guide according to claim 1, wherein the reinforced resin portion forms an external surface of the fishing line guide (see claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claim 12, Akiba teaches the fishing line guide according to claim 2, wherein the reinforced resin portion forms an external surface of the fishing line guide, and the external surface faces in an axial direction of the guide ring (as seen in figures 10-11).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-14 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not disclose or make obvious the combination of limitations recited in claims 1, 2, 13, and 14; particularly, wherein the foam portion forms an external surface of the fishing line guide, etc.
Response to Arguments
Response to Applicant's arguments filed 4/2/26 can be found in the updated rejections above in light of the amendments to the claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA WONG whose telephone number is (571)272-7889. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 8:00am to 4:30pm MST.
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, Timothy Collins can be reached at (571)272-6886. 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.
/JESSICA B WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3644
Prosecution Insights