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 .
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.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Response to Amendment
The preliminary amendment to the claims filed 8/6/2025 has been entered:
Claims 1-2 are cancelled.
Claims 3-22 are new.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/22/2025 is being considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, at least the biasing member contacting the carrier plate to urge the carrier plate toward the adjustment screw (claims 11 and 19) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claim(s) 8, 12-19, and 22 is/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 8 recites the limitation “a slide bearing” in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. A slide bearing was already recited in claim 1, from which claim 8 depends, thus rendering unclear whether applicant is referring to the previously recited slide bearing or to another slide bearing.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “the void” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because a void of the base was not previously recited.
Further regarding claim 12, the limitation “a carrier plate disposed within [a] void of the base” in line 3 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear which components are being positively claimed and which are not. For example, an adjustment system “for a firearm accessory including a base” was previously recited, which suggests that the base and the firearm accessory are not being positively claimed. However, “carrier plate disposed within [a] void of the base” was subsequently recited, which now suggests that the base (via the void thereof) and the firearm accessory (via the base thereof) are being positively claimed. Clarification is required.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “a slide bearing” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. A slide bearing was already recited in claim 12, from which claim 17 depends, thus rendering unclear whether applicant is referring to the previously recited slide bearing or to another slide bearing.
Regarding claim 22, the limitation “a spring disposed between the carrier mount and the vertical actuator and structured to bias the carrier mount toward the vertical actuator” in lines 1-3 is unclear as claimed. How would a spring disposed between the carrier mount and the vertical actuator bias the carrier mount toward the vertical actuator? The drawings and specification show and describe only a spring 134 which is disposed between the carrier mount 130 and the carrier plate 120. Clarification is required.
Claims 13-16 and 18-19 are rejected for depending from an indefinite claim.
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.
Claim(s) 3-9, 12-18, and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jeung (US 2016/0305741), herein ‘Jeung’.
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Jeung discloses an adjustable target sight (Fig. 10) for a firearm (par. 36), comprising:
a base (110, 210) for securing a body (211) of the target sight to the firearm, the base including a void (Figs. 10 and 12);
a carrier plate (242) disposed within the void of the base (Figs. 11 and 13-15);
a carrier mount (223) coupled to and carried by the carrier plate (Figs. 13-15; par. 102-103);
a light source (221) carried by the carrier mount (par. 83; Figs. 12-15); and
a vertical adjustment system (230) operative to cause the carrier mount to move vertically relative to the carrier plate (Fig. 15; par. 84-86), the vertical adjustment system including:
a vertical actuator (231 and/or the portion of component 232 other than 232a) for transferring an adjustable biasing force to the carrier plate (Fig. 15; par. 84-86),
a spring (234) coupled to the carrier mount and structured to bias the carrier mount toward the vertical actuator (Fig. 15; par. 98-99), and
a slide bearing (232 and/or 232a) in physical contact with the carrier mount (Figs. 13-15).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Jeung discloses wherein the slide bearing further biases the carrier mount in a direction other than vertical (Fig. 14; component 232 prevents respective vertical movement and enables respective horizontal movement of component 223).
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Jeung discloses wherein the slide bearing is hollow (Figs. 12-15; at least the portion of component 232 which meshes with threaded portion 231b of shaft 231a is shown to be hollow such that the threaded portion 231b can extend therethrough).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Jeung discloses wherein the carrier plate is horizontally adjustable relative to the base (Fig. 14; par. 95).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Jeung discloses wherein the vertical actuator remains in position when the carrier plate is horizontally adjusted (Fig. 14).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Jeung discloses another slide bearing (235) disposed between the vertical actuator and the carrier mount (Fig. 14).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Jeung discloses wherein the vertical actuator is ring-shaped (Figs. 12-15; at least the portion of component 232 which meshes with threaded portion 231b of shaft 231a is shown to be ring-shaped such that the threaded portion 231b can extend therethrough).
Regarding claim 20, Jeung discloses a target sight (Fig. 10) for a firearm (par. 36), comprising:
a carrier plate (242) structured to move horizontally relative to a base (110, 210) of the target sight (Fig. 14; par. 95);
a carrier mount (223) coupled to and carried by the carrier plate (Figs. 13-15; par. 102-103);
a light source (221) carried by the carrier mount (par. 83; Figs. 12-15); and
a vertical adjustment system (230) operative to cause the carrier mount to move vertically relative to the carrier plate (Fig. 15; par. 84-86), the vertical adjustment system including a vertical actuator (231) that remains horizontally fixed relative to the base of the target sight (Fig. 14).
Regarding claim 21, Jeung discloses a slide bearing (232 and/or 235) disposed between the vertical actuator and the carrier mount (Figs. 13-15).
Regarding claim 22, Jeung discloses a spring (234) disposed between the carrier mount and the carrier plate (Figs. 13-15) and structured to bias the carrier mount toward the vertical actuator (Fig. 15; par. 98-99).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 10-11 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeung (US 2016/0305741) as applied to claims 6 and 14 above, respectively, and further in view of Elpedes et al. (US 2010/0083554), herein ‘Elpedes’.
Regarding claims 10-11 and 19, Jeung discloses a horizontal adjustment system (240) including an adjustment screw (241) structured to act on the carrier plate (par. 90-91); and a biasing member (243) contacting the carrier plate to urge the carrier plate toward the adjustment screw (Figs. 13-15; par. 104-105), but does not expressly teach one or more apertures in the carrier plate structured to respectfully receive one or more pins coupled to the base therethrough.
Elpedes teaches a sight (10) for a firearm (20) comprising a base (26), a carrier plate (78) disposed within the base (Fig. 3), a carrier mount (130, 138) coupled to and carried by the carrier plate (par. 69), a light source (132) carried by the carrier mount (Fig. 5), a vertical actuator (76) to cause the carrier mount to move vertically (par. 69), a horizontal adjustment screw (100) to cause the carrier mount to move horizontally (par. 85), and one or more apertures (95) in the carrier plate (par. 59) to receive one or more pins (93) coupled to the base therethrough (Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the carrier plate of Jeung to include one or more apertures structured to respectfully receive one or more pins coupled to the base therethrough as taught by Elpedes with a reasonable expectation of success in order to further maintain the position of the carrier plate relative to the base (Elpedes; par. 59).
Conclusion
Claims 1-2 are cancelled. Claims 3-22 are rejected.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN S GOMBERG whose telephone number is (571)272-4802. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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.
/Troy Chambers/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3641
/BENJAMIN S. GOMBERG/
Examiner
Art Unit 3641
Prosecution Insights