DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01 JUL 26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to Applicant’s assertion that “No prohibited new matter is included,” at least with respect to Fig. 1, whether adding the callout “G-1” and an arrow is prohibited new matter is irrelevant because the amendment to the specification renders the G-1 and the arrow new matter. Specifically, Applicant amends the specification to now say that a “fire control system G, in turn, is secured to the riser assembly F at a mounting point G-1 on a mount of the fire control system G (e.g., a standalone mount, for example, of a Wilcox GSSS grenade sighting system per one embodiment), whereby the riser raises the mounting point of the fire control system G” (underlining showing newly-added matter), ¶ [0082]. Nowhere did Applicant previously disclose anything like a mounting point G-1 being a standalone mount. Thus, the amendment to the specification is new matter and, thus, the amendment to drawing Fig. 1 is also new matter.
As regards the basis of rejections under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103, i.e., US 2020/0033095 to Sabaldan Elpedes (“SE”), reliance on powered mount 10, e.g., Figs. 1-4, fairly meets “a riser housing” and “wherein the riser housing is separate from and configured to raise the mounting point of the fire control system.” From, e.g., Fig. 4, it is evident that SE fully contemplates a separate element from fire control system 14 and, from at least Figs. 1-2, it is also clear that riser housing 10 is sufficiently configured to raise the mounting point of the fire control system 10. Note that SE discloses that “optical device 14 may be any optical device for aligning a barrel 20 of the firearm 18 relative to a target,” ¶ [0040], which clearly conveys that riser housing 10 has no association with any particular optical device, but rather, may be used with any such device.
For these reasons, the rejections must stand.
Drawings
The drawings filed 01 JUL 26 are objected to because such include new matter. See discussion above. 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 amendment filed 01 JUL 26 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure has been adequately detailed above.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 remains objected to because of the following informalities: “transmitted” in lines 2-3 (2X), should be shortened to --transmit--, for agreement with “configured to” preceding each. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "The combination" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. By amendment, no combination is recited in claim 3 upon which claim 4 depends.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claims 1-5, 7, 16, and 18-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SE.
Re: claims 1 and 3, SE discloses the claimed invention including a riser mount system for a weapon comprising: a riser housing 10, e.g., Figs. 1-4, having a lower surface 22 configured to engage a weapon accessory interface 34; an upper surface 98 opposite the lower surface (shown) configured to engage a fire control system 14; and a peripheral wall (not particularly called out but clearly shown) extending between the lower surface and the upper surface, the housing defining an interior compartment (evidenced by, e.g., aperture 114 and area housing battery and power conversion system 142), wherein the riser housing is separate from and configured to raise the mounting point of the fire control system (see above); a riser circuit assembly, inter alia, 146, 150, disposed with the interior compartment (shown), the interior compartment configured to receive one or more batteries 154 for electrical coupling to the riser circuit assembly, ¶ [0047]; an electrical connector 110 disposed on the upper surface (shown: see also 134, e.g., Fig. 5A) and structured and operable to electrically couple the one or more batteries to a fire control system, ¶ [0044] (see also, 138, e.g., Fig. 5B) and a camera assembly disposed within the interior compartment (not shown, but see, ¶ [0057]), and, re: claim 3, to include the fire control system (shown).
Re: claim 2, SE further discloses wherein the camera assembly comprises a camera (above) positioned to image a target area located along a direction of aim of the weapon. Whether SE expressly discloses such, while having a camera positioned to image a target area located outside a direction of aim of the weapon would be possible, along the direction of aim would be best. Furthermore, because SE fails to suggest the camera being unaligned with the direction of aim, the presumption must be along such a direction.
Re: claim 4, SE further discloses wherein the fire control system comprises a laser sight, e.g., ¶¶ [0039], [0056].
Re: claim 5, SE further discloses further comprising a rail clamp assembly, inter alia, 38, configured to detachably engage a weapon-mounted rail, ¶ [0041].
Re: claim 7, SE further discloses wherein the rail clamp assembly is configured to detachably engage a Picatinny rail. Whether expressly so disclosed, the rail shown reasonably demonstrates that, among attachment rails, Picatinny-type rails were clearly contemplated.
Re: claim 16, SE further discloses wherein the weapon accessory interface comprises a handguard assembly, e.g., Fig. 6B, having a handguard circuit assembly, inter alia, 34’, 312 in electrical communication with the riser circuit assembly, as via 90, e.g., Fig. 6A, and 94.
Re: claim 18, Se further discloses the system further comprising a flashlight assembly configured for detachable coupling to the weapon accessory interface and electrical coupling to the one or more batteries, e.g., ¶¶ [0039], [0056].
Anent: claims 19-21, see relevant claims above.
Re: claim 22, SE discloses the claimed invention as applied above and further including a first electrical connector 134, e.g., Fig. 5A, disposed on [[the]] --a-- first surface 122 and structured and operable to electrically couple the one or more batteries to a fire control system 14’, e.g., Fig. 5B, ;a second electrical connector 306, e.g., Fig. 6A, disposed on [[the]] --a--second surface 310 and structured and operable to electrically couple the one or more batteries to one or more devices on the weapon accessory interface, ¶ [0056]; and a camera assembly configured for detachable coupling to the weapon accessory interface and electrical coupling to the one or more batteries. The combination of the disclosures of ¶¶ [0056] – [0057] clearly establishes that SE fully contemplated not only secondary accessories attachable to the riser mount but also such elements being integral therewith. Thus, any combination of any particular number of accessories and the riser mount is fairly anticipated by SE.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 6 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SE.
Re: claim 6, SE discloses the claimed invention as applied above and further discloses wherein the rail clamp assembly includes at least one movable rail clamp 66 actuated by a rotatable fastener 82 to secure the accessory to the rail (through apertures 86), except for the fastener 82 being a thumbscrew.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to substitute a thumbscrew for the fastener disclosed, since the equivalence of fasteners and thumbscrews for their use in the firearm accessory attachment art and the selection of any known equivalents to the fastener disclosed would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Further rationale: “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield predictable results.” KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395. Here, substituting fasteners would yield only predictable results.
Re: claim 14-15, SE discloses the claimed invention as applied above including the lower surface of the housing comprising a rail segment to detachably attach to a rail of a firearm, wherein the rail segment is a Picatinny rail segment, except for the upper surface of the housing comprising such a rail segment.
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, SE clearly discloses multiple means for attaching accessories to the upper surface, including a channel 122 and ridge 126 in a base 130 arrangement. It cannot be reasonably argued that SE proposes simply setting the ridge 126 into the channel 122 to attach the accessory 14’ to the housing 10’ because the accessory would certainly fall off the housing absent some means for fastening the two together. Because SE fairly discloses a rail segment at the lower surface of the housing configured to attach to a rail of a firearm and because accessories are known to incorporate rails into their attachment facilities, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the rail segment of the lower surface for the means for attachment of the upper surface to connect to a rail of an accessory. See also further rationale provided above.
Claim 22 is alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SE.
Should the rejection based on anticipation above fail, it is asserted that, given the disclosure of SE, one of ordinary skill in the art would arrive at the claimed invention, i.e., multiple electrical connectors for multiple accessories and a camera, since such appears merely to duplicate disclosed parts and since SE clearly discloses multiple accessories.
Claims 8-13 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SE in view of US 2022/0120533 to Teetzel et al. (“Teetzel”).
Re: claim 8, SE discloses the claimed invention as applied above and further discloses further comprising: a first battery tube disposed within the interior compartment (wherein battery 154 is disposed, ¶ [0047]) and configured to receive a first battery 154; except for a second battery tube disposed within the interior compartment and configured to receive a second battery; and a switch disposed on the housing and configured to selectively electrically couple the first battery and the second battery to the riser circuit assembly and to selectively electrically decouple the first battery and the second battery from the riser circuit assembly.
Teetzel teaches a riser mount system 1000, e.g., Figs. 1-2, comprising a housing (shown/inherent) including a first battery tube (for holding a power source 1136) and configured to receive a first battery, ¶ [0039], a second battery tube (next to the first but otherwise identically configured), a second battery (the other power source 1136), a switch 1080 disposed on the housing (shown) and configured to selectively electrically couple the first battery and the second battery to the riser circuit assembly and to selectively electrically decouple the first battery and the second battery from the riser circuit assembly, ¶ [0035], in the same field of endeavor for the purpose of assisting in weapons launching projectiles having known trajectories, ¶ [0002].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify SE as taught by Teetzel in order to assist in launching projectiles having known trajectories with a reasonable expectation of success because Teetzel further discloses an optical range finder, ¶ [0003], thus resolving a distance to a target and the applicable trajectory required. Further rationale: All claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to a skilled artisan at the time the invention was made.
Re: claim 9, Teetzel further discloses wherein the first battery tube includes a first open end (inherent/shown/disclosed) extending through a first opening in the peripheral wall (inherent/shown/disclosed), the first open end being closed by a first removable cover 1140; and the second battery tube includes a second open end extending through an opening in the peripheral wall, the second open end being closed by a second removable cover 1140, ¶ [0039].
Re: claim 10, Teetzel further discloses further comprising a computer-readable storage medium 1180, e.g., Fig. 12, configured to store digital representations of images acquired by the camera assembly 1152, ¶ [0044].
Re: claim 11, whether expressly disclosed by Teetzel, the storage medium being removable would be an obvious variant well-known in the art. Furthermore, it has been held that the recitation that an element is “capable of” performing a function, here, e.g., capable of removal, is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform. It does not constitute a limitation in any patentable sense. In re Hutchinson, 69 USPQ 138. Thus, even were tools required to remove the medium, Teetzel would still obviate the claimed subject matter.
Re: claim 12, Teetzel further discloses further comprising a wireless communication module 1220 configured to transmit image data acquired by the camera assembly to an external device, ¶ [0044].
Re: claim 13, Teetzel further discloses wherein the wireless communication module is configured to (i) transmit[[ed]] image data in real time as a video stream (via module 1220, and video processor 1164 and video circuit board 1168); (ii) transmit[[ed]] image data in batch form following acquisition; or both. There is nothing about the configuration disclosed incapable of transmitting image data in batch form following acquisition, if such is capable of transmitting image data at all.
Re: claim 17, Teetzel further discloses further comprising a keypad assembly 1096, electrically coupled to weapon accessory interface, ¶¶ [0036] – [0037], the keypad assembly having one or more buttons configured to control operation of the fire control system (a three-button keypad is disclosed).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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
31-Aug-26
Prosecution Insights