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 .
Response to Amendment
The preliminary amendment filed 20 June 2025 is acknowledged. Applicant’s cancelation of claims 23-34 is noted. The remainder of the instant Office Action is directed to claims 1-22.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 15, 20, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nebeker (2014/0165442) in view of Bantle (2016/0146559).
In reference to claim 1, Nebeker discloses a firearm with slide takedown and magazine disconnect assembly comprising:
a frame (12) configured to detachably receive an ammunition magazine;
a barrel (14) defining a longitudinal axis of the firearm;
a trigger (16) for discharging the firearm;
a reciprocating slide (20) slidably engaged with the firearm, the slide moveable between a forward position and a rearward removal position (paragraphs 44 and 45);
a takedown lever (50) pivotably mounted to the firearm and engageable with the slide, the lever being pivotable in a lateral direction about the longitudinal axis between a blocking position in which the slide is not movable from the forward position to the rearward removal position, and a non-blocking position in which the slide is movable to the rearward removal position to disengage the frame (figures 7-9, 14, and 17; paragraphs 48 and 49).
Thus, Nebeker discloses the claimed invention except for:
a magazine disconnect member engageable with and movably responsive to inserting the magazine into or removing the magazine from the firearm;
wherein the magazine disconnect member is movable between a rearward locked position which blocks movement of the trigger to prevent firing the firearm, and a forward unlocked position which allows movement of the trigger and concurrently engages the takedown lever to prevent moving the takedown lever from the blocking position to the non-blocking position.
Further, Nebeker discloses that a latch or similar mechanical member can be used to selectively prevent movement of a takedown lever (paragraph 51). Bantle teaches it is known to provide a firearm, like that of Nebeker, with a magazine disconnect member engageable with and movably responsive to inserting a magazine into or removing the magazine from the firearm; wherein the magazine disconnect member is movable between a rearward position which blocks movement of the trigger to prevent firing the firearm (i.e., a position that locks the trigger), and a forward position which allows movement of the trigger and concurrently engages a takedown lever to prevent moving the takedown lever from the blocking position to the non-blocking position, in order to provide enhanced safety when disassembling the firearm and/or anytime the magazine the is removed, i.e. a position that unlocks the trigger, but locks the takedown lever (paragraph 39: magazine disconnect 17, takedown lever 15+15A; figure 8 shows the forward position; figure 10 shows the rearward position).
Thus, it is noted the magazine disconnect of Bantle acts, in part, as a latch or similar mechanical member to engage and prevent movement of the takedown lever when the magazine disconnect is in the forward position. Further, as noted above, Nebeker discloses that a latch or similar mechanical member can be used to engage and prevent movement of the takedown lever. Further, it is clear that the magazine disconnect (17) of Bantle moves forward and rearward relative to the takedown lever, albeit via a pivoting motion, to engage or disengage from the takedown lever. Further, Nebeker does not limit the configuration or arrangement of the latch or similar mechanical member. Further, it is clear from the drawings of Nebeker that such a latch or similar mechanical member could be implemented to move forward and rearward, via a pivoting motion, in a similar manner as to Bantle, since such a latch or mechanical member need only be able to move into and out of engagement with the takedown lever.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the firearm of Nebeker to include a magazine disconnect member engageable with and movably responsive to inserting a magazine into or removing the magazine from the firearm; wherein the magazine disconnect member is movable between a rearward locked position which blocks movement of the trigger to prevent firing the firearm, and a forward unlocked position which allows movement of the trigger and concurrently engages a takedown lever to prevent moving the takedown lever from the blocking position to the non-blocking position, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide enhanced safety when disassembling the firearm and/or anytime the magazine the is removed.
In reference to claim 2, Nebeker in view of Bantle makes obvious the claimed invention, as set forth above (also see Bantle, paragraph 39: spring 19).
In reference to claim 15, Nebeker in view of Bantle makes obvious the claimed invention, as set forth above in the references to claims 1 and 2.
In reference to claim 20, Nebeker in view of Bantle makes obvious the claimed invention (Nebeker: abstract, drawings, and paragraph 35).
In reference to claim 22, Nebeker in view of Bantle makes obvious the claimed invention (Nebeker: mounting end 58, free end 57, and blocking surface 52).
Claims 1-10, 15-17, and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nebeker in view of Kallio (2012/0174453) and further in view of Thomele (EP 2116804 A1),.
In reference to claim 1, Nebeker discloses a firearm with slide takedown and magazine disconnect assembly comprising:
a frame (12) configured to detachably receive an ammunition magazine;
a barrel (14) defining a longitudinal axis of the firearm;
a trigger (16) for discharging the firearm;
a reciprocating slide (20) slidably engaged with the firearm, the slide moveable between a forward position and a rearward removal position (paragraphs 44 and 45);
a takedown lever (50) pivotably mounted to the firearm and engageable with the slide, the lever being pivotable in a lateral direction about the longitudinal axis between a blocking position in which the slide is not movable from the forward position to the rearward removal position, and a non-blocking position in which the slide is movable to the rearward removal position to disengage the frame (figures 7-9, 14, and 17; paragraphs 48 and 49).
Thus, Nebeker discloses the claimed invention except for:
a magazine disconnect member engageable with and movably responsive to inserting the magazine into or removing the magazine from the firearm;
wherein the magazine disconnect member is movable between a rearward locked position which blocks movement of the trigger to prevent firing the firearm, and a forward unlocked position which allows movement of the trigger and concurrently engages the takedown lever to prevent moving the takedown lever from the blocking position to the non-blocking position.
Kallio teaches it is known to provide a firearm, like that of Nebeker, with a magazine disconnect member engageable with and movably responsive to inserting the magazine into or removing the magazine from the firearm, wherein the magazine disconnect member is movable between a rearward locked position which blocks movement of the trigger to prevent firing the firearm, and a forward unlocked position which allows movement of the trigger, in order to provide enhanced safety when the magazine is removed, wherein the magazine disconnect member is spring-biased to the rearward position (figures 9 and 10: magazine disconnect member 100, spring 120).
Additionally, Nebeker discloses that a latch or similar mechanical member can be used to selectively prevent movement of the takedown lever (paragraph 51).
Thomele teaches it is known to provide such a latch or similar mechanical member at the front end of a magazine disconnect member, like that of Kallio, to engage a takedown lever to prevent moving the takedown lever from a blocking position to a non-blocking position when the magazine disconnect member is in a forward position, in order to provide enhanced safety during disassembly (figures 2 and 3, magazine disconnect member 19 having latch/similar mechanical member 25, takedown lever 5+6). Thus, Thomele teaches it is known to form a latch or similar mechanical member to selectively prevent movement of a takedown lever on the front end of a magazine disconnect member.
Further, Nebeker does not limit the configuration or arrangement of the latch or similar mechanical member (disclosed in paragraph 51). Further, it is clear from the drawings of Nebeker that such a latch or similar mechanical member could be implemented to move forward and rearward, since such a latch or mechanical member need only be able to move into and out of engagement with the takedown lever.
Thus, considering all of the above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the firearm of Nebeker with a magazine disconnect member engageable with and movably responsive to inserting the magazine into or removing the magazine from the firearm; wherein the magazine disconnect member is movable between a rearward locked position which blocks movement of the trigger to prevent firing the firearm, and a forward unlocked position which allows movement of the trigger and concurrently engages the takedown lever to prevent moving the takedown lever from the blocking position to the non-blocking position, wherein the magazine disconnect member is spring-biased to the rearward position, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide enhanced safety when disassembling the firearm and/or anytime the magazine the is removed.
In reference to claim 2, Nebeker in view of Kallio and further in view of Thomele (the modified Nebeker) makes obvious the claimed invention, as set forth above.
In reference to claim 3, the modified Nebeker makes obvious the claimed invention. Both Kallio and Thomele teach magazine disconnect members that are slideably and axially movable along the longitudinal axis between their rearward and forward positions.
In reference to claim 4, the modified Nebeker makes obvious the claimed invention. In both Kallio and Thomele, the rear end of the magazine disconnect member engages a magazine. Thomele teaches it is the front end of the magazine disconnect member that engages the takedown lever.
In reference to claim 5, the modified Nebeker makes obvious the claimed invention (Kallio: protrusion 102; see figures 9 and 10).
In reference to claim 6, the modified Nebeker makes obvious the claimed invention (Kallio: figures 7 and 9-11, disconnect member 100, actuating protrusion 112). The takedown lever engagement protrusion is provided on a front end of the disconnect member, as set forth above in the reference to claim 1.
In reference to claim 7, the modified Nebeker makes obvious the claimed invention (Kallio: figures 7 and 9-11, central opening 101).
In reference to claim 8, the modified Nebeker makes obvious the claimed invention (Nebeker: figure 8 shows the blocking position, figures 9 and 10 show non-blocking position).
In reference to claim 9, the modified Nebeker makes obvious the claimed invention (Nebeker: figures 8-10).
In reference to claim 10, the modified Nebeker makes obvious the claimed invention (Nebeker: paragraph 51, the latch or similar mechanical member would engage a lateral surface, like the surface at the bottom of groove 82, in order to obtain the same functionality as pin 80; the modified Nebeker includes such a latch or similar mechanical member).
In reference to claim 15, the modified Nebeker makes obvious the claimed invention, as set forth above in the reference to claim 1.
In reference to claim 16, the modified Nebeker makes obvious the claimed invention (Nebeker: paragraph 51, the latch or similar mechanical member would engage a lateral surface, like the surface at the bottom of groove 82, in order to obtain the same functionality as pin 80; the modified Nebeker includes such a latch or similar mechanical member).
In reference to claim 17, the modified Nebeker makes obvious the claimed invention (Nebeker: paragraph 51, the latch or similar mechanical member would clearly include a lateral inward facing surface to engage the lateral surface of the takedown lever, like the pin 80 has such a surface to engage the surface at the bottom of groove 82, in order to obtain the same functionality as pin 80; the modified Nebeker includes such a latch or similar mechanical member).
In reference to claim 19, the modified Nebeker makes obvious the claimed invention (Nebeker: pocket 82 is intended to receive the latch or similar mechanical member disclosed in paragraph 51, in a manner similar to how pocket 82 receives pin 80).
In reference to claim 20, the modified Nebker makes obvious the claimed invention (see previous reference to claim 20).
In reference to claim 21, the modified Nebeker makes obvious the claimed invention (Kallio: figures 9 and 10).
In reference to claim 22, the modified Nebeker makes obvious the claimed invention (see previous reference to claim 22).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-14 and 18 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: see attached Notice of References Cited. The relevance of each cited reference is made clear by at least the abstract and/or drawings thereof.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIEL J KLEIN whose telephone number is (571)272-8229. The examiner can normally be reached 11:30am-8pm.
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.
GABRIEL J. KLEIN
Examiner
Art Unit 3641
/Gabriel J. Klein/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641
Prosecution Insights