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.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 9-10 and 16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 9/22/2025.
Response to Amendment
The amendment to the claims filed 9/22/2025 has been entered:
Claims 1-25 are active.
Claims 21-25 are new.
Claims 9-10 and 16 are withdrawn.
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/22/2025 is being considered.
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
US Patent 11747100 is referenced in paragraph [0098], but is not cited in the IDS.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 7/11/2025. These drawings are acceptable.
Specification
The lengthy 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 Objections
Claim(s) 1-2, 8, 11, 15, 20, and 24 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “the at least one part” in line 6 should instead say, for example, “[[the]] at least one part of the firearm”.
Regarding claim 2, “slideably” in line 2 should say “slidably”; and a period (“.”) should be inserted at the end of the claim.
Regarding claim 8, “the grip surface” in line 1 should instead say “[[the]] a grip surface”.
Regarding claim 11, the colon (“:”) at the end of line 5, after the word “part”, should be replaced with a comma (“,”); the limitation “the length” in line 16 should instead say “[[the]] a length”; and “a length” in line 18 should be deleted.
Regarding claim 15, the word “is” in line 1 should be deleted.
Regarding claim 20, “the at least one part” in line 6 should instead say, for example, “[[the]] at least one part of the firearm”; “the length” in line 14 should instead say, for example, “[[the]] a length”; and “and a length” in line 17 should be deleted.
Regarding claim 24, the at least one projection was previously recited in claims 22-23, and was not previously recited in claim 21, from which claim 24 depends. As such, for examination, it was assumed that applicant intended for claim 24 to depend from claim 23.
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 18-20 and 23-25 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.
Regarding claim 18, the limitation “wherein the slideable attachment interface comprises a first portion of an attachment interface and the additional interface comprises a second portion of the attachment interface that is different than the first and second portions” in lines 1-4 is unclear as claimed. How can the second portion be different than the first and second portions? For examination, it was assumed that applicant intended to recite, for example, “wherein the slideable attachment interface comprises a first portion of an attachment interface and the additional interface comprises a second portion of the attachment interface that is different than the first portion
Regarding claim 19, the limitation “wherein the urge [of] the attachment drives the grip feature against a corresponding surface of the firearm” in lines 2-3 is unclear as claimed. The attachment was not previously recited as urging. Comparatively, claim 11, from which claim 19 depends, previously recited that a portion of [a] length of the separate part urges the attachment. For examination, it was assumed that applicant intended to recite, for example, “wherein the urge of the separable part on the attachment drives the grip feature against a corresponding surface of the firearm”.
Regarding claim 20, the limitation “the urge the attachment to resist movement of the attachment” in line 15 is unclear as claimed. The attachment was not previously recited as urging, since the claim previously recited in lines 14-15 that a portion of [a] length of the separate part urges the attachment. Further, it is unclear how the urge of the attachment can resist movement of itself. Clarification is required. For examination, it was assumed that applicant intended to recite, for example, “the urge of the separable part on the attachment to resist movement of the attachment”.
Regarding claim 23, the limitation “wherein a terminal end of a projection of the at least one projection, and the terminal end to bite into the covered surface when the attachment interface is tightened” in lines 1-4 is unclear as claimed. It is unclear what specifically applicant is seeking to claim as their invention by the limitation. For examination, it was assumed that applicant intended to recite, for example, “wherein a terminal end of a projection of the at least one projectionis adapted to bite into the covered portion of the surface when the attachment interface is tightened”.
Claims 24-25 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) 1-3, 7-8, 11-12, 14-15, and 17-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Smith (US 5621995), herein ‘Smith’.
Regarding claim 1, Smith discloses an apparatus (Figs. 1-8) to operate in a recoil environment, the apparatus including:
an attachment (13) configured to slidably couple to a firearm (10), wherein the attachment includes:
a slideable attachment interface (16-17) to restrict a coupling movement of the attachment relative to at least one part (col. 2 lines 26-32) of the firearm, wherein the coupling movement is along a plane (Fig. 2), wherein the slideable attachment interface comprises a male feature or a female feature of a dovetail interface, a T-slot interface, or another undercut interface (16-17; Figs. 1-8; col. 2 lines 26-32); and
an additional interface (20) associated with a separable part (18), the additional interface to further restrict movement of the attachment relative to the at least one part (col. 2 lines 32-35);
wherein the separable part comprises a non-threaded part (18; Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 2, Smith discloses wherein the attachment comprises a magazine funnel, a grip accessory, or a grip attachment (Figs. 1-8) to slidably couple to a grip (15) of the firearm.
Regarding claim 3, Smith discloses wherein a portion of a surface (32) of the attachment, spaced apart from an opening (19) to receive the non-threaded part (col. 2 lines 32-35), covers a portion of a surface of an exterior of the firearm (Figs. 1-2); and
wherein the portion of the surface of the attachment comprises at least one projection (33) or a textured pattern, and the non-threaded part is configured to bias the at least one projection or textured pattern against the covered portion of the surface of the exterior of the firearm (pin 18 when inserted in holes 19-20 applies an upward force to attachment 13 via hole 20).
Regarding claim 7, Smith discloses wherein the at least one projection comprises a single tooth (33; Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 8, Smith discloses wherein a grip surface (14) is located on an interior surface of the attachment (Figs. 1-8);
wherein the attachment includes fore and aft regions (Fig. 2; aft region being the left-hand side of component 13, and fore region being the right-hand side of component 13), or other opposing regions; and
wherein the attachment interface is located on one of the fore and aft regions (aft region; Fig. 2), or on one of the other opposing regions, and the grip surface is located on the other one of the fore and aft regions (fore region; Fig. 2), or the other one of the other opposing regions.
Regarding claim 11, Smith discloses an apparatus (Figs. 1-8) to operate in a recoil environment, the apparatus including:
an attachment (13) configured to slidably couple to a firearm (10), the attachment including a threadless region (12) to couple to one or more corresponding threadless regions (Figs. 1-2) of at least one part (15) of the firearm, wherein the attachment includes:
a slideable attachment interface (16-17) to restrict a coupling movement of the attachment relative to the at least one part (col. 2 lines 26-32), to a fore/aft movement (holding the firearm 10 such that it is pointing upward or downward results in fore/aft movement of the flanges 16-17), wherein the coupling movement is along a plane (Fig. 2), wherein the slideable attachment interface comprises a male feature or a female feature of a dovetail interface, a T-slot interface, or another undercut interface (16-17; Figs. 1-8; col. 2 lines 26-32); and
an additional interface (20) associated with a separable part (18), the additional interface to restrict a fore/aft position of the attachment relative to the at least one part (col. 2 lines 32-35);
wherein the separable part includes terminal ends (Fig. 4);
wherein a portion of a length of the separable part is adapted to urge the attachment in a direction that is parallel with the plane (pin 18, when inserted in holes 19-20, applies a force to attachment 13 via hole 20); and
wherein the attachment is adapted to apply, in an opposite direction, a counter force on the portion of the length of the separable part (attachment 13, via hole 20, inherently provides a counterforce to pin 18, since Newton’s Third Law states that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction).
Regarding claim 12, Smith discloses wherein the attachment comprises a grip attachment (Figs. 1-8).
Regarding claim 14, Smith discloses wherein the portion of the length is part of a tapered or sloped section of the separable part (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 15, Smith discloses wherein the direction includes a forward component or a rearward component (Figs. 1-8).
Regarding claim 17, Smith discloses wherein the attachment comprises a grip attachment (33) and the direction is perpendicular with a canted axis or a vertical non-canted axis (Figs. 1-8).
Regarding claim 18, Smith discloses wherein the slideable attachment interface comprises a first portion (16-17) of an attachment interface (Figs. 1-8) and the additional interface comprises a second portion (20) of the attachment interface that is different than the first portion (Figs. 1-8);
wherein the attachment interface includes a third portion (33) that is different than the first and second portions (Figs. 1-8).
Regarding claim 19, Smith discloses wherein the third portion of the attachment interface includes a surface (32) having a grip feature (33);
wherein the urge of the separable part on the attachment drives the grip feature against a corresponding surface (34) of the firearm (col. 2 line 66 – col. 3 line 5); and
wherein the grip feature comprises a grip tooth (33; Fig. 4) or a textured surface.
Regarding claim 20, Smith discloses an apparatus (Figs. 1-8) to operate in a recoil environment, the apparatus including:
an attachment (13) configured to slidably couple to a firearm (10), wherein the attachment includes:
a slideable attachment interface (16-17) to restrict a coupling movement of the attachment relative to at least one part (col. 2 lines 26-32) of the firearm, wherein the coupling movement is along a plane (Fig. 2), wherein the slideable attachment interface comprises a male feature or a female feature of a dovetail interface, a T-slot interface, or another undercut interface (16-17; Figs. 1-8; col. 2 lines 26-32); and
an additional interface (20) associated with a separable part (18), the additional interface to further restrict movement of the attachment relative to the at least one part (col. 2 lines 32-35);
a portion of a length of the separable part to urge the attachment against a surface of the firearm (pin 18, when inserted into holes 19-20, applies a force to attachment 13 via hole 20), the urge of the separable part on the attachment to resist movement of the attachment along the plane away from the surface of the firearm (Figs. 1-2; col. 2 lines 32-35);
wherein the separable part includes terminal ends (Fig. 4); and
wherein the attachment is adapted to apply a counter force on the portion of the length of the separable part (attachment 13, via hole 20, inherently provides a counterforce to pin 18, since Newton’s Third Law states that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction).
Regarding claim 21, Smith discloses an apparatus (Figs. 1-8), comprising:
an attachment (13) configured to couple to a firearm (10), the attachment including:
a surface (32) to cover a portion of a surface of an exterior of the firearm when the attachment is coupled to the firearm (Figs. 1-2); and
an attachment interface (18) configured to bias said surface of the attachment against the covered portion of the surface of the exterior of the firearm (pin 18, when inserted into holes 19-20, applies a force to attachment 13 via hole 20), in which the surface of the attachment includes a grip feature (33).
Regarding claim 22, Smith discloses wherein the grip feature comprises at least one projection (33; Fig. 4) or a textured pattern.
Regarding claim 23, Smith discloses wherein a terminal end of a projection of the at least one projection is adapted to bite into the covered portion of the surface when the attachment interface is tightened (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 24, Smith discloses wherein the at least one projection comprises an asymmetrical tooth (component 33 is asymmetric, for example, about a horizontal axis, when viewed from the side as in Fig. 2).
Claim(s) 21-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Forster et al. (US 6112446), herein ‘Forster’.
Regarding claim 21, Forster discloses an apparatus (Figs. 1-4), comprising:
an attachment (3) configured to couple to a firearm (1-2), the attachment including:
a surface (35) to cover a portion (15) of a surface (16) of an exterior of the firearm (Fig. 1) when the attachment is coupled to the firearm (Fig. 4); and
an attachment interface (34) configured to bias said surface of the attachment against the covered portion of the surface of the exterior of the firearm (col. 2 line 66 – col. 3 line 10), in which the surface of the attachment includes a grip feature (35; Figs. 2 and 4; col. 2 line 66 – col. 3 line 10).
Regarding claim 22, Forster discloses wherein the grip feature comprises at least one projection (Fig. 2; col. 2 line 66 – col. 3 line 10) or a textured pattern.
Regarding claim 23, Forster discloses wherein a terminal end of a projection of the at least one projection is adapted to bite into the covered portion of the surface when the attachment interface is tightened (Figs. 2 and 4; col. 2 line 66 – col. 3 line 10).
Regarding claim 24, Forster discloses wherein the at least one projection comprises an asymmetrical tooth (35; Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 25, Forster discloses wherein the asymmetrical tooth includes at least one angled side (Fig. 2), wherein an angle of an angled side of the at least one angled side is 120 degrees or less (Fig. 2).
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.
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.
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) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith (US 5621995) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Forster et al. (US 6112446).
Regarding claims 4-6, Smith does not expressly teach wherein the at least one projection comprises a tapered structure having at least one angled surface with an angle of 100 degrees or less.
Forster teaches an apparatus (Figs. 1-4) comprising an attachment (3) configured to slidably couple to a firearm (1-2), the attachment including a slidable dovetail attachment interface (31), and an additional non-threaded interface (34-35) to further restrict movement of the attachment relative to the firearm (col. 2 line 66 – col. 3 line 10), wherein a portion (37) of a surface (32) of the attachment, spaced apart from an opening (14) to receive the additional non-threaded interface (col. 2 line 66 – col. 3 line 10), covers a portion (17) of a surface (12) of an exterior of the firearm (Figs. 1-4), wherein the portion of the surface of the attachment comprises at least one projection (37; Figs. 2 and 4) biased against the covered portion of the surface of the exterior of the firearm (Fig. 4), wherein the at least one projection comprises a tapered structure having at least one angled surface with an angle of 100 degrees or less (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 at least one projection of Smith to comprise a tapered structure having an angled surface with an angle of 100 degrees or less as taught by Forster with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the form-fitting connection between the attachment and the firearm (Forster; col. 3 lines 12-16).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith (US 5621995) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Landis et al. (US 2020/0025472), herein ‘Landis’.
Regarding claim 13, Smith does not expressly teach wherein the separable part comprises a rotatably driven part including a threaded section and a non-threaded section, where the portion of the length of the separable part comprises part of the non-threaded section.
Landis teaches an apparatus (5) comprising an attachment (10, 12) configured to couple to a firearm (16), the attachment associated with a separable part (13) to restrict a fore/aft position of the attachment relative to the firearm (par. 21), wherein the separable part includes terminal ends and a length (Fig. 1), wherein the separable part comprises a rotatably driven part including a threaded section (13A) and a non-threaded section (13B), where the portion of the length of the separable part comprises part of the non-threaded section (Fig. 1; par. 21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the separable part of Smith to comprise a rotatably driven part with a threaded section and a non-threaded section as taught by Landis with a reasonable expectation of success in order to secure the attachment to the firearm by rotation of the separable part (Landis; par. 24).
Conclusion
Claims 9-10 and 16 are withdrawn. Claims 1-8, 11-15, and 17-25 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