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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length (the current abstract is 45 words in length). The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 12, change “at least one items from the group of” to -- at least one item from the group of:--
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 (as well as dependent claims 2-4 due to dependency) is 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 1 recites the limitation "the same side". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dvorak; Robert J. (US 8016173 B2) in view of Miller; La Rae Lee et al. (US 6085695 A).
Regarding claim 1 Dvorak discloses a reel cover comprising a foldable fabric shell (Fig. 1; 100); (capable of covering a reel), wherein:
a. said fabric shell is folded to form a pouch shaped to receive a fishing reel (Fig. 1; 100); (device is capable of receiving a fishing reel);
b. said folded fabric shell comprises an overlapping section (150) of said fabric shell;
c. further wherein a plurality of sections of said folded fabric shell (110, 120, 130, 140) forms a pair of opposing V-shaped channels (shown in Fig. 4), shaped to wrap substantially around a fishing rod;
d. said reel cover further comprising at least one fishing line aperture (243); (Col. 6, lines 31-37) in said fabric shell configured to permit a fishing line to pass unobstructed from within said pouch to the exterior of said pouch;
e. said reel cover further comprising at least one closure (Fig. 2; 220, 230 and/or Fig. 4; 174); (Col. 4, lines 64-66) configured to define the size of said V-shaped channels and said pouch;
Dvorak does not disclose at least one pair of apertures on the same side of said reel cover shaped to permit the passage of at least one items from the group of fishing reel handle or bail from within said pouch to the exterior of said pouch.
Miller teaches at least one pair of apertures (Fig. 3; 40, 70) on the same side of said cover (each on a front side) shaped to permit the passage of at least one items from the group of fishing reel handle or bail from within said pouch to the exterior of said pouch (Col. 4; lines 33-37).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the side of the cover of Dvorak to include at least one pair of apertures on the same side of said reel cover shaped to permit the passage of at least one items from the group of fishing reel handle or bail from within said pouch to the exterior of said pouch, in order to provide more access openings to the inside of the cover. Thus, enhancing the ease of access to items within the interior.
Regarding claim 3 Dvorak in view of Miller discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Dvorak does not disclose an ID plate affixed to said fabric shell. Miller teaches an ID plate affixed to said fabric shell (Fig. 3; 140).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the overlapping section of said fabric shell of Dvorak to include an ID plate, as taught by Miller, in order to provide identification, advertising, or decoration (Col. 4, lines 29-33).
Claim(s) 2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dvorak; Robert J. (US 8016173 B2) in view of Miller; La Rae Lee et al. (US 6085695 A), further in view of Looney; Michael Brian (US 20070289199 A1).
Regarding claim 2 Dvorak in view of Miller discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Dvorak does not disclose a plurality of drains in a bottom section of said pouch of said reel cover. Looney teaches a plurality of drains (Fig. 1; 29) in a bottom section of said pouch of said reel cover [0012].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified pouch of Dvorak in view of Miller to include drainage holes, as taught by Looney, in order to prevent the buildup of liquid or debris.
Regarding claim 4 Dvorak in view of Miller and Looney discloses all of the limitations of claim 2. Dvorak does not disclose an ID plate affixed to said fabric shell. Miller teaches an ID plate affixed to said fabric shell (Fig. 3; 140).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the overlapping section of said fabric shell of Dvorak to include an ID plate, as taught by Miller, in order to provide identification, advertising, or decoration (Col. 4, lines 29-33).
The examiner notes that Looney also discloses an ID plate affixed to an overlapping section of a fabric shell (Fig. 1; 15).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited art is considered pertinent because it relates to bags which are capable of holding fishing reels similar to the disclosed invention.
US 1849545 A
US 2691400 A
US 2089086 A
US 20210353017 A1
US 20060075677 A1
US 4726141 A
US 6564498 B2
US 8839745 B1
US 6263610 B1
US 6723906 B2
US 5417354 A
US 8776267 B2
US 4727675 A
US 8789696 B2
US 20100078099 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRITTANY LOWERY whose telephone number is (571)270-3228. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 am-4 pm 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.
/BRITTANY A LOWERY/Examiner, Art Unit 3644
/TIMOTHY D COLLINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3644