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 .
Election/Restrictions
After review applicant argument, the examiner agrees that the Restriction is withdrawn.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 10-11, and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mashhour (2015/0048616) in view of O’Neal (2015/0327518).
Regarding claim 1, Mashhour teaches a fly tying tool (figs 1-5) comprising: a base (member 200); and a shaft (310) coupled to the base (para 0047), the shaft including a fly securing portion (member 242).
Mashhour does not teach the fly securing portion having a magnet for securing a fly.
O’Neal teaches a flying tool (fig 1) having a fly securing portion (members 18, 22-24, and 28) having a magnet (member 22) for securing a fly.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify Mashhour tool by replace the fly securing portion of O’Neal in order to tie a secure knot in a timely and efficient manner.
Regarding claim 2, the modified tool Mashhour-O’Neal discloses the shaft is rotatably coupled to the base (Mashhour, para 0023).
Regarding claim 3, the modified tool Mashhour-O’Neal discloses the fly securing portion includes a hook feature (O’Neal, member 28) that extends out from the magnet.
Regarding claim 4, the modified tool Mashhour-O’Neal discloses the magnet is positioned at a face of the fly securing portion (O’Neal, fig 1).
Regarding claim 5, the modified tool Mashhour-O’Neal discloses the magnet is positioned within an opening in the face (O’Neal, fig 1).
Regarding claim 6, the modified tool Mashhour-O’Neal discloses a threading structure (Mashhour, figs 7).
Regarding claim 10, the modified tool Mashhour-O’Neal discloses the threading structure is formed on an extension from the shaft (Mashhour, figs 7).
Regarding claim 11, the modified tool Mashhour-O’Neal discloses the threading structure is integrated into the shaft.
Regarding claim 16, Mashhour teaches a fly tying tool (fig 1-5) comprising: a base (member 200) having a first end and a second end and a channel that extends from the first end to the second end (member 200); and
a shaft (member 310) comprising a first end forming a fly securing portion and a second end forming a coupling portion that inserts into the channel to secure the shaft to the base (para 0047).
Mashhour does not teach the fly securing portion including a magnet for securing a fly to the shaft.
O’Neal teaches a flying tool (fig 1) having a fly securing portion (members 18, 22-24, and 28) having a magnet (member 22) for securing a fly.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify Mashhour tool by replace the fly securing portion of O’Neal in order to tie a secure knot in a timely and efficient manner
Regarding claim 17, the modified tool Mashhour-O’Neal discloses the fly securing portion includes a hook (O’Neal, member 28) feature that extends beyond the magnet.
Regarding claim 18, the modified tool Mashhour-O’Neal discloses the shaft includes a threading structure (O’Neal, figs 7).
Claim(s) 7-8 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mashhour (2015/0048616) and O’Neal (2015/0327518) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Wilkinson (3,680,248).
Regarding claims 7-8 and 19-20, the modified tool Mashhour-O’Neal teaches all limitations except the threading structure comprises a spiral having a bottom end and a top end and a central channel that extends from the bottom end to the top end.
Wilkinson teaches a flying tool (figs 1-3) having a threading structure comprises a spiral having a bottom end and a top end and a central channel that extends from the bottom end to the top end (member 20); wherein the top end of the spiral forms an eye receiving area for aligning an eye of the fly over the central channel (fig 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the flying tool of Mashhour by using a spiral threading structure, as taught by Wilkinson, in order to provide an improved fishhook extractor which is constructed and arranged to enable a fisherman to remove a fishhook from a fish in a most effective manner.
Claim(s) 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mashhour (2015/0048616) in view of Wilkinson (3,680,248).
Regarding claims 12-13, Mashhour teaches a fly tying tool (fig 1-5) comprising: a fly tying tool comprising: a base (member 200); and
a shaft () coupled to the base, the shaft including a threading structure l having a bottom end and a top end and a central channel that extends from the bottom end to the top end (para 0047).
Mashhour does not teach a threading structure comprising a spiral channel, wherein the top end of the spiral forms an eye receiving area.
Wilkinson teaches a flying tool (figs 1-3) having a threading structure comprising a spiral channel (member 20), wherein the top end of the spiral forms an eye receiving area (fig 4)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the flying tool of Mashhour by using a spiral threading structure, as taught by Wilkinson, in order to provide an improved fishhook extractor which is constructed and arranged to enable a fisherman to remove a fishhook from a fish in a most effective manner.
Regarding claim 14, the modified tool Mashhour-Wilkinson teaches all limitations and Mashhour further teaches the shaft is configured to rotate relative to the base, and wherein the channel is configured such that, as the shaft is rotated, a line routed through the central channel is rotated through the channel until the line is freed from the spiral (Mashhour, fig 7).
Wilkinson teaches that the channel is spiral (fig 1, member 20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the flying tool of Mashhour by using a spiral channel, as taught by Wilkinson, in order to provide an improved fishhook extractor which is constructed and arranged to enable a fisherman to remove a fishhook from a fish in a most effective manner.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mashhour (2015/0048616) and Wilkinson (3,680,248) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of O’Neal (2015/0327518).
Regarding claim 15, the modified tool Mashhour-Wilkinson teaches all limitations except the shaft includes a fly securing portion having a magnet for securing a fly.
O’Neal teaches a flying tool (fig 1) having a fly securing portion (members 18, 22-24, and 28) having a magnet (member 22) for securing a fly.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify Mashhour tool by replace the fly securing portion of O’Neal in order to tie a secure knot in a timely and efficient manner.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: none of the prior art teaching a flying tool having a rotate base, a magnet location opposite to the base, a spiral channel, a hook and an eye receiving area are adjacent to the magnet.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon, is listed on the attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO-THIEU L NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0476. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-3pm.
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, KHOA D. HUYNH can be reached at (571)272-4888. 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.
BAO-THIEU L. NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3732
/BAO-THIEU L NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732