Prior art

Analysis of Prior Art Cited in U.S. Patent No. 12,031,784

As a technical patent analyst, I have reviewed the prior art citations for U.S. Patent No. 12,031,784, titled "Adapted forced reset trigger." The '784 patent, assigned to ABC IP, LLC, describes a locking member for a forced reset trigger with a deflectable upper portion. This feature is intended to allow the trigger to function in firearms with different internal dimensions, such as the AR-10 platform, where a standard locking bar would be too short to be actuated or would interfere with the bolt carrier's movement.

The analysis below details the most relevant prior art cited during the patent's prosecution and its potential impact on the claims of the '784 patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

---

Key Cited References

The primary inventive concept of the '784 patent revolves around a two-piece, hinged, or otherwise deflectable locking member that interacts with the bolt carrier. The most relevant prior art teaches the fundamental concepts of forced reset triggers and various safety and locking mechanisms.

1. U.S. Patent No. 10,514,223 B1

• Full Citation: US 10,514,223 B1, "Firearm trigger mechanism," Inventor: Jeffrey Cooper Rounds, Assignee: Wolf Tactical LLC, Publication Date: December 24, 2019, Filing Date: September 27, 2018.
• Brief Description: This patent is foundational to the '784 patent and is explicitly incorporated by reference. It describes a forced reset trigger mechanism where the hammer, upon being reset by the bolt carrier, forces the trigger member back to its set position. It also discloses a locking bar that prevents the trigger from being pulled unless the bolt carrier is fully in battery.
• Potential Anticipation of Claims: This patent does not anticipate the core claims of the '784 patent. While it establishes the environment of a forced reset trigger with a locking member, the locking member described is a single, rigid component. The '784 patent's background section explicitly states that the design in the '223 patent is insufficient for certain firearm platforms like the AR-10 because a simple extension of the locking bar would lead to interference with the bolt carrier. Therefore, the '223 patent lacks the novel element of a "deflectable portion" that is "separately movable relative to the body portion" as claimed in independent claim 1 of the '784 patent.

2. U.S. Patent No. 11,346,627 B1

• Full Citation: US 11,346,627 B1, "Forced reset semiautomatic trigger with sliding blocking bar," Inventor: Lawrence DeMonico, Assignee: ABC IP, LLC, Publication Date: May 31, 2022, Filing Date: February 8, 2022.
• Brief Description: This patent, also from the inventor of the '784 patent, describes a forced reset trigger that uses a sliding locking member instead of a pivoting one. This sliding bar is actuated by the bolt carrier to lock and unlock the trigger. The '784 patent itself mentions that its deflectable extension concept could be adapted to a sliding locking member like the one shown in the '627 patent.
• Potential Anticipation of Claims: This patent does not anticipate the claims of the '784 patent. The locking member in the '627 patent, while different from the '223 patent (sliding vs. pivoting), is still a unitary, non-deflecting component in the context of the upward extension. It does not teach or suggest the two-piece, deflectable/hinged construction that is the central innovation of the '784 patent's claims.

3. U.S. Patent No. 7,398,723 B1

• Full Citation: US 7,398,723 B1, "Trigger forward displacement system and method," Inventor: Brian A. Blakley, Publication Date: July 15, 2008, Filing Date: April 25, 2003.
• Brief Description: The Blakley patent discloses a system to increase the cyclic rate of a semi-automatic firearm by using the bolt carrier's movement to act on a pivoting cam, which in turn forces the trigger forward. This is a form of a forced reset mechanism.
• Potential Anticipation of Claims: This patent does not anticipate the claims of the '784 patent. While it deals with interaction between the bolt carrier and a trigger mechanism component to achieve a reset, it does not describe a locking member that prevents the trigger from being pulled. More specifically, it does not disclose a locking member with a body portion and a separately movable, upwardly extending deflectable portion as recited in claim 1 of the '784 patent.

4. U.S. Patent No. 9,151,557 B2

• Full Citation: US 9,151,557 B2, "Automatic sear assembly for a rifle," Assignee: Sig Sauer, Inc., Publication Date: October 6, 2015, Filing Date: May 17, 2013.
• Brief Description: This patent describes an automatic sear assembly for a rifle that includes a sear trip actuated by the bolt carrier. The sear trip has a feature (a spring-loaded pawl) that allows the bolt carrier to pass over it in one direction (rearward) but causes actuation when the bolt carrier moves forward into battery.
• Potential Anticipation of Claims: This patent presents a closer, though still distinct, concept. It teaches a one-way actuation mechanism involving the bolt carrier. However, this mechanism is part of an automatic sear for controlling the timing of a hammer in automatic fire, not a locking member for a semi-automatic forced reset trigger that prevents the trigger itself from moving. While it shows a component with a form of one-way deflection, its function and integration into the trigger mechanism are different from what is claimed in the '784 patent. It does not disclose a "locking member that is movable between a first position in which it locks a trigger member against pulling movement and a second position where it does not restrict movement," which is a key limitation of claim 1.

Conclusion

Based on the analysis of the cited prior art, none of the references appear to anticipate the claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,031,784 under 35 U.S.C. § 102. The key innovation recited in independent claim 1—a trigger locking member with a main body and a separately movable, deflectable upper portion designed to interact with the bolt carrier in two different ways depending on its direction of travel—is not taught by the cited art. The foundational '223 and '627 patents disclose forced reset triggers with unitary locking members, and the '784 patent's invention is presented as a solution to the specific dimensional problems their designs would face in certain firearms. Other references, like Blakley ('723) and Sig Sauer ('557), describe different mechanisms for interacting with a bolt carrier but do not disclose the specific claimed structure and function of the '784 patent's locking member.