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
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Newly filed amendment to specification of 02/05/2026 in page 3 has ‘diameter “D”’, but the drawing has diameter “TD”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 22-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasan et al., US5908278 (hereinafter, Hasan) in view of Nottelmann et al., US4948318 (hereinafter, Nottelmann).
Regarding claim 22, Hasan teaches a fastener 24 having a lengthwise axis (fastener extending from head to tip vertically lengthwise axis), comprising:
a hexagonal drive head 26;
a shank 34 having a tip end 32, a tapered portion (see tapered portion between the tip end and the threaded portion), and a threaded portion 28 having a diameter (see diameter ‘T’ in Fig. 4), wherein the tapered portion extends from the tip end to the threaded portion (see Fig. 2); and
a flange portion (see flanged portion attached to the head portion of the fastener) disposed between and contiguous with the hexagonal drive head and the shank (see Fig. 2);
wherein the diameter (T) of the threaded portion of the shank is larger than a standard thread diameter associated with the standard United States hexagonal drive head size of the hexagonal drive head (see column 4, lines 1-7).
Hasan fails to expressly teach that the hexagonal head is dimensioned according to a standard United States hexagonal drive head sizes in inches.
However, it is the examiner’s position that changes in shape have been established to be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the shape of the head to dimension as per standard United States sizes in inches as an obvious change in shape. Further, it is considered obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to make the hexagonal shape of the head in inches, since Hasan teaches structural limitations of the claimed fastener.
Further, Hasan teaches the tapered portion is configured with a self-threading/self-tapping thread type (column 4, lines 13-18), but fails to teach wherein the threaded portion is configured with a self-threading thread type
However, Nottelmann teaches similar fastener having a self-tapping thread (see threaded shank 14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have modified the threads of Hasan to be configured to self-threading thread type as taught by Nottelmann for easy self-drilling and tapping of building structure, and prevent loosening and hazards from using of multiple parts fasteners.
Regarding claim 23, Hasan in view of Nottelmann teaches and/or make obvious of the fastener of claim 22, but fails to teach wherein the standard United States hexagonal drive head size of the hexagonal head is a 5/16 inch hexagon, and the diameter of the threaded portion of the shank is the standard diameter for a standard United States 9/16 inch hexagonal drive head size.
However, change in size have been established to be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art in the absence of a persuasive evidence that the particular configuration was significant. The disclosure does not provide any evidence of the criticality of the constant diameter portion of the shank is the standard diameter for the standard United States 9/16 inch hexagonal drive head size. Therefore, it would have been obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the dimension of hexagonal head drive head to 5/16 in and shank diameter to standard diameter 9/16 inch as an obvious change in shape and size.
Regarding claim 24, Hasan in view of Nottelmann teaches and/or make obvious of the fastener of claim 22, wherein Hasan further teaches the flange portion (see flanged portion attached to the bottom of the head portion 26) extends radially outward a distance greater than the drive head (see size of the head 26) and the constant diameter (T).
Regarding claim 25, Hasan in view of Nottelmann teaches and/or make obvious of the fastener of claim 22, wherein the standard United States hexagonal drive head size of the hexagonal head is a 5/16 inch hexagon, and the constant diameter of the threaded portion of the shank has a 3/8 inch diameter.
However, change in size have been established to be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art in the absence of a persuasive evidence that the particular configuration was significant. The disclosure does not provide any evidence of the criticality of the constant diameter portion of the shank is the standard diameter for the standard United States 9/16 inch hexagonal drive head size. Therefore, it would have been obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the dimension of hexagonal head drive head to 5/16 in and shank diameter to standard diameter 3/8 inch as an obvious change in shape and size.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 02/05/2026, with respect to claim(s) 22-25 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIL K MAGAR whose telephone number is (571)272-8180. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at (571) 272-8322. 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.
/DIL K. MAGAR/Examiner, Art Unit 3675
/CHRISTINE M MILLS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675