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 .
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miller (US 20200316694).
Regarding claim 1, Miller discloses a tool 40 capable of creating a full-sized hole and countersink from a plurality of preformed holes that are near full-size and that are in respective stacked components of a stack-up overlapped in fixed position relative to each other, a through-hole being formed through an overlapping region of the preformed holes, each preformed hole having a preformed hole diameter and an offset distance capable of being less or equal to a maximum allowable offset distance (see e.g. Figs. 1-3). The tool comprises a hole cutter 47/48 having a hole cutter having a hole cutter outer diameter, a countersink cutter with a hole widening section 42/44 is adjacent to and extends from the hole cutter. The hole widening section has a narrow portion 44 immediately adjacent to and adjoining the hole cutter outer diameter of the hole cutter (see e.g. Fig. 7B). A pilot member 46 is formed adjacent the hole cutter, being coaxial to the hole cutter and the countersink cutter. The pilot member has a pilot diameter smaller than the hole cutter outer diameter and substantially equal to the preformed hole diameter minus the maximum allowable offset distance, the pilot diameter being sized to pass through the through-hole. The hole cutter outer diameter is greater than or equal to the preformed hole diameter plus the maximum allowable offset distance and wherein the narrow portion progressively widens outwardly in a direction away from the pilot member, widening from the hole cutter outer diameter adjacent the hole cutter to a countersink cutter outer diameter larger than the hole cutter outer diameter.
Regarding claim 2, Miller discloses the plurality of preformed holes including a first preformed hole and a second preformed hole (in layers 18 and 20, see Fig. 3), wherein at least a portion of a boundary of the first preformed hole and at least a portion of a boundary of the second preformed hole define a non-cylindrical perimeter of the through-hole. The pilot member is configured to make contact with a first side and an opposite side at respective locations where a major axis of the first preformed hole and the second preformed hole intersect the non-cylindrical perimeter if the drill is moved in that direction.
Regarding claim 3, Miller discloses the maximum allowable offset distance being capable of defining a predefined maximum distance between a center of each of the first preformed hole and the second preformed hole.
Regarding claim 4, Miller discloses the pilot member including a cylindrical shaft (see Fig. 7A).
Regarding claim 5, Miller discloses the hole cutter further comprising a first stepped section 47 and a second stepped section 48. The second stepped section has the hole cutter outer diameter and the first stepped section has a hole cutter intermediate diameter smaller than the hole cutter outer diameter (see Fig. 7A).
Regarding claim 6, Miller discloses the hole cutter intermediate diameter being larger than the pilot diameter (see Fig. 7A).
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheibel et al. (US 20200108456, hereinafter ‘Scheibel’) in view of Miller (US 20200316694).
Regarding claim 1, Scheibel discloses a tool for creating a full-sized hole from a plurality of preformed holes that are near full-size, and that are in respective stacked components of a stack-up overlapped in a fixed position relative to each other. A through-hole is formed through an overlapping region of the preformed holes, each preformed hole having a preformed hole diameter and an offset distance less than or equal to a maximum allowable offset distance (see e.g. Fig. 3). The tool comprises a hole cutter 34 having a hole cutter outer diameter D3 and a pilot member 32 formed coaxial with and adjacent to the hole cutter. The pilot member has a pilot diameter D2 smaller than the hole cutter outer diameter and substantially equal to the preformed hole diameter minus the maximum allowable offset distance, and is sized to pass through the through-hole (Paragraph [0028]). The hole cutter outer diameter is greater than or equal to the preformed hole diameter plus the maximum allowable offset distance. Scheibel does not disclose the tool also comprising a countersink cutter.
Miller discloses a similar tool having a coaxial and integrally-formed pilot 46, hole cutter 47/48 and a countersink cutter with a hole-widening section 42/44 adjacent to and extending from the hole cutter. The hole widening section has a narrow portion 44 immediately adjacent to and adjoining the hole cutter outer diameter of the hole cutter which progressively widens outwardly in a direction away from the pilot member, widening from the hole cutter outer diameter adjacent the hole cutter to a countersink cutter outer diameter larger than the hole cutter outer diameter.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the tool of Scheibel by incorporating a coaxial countersink cutter adjacent to the hole cutter, as taught by Miller, in order to form a countersink in the preformed hole(s) if desired, to enable the user to recess the head of a fastener inserted therethrough.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Scheibel discloses the plurality of preformed holes including a first preformed hole 20’ and a second preformed hole 22’, and wherein at least a portion of a boundary of the first preformed hole and at least a portion of a boundary of the second preformed hole define a non-cylindrical perimeter of the through-hole (see Fig. 3). The pilot member is configured to contact a first side and an opposite side at respective locations where a major axis of the first predefined hole intersects the non-cylindrical perimeter (Paragraph [0028], the pilot being disclosed as ‘snugly sliding’ e.g. contacting the non-cylindrical perimeter). The maximum allowable offset distance defines a predefined maximum distance between a center of each of the first preformed hole and the second preformed hole (Paragraph [0034]).
Regarding claim 4, Scheibel discloses the pilot member 32 including a cylindrical shaft (Paragraph [0031]).
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Scheibel does not disclose the hole cutter comprising the claimed first and second stepped sections.
Miller discloses the hole cutter further comprising a first stepped section 47 and a second stepped section 48. The second stepped section has the hole cutter outer diameter and the first stepped section has a hole cutter intermediate diameter smaller than the hole cutter outer diameter. The hole cutter intermediate diameter is larger than the pilot diameter (see Fig. 7A).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the hole cutter section of the tool of Scheibel with the first and second stepped sections as taught by Miller, in order to provide the machined hole with the shape desired for the size(s) of fastener chosen to be used with the finished hole(s).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-6 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
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alan Snyder whose telephone number is (571)272-4603. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 7:00a - 5:00p.
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, Sunil K Singh can be reached at 571-272-3460. 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.
/Alan Snyder/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722
Prosecution Insights