Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/700,388

THRUST NUT

Non-Final OA §102§103§112§DP
Filed
Mar 21, 2022
Examiner
DOERRLER, WILLIAM CHARLES
Art Unit
3993
Tech Center
3900
Assignee
Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc.
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
312 granted / 398 resolved
+18.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
422
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
36.5%
-3.5% vs TC avg
§102
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
§112
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 398 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112 §DP
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on February 11, 2026 has been entered. Reissue Applications For reissue applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, all references to 35 U.S.C. 251 and 37 CFR 1.172, 1.175, and 3.73 are to the current provisions. The October 17, 2024 ADS is correct. The statement under 37 CFR 3.73(c) submitted September 18, 2024 is acceptable. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 5-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Claim 5 beginning on line 14 claims “the rod engaging portions being formed as one or more grooves”. The grooves are not disclosed in the written description. The description mentions “right screw portions 9” and these are shown in the figures as being threaded. There is, however, no basis for the screw portions having a single groove. The screw portions are shown with a plurality of grooves. The grooves cannot be seen as one continuous groove as the portions do not extend around the entire circumference of the opening. The remaining claims depend from claim 5, so they are rejected due to their dependency. Claim Rejections - 35 USC §§ 102 & 103 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. 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) 5,10-13,15,17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Japanese Patent Application JP 2000-346034 to NHK Spring Co., invented by Kitamura et al, (hereinafter “JP ‘034”). JP ‘034 (which is the priority document for the previously applied EP ‘734) discloses a nut comprising a main body (1) that has a central hole (tapered throughbore 1a) of which an inner diameter becomes successively smaller (figs 1-4), and a small diameter end portion having about a circumference a plurality of stepped portions (the fourth paragraph of the machine translation below [0021] describes “The left and right slopes 1a of the mortar-shaped hole 1b are axially displaced at their lower end portions by ½ P of the screw pitch of the female screw 2b of the screw piece 2.”; a plurality of segments (running screws 2) that are slidable within the slanted hole, each of the segments having a small-diameter side that comes into contact with at least one of the stepped portions (figure 2); rod engaging portions (grooves) formed on an inner wall surface of each one of the plurality of segments (figures 3 and 4), the grooves aligning to form a threaded surface to engage the rod; and a spring (3) that urges the segments toward the small-diameter side at all times (paragraphs 20-22). For the threaded bolt to be engaged with the threads on the inner surfaces of the running screws 2 in the nature of a standard nut/bolt combination as the device is intended to be used, the threads would need to be in alignment and continuous across the plurality of segments, or the threaded bolt would not be able to pass between the threads of the running screw segments. This 1/1 size correspondence between the threads of the bolt and the grooves on the sliding portions is shown in figures 3,4 and 6. The ½ P height difference shown in figure 2 is a height difference along the axial dimension of different stepped portions supporting different slidable sections. Claim 5 has been amended to include “the stepped portions having end portion positions that are adjacent to each other along said circumference of said small-diameter end portion”. Figure 2 of JP ‘034 shows that there is a step along the small diameter end portion. There is no discussion in JP ‘034 pertaining to the ends of the stepped portions. The ends may be adjacent or they may not. Either way, the stepped end will serve to support the ends of the screw pieces 2 while allowing the threads on the bolt passing through the center to properly contact the grooves formed on the screw pieces 2. As no function or criticality is afforded the end portions of the stepped portions being adjacent in the specification of the ‘655 patent, making the end portion adjacent to each other is seen as an obvious design choice that will not effect the functioning of the stepped ends or the sliding screw pieces that contact them. In regard to claim 10, figures 1(b) and 3 show a central projection on the sliding members (unnumbered, but which permit a space for the spring). In regard to claim 11, the inner surface of the running screws 2 is designed to engage threads on the central rod. In regard to claims 12 and 13, the threads extend the entire length of the interior side of the running screws, from the large diameter side to the small diameter side that is in contact with the stepped portions. In regard to claim 15, spring 3 is disposed within the nut body. In regard to claims 17 and 18 paragraph 19 describes the stepped portions on opposites sides having heights that differ by half the pitch of the threads. Claim(s) 6,8,9,14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP ‘034 in view of US Patent No. 4,363,164 to Okada (hereinafter “Okada”). As discussed above, JP ‘034 discloses a nut with a main body with a slanted hole with stepped portions at the bottom which contact slidable segments with grooves forming threads to connect to a central rod, as claimed in claim 5. Claim 6 depends from claim 5 and adds a plurality of guide pieces formed on the inner wall surface to guide the segments. Okada shows a similar nut with a main body 1 having a slanted hole 2 to support nut elements 5 which have a threaded inner surface 7 to connect to a central threaded rod. Okada uses projections 3,3’ and 3” to guide nut elements 5. See the paragraph beginning on line 18 of column 2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s invention from the teaching of Okada to modify the nut assembly of JP ‘034 by adding guide pieces to the slanted hole to guide and separate the sliding nut portions to ensure their (and their associated grooves forming threads) alignment for proper functioning. In regard to claim 8, the projections of Okada extend axially along the inner wall surface toward the lower stepped surface at the small-diameter end portion. In regard to claim 9, figure 2 of Okada shows the polygonal shape of the nut. In regard to claim 14, Okada shows washer 8 on the large-diameter side between the plurality of segments 5 and the spring 9. In regard to claim 16, the guide pieces 3 of Okada are shown as wedge shaped. Claim(s) 7 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP ‘034 in view of US Patent No. 5,081,811 to Sasaki (hereinafter “Sasaki”). As discussed above, JP ‘034 discloses a nut with a main body with a slanted hole with stepped portions at the bottom which contact slidable segments with grooves forming threads to connect to a central rod, as claimed in claim 5. Claim 7 depends from claim 5 and adds a washer capable of locking with a fastening member is fixed or rotatably attached to the small-diameter end portion of the main body. Sasaki shows a nut with sliding, threaded internal members 13 to mate with a rod which passes through the center of the nut, with a washer member 5 fixedly attached to the to the small diameter end portion of the main body. Holes 4 pass through the washer to permit locking with a fastening member. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s invention from the teaching of Sasaki to modify the nut of JP ‘034 by adding a washer to the bottom of the nut to permit locking the nut to a fastening member to easily lock members together while permitting movement of the threaded rod connecting the members together. In regard to claim 19, figure 5 of Sasaki shows the washers of an upper and lower nut fastened to fastening members (the upper and lower logs) and connected with a threaded rod. The structure of the nuts permit contraction along the rod. Claim(s) 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP ‘034 in view of US Patent No. 4,974,888 to Childers (hereinafter “Childers”). As discussed above, JP ‘034 discloses a nut with a main body with a slanted hole with stepped portions at the bottom which contact slidable segments with grooves forming threads to connect to a central rod, as claimed in claim 5. Claim 19 depends from claim 5 and adds a fastening member connected to another fastening member by a rod, wherein one or more of the fastening members can contract in a contracting direction along the rod, and the rod is at least partially held within the slanted hole of the nut. Childers shows a nut 10 with sliding, threaded internal members 120 to mate with a rod which passes through the center of the nut, with a flange 92 fixedly attached to the to the small diameter end portion of the main body. Flanges 92 permit locking with a fastening member. Bolt 70 is fastened by the nuts and the nuts sliding members permit the contraction along the bolt. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s invention from the teaching of Childers to modify the nut of JP ‘034 by permitting contraction along a bolt that connects two fastening members to permit locking the nut to a fastening member to easily lock members together while permitting movement of the threaded rod connecting the members together. In regard to claim 20, guides 115 of Childers are formed on the inner wall surface of the main body and guide the sliding of the plurality of segments in an axial direction. Double Patenting The approval of the terminal disclaimer submitted September 18, 2024 has led to the withdrawal of the double patenting rejection. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed June 12, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In the third paragraph of the remarks regarding the 102 rejection, PO states that the running screws segments are disengaged from the threaded bolt when moving upwardly. This is not argued. The same is true of the claimed invention when the bolt is moving upwardly relative to the bolt. While the segments engaging the threads of the bolt need not be continuous for the threaded bolt to be rotated with respect to the main body, the threads of the bolt and the grooves on the segments are shown to have the same pitch in all of the figures (particularly 3,4 and 6), as they are in the ‘655 patent (figures 8-11). Applicant argues that JP ‘034, does not have stepped portions having end portion positions that are adjacent to each other. JP ‘034 shows stepped portions supporting the bottom of sliding members that are threaded to engage with a bolt extending through the center of the device when the device is tightened. The examiner agrees that JP ‘034 is silent as to the ends of the stepped portions. However, the ‘655 patent never discusses this feature (which is shown in the drawings) so it is seen as a design choice that will effect the functioning of the device. PNG media_image1.png 200 184 media_image1.png Greyscale Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM C DOERRLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4807. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7-5. 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, Eileen Lillis can be reached on 571-272-6928. 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. /WILLIAM C DOERRLER/Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3993 Conferees: /WILLIAM E DONDERO/ Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3993 /EILEEN D LILLIS/SPRS, Art Unit 3993
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 21, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 21, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 01, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Feb 05, 2024
Response Filed
Mar 14, 2024
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Sep 18, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 19, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 04, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Jun 12, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 17, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Feb 11, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 12, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent RE50847
METHOD OF INSTALLING A MULTI-BOWL WELLHEAD ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590718
Air conditioning systems for rooms
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent RE50828
DRIVING-SIDE PULLEY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent RE50827
ONE TRIP LOCKDOWN SLEEVE AND RUNNING TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571574
ICE MAKER AND REFRIGERATOR INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+12.8%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 398 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month