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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the first open end" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5-6, 12, 14-15, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 2021000205 (KR) in view of Lieser (4,404,874).
KR teaches with respect to claim 1, a dental tool device configured to seat and remove a retention member in a dental cap coupled in a dental appliance (such that the device is capable of functioning as claimed, see par. 1 of translation) comprising an elongate member 20 comprising a main body 23, expander portion 211/21, a seating end portion 24, an engaging portion 23 (such that portion 23 is a grip to be engaged with) positioned between the expander portion 211/21 and the seating end portion 24, and a first threaded portion 22, an expandable grabber 10 configured to be inserted into the retention member to grab the retention member (see figs. 2, 7-8), the expandable grabber having an opening sized and configured to receive a portion of the elongate member including the expander portion (see figs. 5-7), wherein the expandable grabber comprises a second threaded portion complimentary to the first threaded portion (pars. 18 and 31 of translation, figs. 3-7), and wherein the first and second threaded portions are configured to engage each other to adjust an axial position of the expandable grabber relative to the elongate member by a rotation of the expandable grabber relative to the elongate member based on the engaged first and second threaded portions to adjust a diameter of at least a portion of the opening (see figs. 5-7, pars. 18 and 31 of translation). KR teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, however, does not specifically teach a handle having an outer surface and a cavity configured to couple to at least a portion of the handle engaging portion, the expander portion and first threaded portion simultaneously and at least a portion of the handle engaging portion and the seating portion simultaneously.
Lieser teaches a tool comprising an elongated member having a main body portion, a working portion 13, a seating end portion 14 and a handle engaging portion 12 positioned between the working portion and the seating end portion, a handle 1/2 having an outer surface and a cavity 4 sized and dimensioned to receive at least a portion of the handle engaging portion and seating portion 14 simultaneously and at least a portion of the handle engaging portion and the working portion simultaneously (see fig. 1, abstract, col. 2, ll. 53-69, col. 3, ll. 1-5). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify KR to include a handle that is configured to be attached to the elongate member on either end as taught by Lieser in order to provide an enhanced grip for the user while still allowing both the working ends to be small and accessible, such that the small size of the workings ends is maintained. Such that the user can more easily grip the end of the tool rather than having to try and grip the middle portion. It is noted that the prior art of KR teaches both ends of the elongated boding as a tool end for contacting and manipulating retention members (see par. 31-32 regarding end with element 24 being a gripping part). Such that it is noted that the combination teaches the limitations are claimed, such that when KR is modified with the handle of Lieser, the cavity of the handle would be configured to engage at least a portion of the handle engaging portion, the expander portion, and first threaded portion simultaneously, and at least a portion of the handle engaging portion and the seating end portion simultaneously.
With respect to claim 5, KR/Lieser teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, KR further teaches wherein the expandable grabber comprises a first portion and a second portion, wherein the first portion has a first internal width and is sized and dimensioned to receive at least a portion of the expander portion, wherein the second portion has a second internal width and is sized and dimensioned to receive a portion of the elongate member having a first threaded portion, and wherein the first width is smaller than the second width (see figs. 5-7, annotated figure below).
With respect to claim 6, KR/Lieser teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, KR further teaches wherein the expandable grabber further comprises a third portion having a third internal width that is larger than each of the first width and the second width, and an internal stop between the second portion and the third portion that limits an adjustment of the position of the expandable grabber relative to the elongate member (see annotated figure below, figs. 5-7).
PNG
media_image1.png
318
614
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 12, KR teaches a dental tool device configured to seat and remove a retention member in a dental cap coupled in a dental appliance (see par. 1 of translation) comprising an elongate member 20 comprising a first outer surface (see fig. 3, such that is has an outer surface) comprising a first threaded portion 22, a first end (end at 211 including 21) and a second end (4), wherein the first outer surface includes a first threaded portion 22; an expandable grabber 10 configured to be inserted into the retention member to grab the retention member (see figs. 2, 7-8) comprising a second outer surface (such that is has an outer surface), an inner surface (see fig. 4, such that it has an inner surface) comprising a second threaded portion complementary to the first threaded portion of the elongate member (pars. 18 and 31 of translation, figs. 3-7), a third end (end near 11), a fourth end (end opposite 11), and an opening between the third end and the fourth end (see fig. 4, such that an opening extends through the expandable grabber); an expander 21 comprised in the first end of the elongate member (see figs. 5-7, such that the first end 211 causes the expandable grabber to expand when inserted), a seating end portion 24 comprised in the second end of the elongate member, an engaging portion 23 (such that portion 23 is a grip portion and configured to be engaged to be gripped) positioned between the expander 21 and the seating end portion 24, wherein the opening of the expandable grabber is configured to couple to a portion of the elongate member having the first threaded portion and the expander such that the first threaded portion and the second threaded portion are configured to adjustably engage one another (see figs. 5-7, pars. 18 and 31 of translation); and wherein an adjustment of the second threaded portion relative to the first threaded portion adjusts a position of the expander relative to the first end of the expandable grabber, and a width of the third end of the expandable grabber (see figs. 5-7, pars. 18, 31 and 35 of translation). KR teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above however, does not specifically teach a handle having an outer surface and a cavity configured to couple to at least a portion of the handle engaging portion and alternatively the expander portion and the seating portion simultaneously and the handle engaging portion and the handle engaging portion is polygonal.
Lieser teaches a tool comprising an elongated member having a main body portion, a working portion 13, a seating end portion 14 and a handle engaging portion 12 positioned between the working portion and the seating end portion, a handle 1/2 having an outer surface and a cavity 4 sized and dimensioned to receive at least a portion of the handle engaging portion and seating portion 14 simultaneously and at least a portion of the handle engaging portion and the working portion simultaneously (see fig. 1, abstract, col. 2, ll. 53-69, col. 3, ll. 1-5) and the handle engaging portion 12 is polygonal (col. 2, ll. 53-55). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify KR to include a handle that is configured to be attached to the elongate member on either end as taught by Lieser in order to provide an enhanced grip for the user while still allowing both the working ends to be small and accessible, such that the small size of the workings ends is maintained. Such that the user can more easily grip the end of the tool rather than having to try and grip the middle portion. It is noted that the prior art of KR teaches both ends of the elongated boding as a tool end for contacting and manipulating retention members (see par. 31-32 regarding end with element 24 being a gripping part). Such that it is noted that the combination teaches the limitations are claimed, such that when KR is modified with the handle of Lieser, the cavity of the handle would be configured to engage at least a portion of the handle engaging portion, the expander portion, and first threaded portion simultaneously, and at least a portion of the handle engaging portion and the seating end portion simultaneously.
With respect to claim 14, KR/Lieser teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, KR further teaches wherein the expandable grabber comprises a first portion and a second portion, wherein the first portion has a first internal width and is sized and dimensioned to receive at least a portion of the expander portion, wherein the second portion has a second internal width and is sized and dimensioned to receive a portion of the elongate member having a first threaded portion, and wherein the first width is smaller than the second width (see figs. 5-7, annotated figure above).
With respect to claim 15, KR/Lieser teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, KR further teaches wherein the expandable grabber further comprises a third portion having a third internal width that is larger than each of the first width and the second width, and an internal stop between the second portion and the third portion that limits an adjustment of the position of the expandable grabber relative to the elongate member (see annotated figure above, figs. 5-7).
With respect to claim 20, KR/Lieser teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Lieser further teaches wherein at least one of the first open end and a portion of the cavity comprises a hexagonal shape (col. 2, ll. 34-35, see figs. 2-3)
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 2021000205 (KR) in view of in view of Lieser (4,404,874) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Scommegna et al. (2018/0228575).
KR/Lieser teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, however, does not specifically teach the outer surface of the handle comprises a set of flat portions.
Scommegna teaches a tool comprising a handle, wherein the outer surface of the handle comprises a set of flat portions 30 (see fig. 10, par. 27). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the handle taught by KR/Lieser with the handle comprising two flats taught by Scommegna to allow for a more effective grip (see par. 27 of Scommegna).
Claim(s) 12, 14-15, 17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 2021000205 (KR) in view of Engel (4,096,896).
With respect to claim 12, KR teaches a dental tool device configured to seat and remove a retention member in a dental cap coupled in a dental appliance (see par. 1 of translation) comprising an elongate member 20 comprising a first outer surface (see fig. 3, such that is has an outer surface) comprising a first threaded portion 22, a first end (end at 211 including 21) and a second end (4), wherein the first outer surface includes a first threaded portion 22; an expandable grabber 10 configured to be inserted into the retention member to grab the retention member (see figs. 2, 7-8) comprising a second outer surface (such that is has an outer surface), an inner surface (see fig. 4, such that it has an inner surface) comprising a second threaded portion complementary to the first threaded portion of the elongate member (pars. 18 and 31 of translation, figs. 3-7), a third end (end near 11), a fourth end (end opposite 11), and an opening between the third end and the fourth end (see fig. 4, such that an opening extends through the expandable grabber); an expander 21 comprised in the first end of the elongate member (see figs. 5-7, such that the first end 211 causes the expandable grabber to expand when inserted), a seating end portion 24 comprised in the second end of the elongate member, an engaging portion 23 (such that portion 23 is a grip portion and configured to be engaged to be gripped) positioned between the expander 21 and the seating end portion 24, wherein the opening of the expandable grabber is configured to couple to a portion of the elongate member having the first threaded portion and the expander such that the first threaded portion and the second threaded portion are configured to adjustably engage one another (see figs. 5-7, pars. 18 and 31 of translation); and wherein an adjustment of the second threaded portion relative to the first threaded portion adjusts a position of the expander relative to the first end of the expandable grabber, and a width of the third end of the expandable grabber (see figs. 5-7, pars. 18, 31 and 35 of translation). KR teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above however, does not specifically teach a handle having an outer surface and a cavity configured to couple to at least a portion of the handle engaging portion and alternatively the expander portion and the seating portion simultaneously and the handle engaging portion and the handle engaging portion is polygonal.
Engel teaches a tool comprising an elongated member 15 having a main body portion, a working portion 30, a seating end portion (see annotated figure) and a handle engaging portion (see annotated figure) positioned between the working portion and the seating end portion, a handle 11 having an outer surface and a cavity 12 configured to couple to at least a portion of the handle engaging portion and alternatively the working portion and the seating end portion simultaneously and the handle engaging portion 15 is polygonal (col. 3, ll. 11-16, 39-41, see figs. 1-2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify KR to include a handle that is configured to be attached to the elongate member on either end as taught by Engel in order to provide an enhanced grip for the user while still allowing both the working ends to be small and accessible, such that the small size of the workings ends is maintained. Such that the user can more easily grip the end of the tool rather than having to try and grip the middle portion. It is noted that the prior art of KR teaches both ends of the elongated boding as a tool end for contacting and manipulating retention members (see par. 31-32 regarding end with element 24 being a gripping part). Such that it is noted that the combination teaches the limitations are claimed, such that when KR is modified with the handle of Engel, the cavity of the handle would be configured to engage at least a portion of the handle engaging portion, the expander portion, and first threaded portion simultaneously, and at least a portion of the handle engaging portion and the seating end portion simultaneously.
PNG
media_image2.png
410
437
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 14, KR/Engel teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, KR further teaches wherein the expandable grabber comprises a first portion and a second portion, wherein the first portion has a first internal width and is sized and dimensioned to receive at least a portion of the expander portion, wherein the second portion has a second internal width and is sized and dimensioned to receive a portion of the elongate member having a first threaded portion, and wherein the first width is smaller than the second width (see figs. 5-7, annotated figure above).
With respect to claim 15, KR/ Engel teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, KR further teaches wherein the expandable grabber further comprises a third portion having a third internal width that is larger than each of the first width and the second width, and an internal stop between the second portion and the third portion that limits an adjustment of the position of the expandable grabber relative to the elongate member (see annotated figure above, figs. 5-7).
With respect to claim 17, KR/Engel teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Engel further teaches wherein the seating end portion comprises an O-ring (see annotated figure, such that portion 32 is inserted into portion 15/20 and portion 32 comprises an O-ring, see figs 4, 7-8). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify KR with the O-ring at the seating end as taught by Engel in order to allow for interchangeable tools at the seating end in order to perform different operations with the tool .
With respect to claim 20, KR/Engel teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Engel further teaches wherein at least one of the first open end and a portion of the cavity comprises a hexagonal shape (col. 3, ll. 9-16).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 10, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that KR is directed to a rubber cap fastening and detaching device used in overdenture system and does not disclose or suggested the features in claim 1 such as a removable handle and therefore cannot disclose or suggested the structural relationship in amended claim 1. However, it is noted that KR is not being used to teach the limitations of a removable handle and therefore, the applicants arguments directed towards KR not teaching the removable handle are moot.
The applicant further argues that the prior art of Lieser only teaches a handle attachable to opposite ends of a tool for ergonomic grip and does not teach or disclose a cavity configured for structural multi-region coupling as claimed. The applicant argues that the rational for combing KR with Lieser does not explain why one would redesign the handle cavity to span specifically and simultaneously engage the expander and threaded region of the elongate member. Further the applicant agues that the office action identifies isolated features in the prior art and assert that combining them would have been obvious for improved grip or usability.
In view of the applicant’s arguments it is first noted that redesign of the handle cavity is not needed. Such that it is noted that the prior art of KR is used to teach the elongate member having an engaging portion between the ends, such that when the tool is being used, the user would grip portion 23 of the shaft which is between the seating end and expander portion. The prior art of Lieser teaches a shaft with two working ends, that including an engaging portion located between the two working ends and the cavity of the handle being sized to accept approximately half of the elongate member. Such that it allows for a large portion to be secured within the cavity to create a secure connection between the two parts. Such that the modification of KR to include the handle taught by Lieser would engage the expander portion and first threaded portion along with at least a portion of the engaging portion, as those are all included in less than half of one end of the elongated member. The same applies to when the handle would be applied to the other side of the elongated shaft of KR, such that it would cover the seating portion of the end and at least a portion of the engaging portion as those are located on the other half of the elongated member. Such that it is noted that the combination teaches the limitations are claimed, such that when KR is modified with the handle of Lieser, the cavity of the handle would be configured to engage at least a portion of the handle engaging portion, the expander portion, and first threaded portion simultaneously, and at least a portion of the handle engaging portion and the seating end portion simultaneously. The cavity of Lieser would not be “redesigned” as argued. An annotated figure is provided below showing the combination of KR with the handle of Lieser, such that it would be configured as claimed. It is noted that the vertical line is a reference to show the approximate middle of the elongate member and the other black lines are the handle with the elongated shaft and claimed sections within the cavity.
PNG
media_image3.png
190
467
media_image3.png
Greyscale
The applicant’s arguments that the combination would require substantial redesign and motivation is not provided for the redesign is not persuasive for the reasons highlighted above. It is noted that the cavity is not redesigned, such that the handle, as taught by Lieser would be similar. See the annaoted figure above which shows the modification of KR with Lieser in which the handle is the black lines and the different portions of the elongated member are within the cavity of the handle as taught by Lieser, which has not been redesigned. Further the applicant argues that the elongated shaft of KR would need to be redesigned to fit withing the handle. However, it is noted that the only “redesign” of the elongated member would be the polygonal portion as taught by Lieser to prevent rotation between the two parts. It is noted that the modification (or “redesign” as argued by the applicant) to change the shape of the engaging portion to engage the handle (i.e. portion 23) would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art in order to prevent the two parts from rotating relative to each other. It is noted that the changing of the shape of portion 23 would not result in any adverse effects of how the tool of KR works and would enhance the grip of the user on the tool even without the use of a handle.
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 HEIDI MARIE EIDE whose telephone number is (571)270-3081. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-4:00.
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, Edelmira Bosques can be reached on 571-270-5614. 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.
/HEIDI M EIDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772 4/2/2026