Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/800,824

TURNING TOOL

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Aug 18, 2022
Examiner
WHITMIRE, ERIC DANIEL
Art Unit
3722
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Walter AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
45 granted / 67 resolved
-2.8% vs TC avg
Strong +38% interview lift
Without
With
+38.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
90
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
43.9%
+3.9% vs TC avg
§102
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
§112
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 67 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 3-9 and 12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 12/22/2025. Applicant's election with traverse of Species 1 in the reply filed on 12/22/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the claims are sufficiently related such that a search for one species would encompass the remaining species, referencing MPEP §803. This is not found persuasive because the present application is submitted as a §371 National Stage Application, and the restriction was made by the requirement for unity of invention. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “clampig arm” in line 13 should read “clamping arm”. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 1-2, 10-11, and 13-15 are 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 1 recites the limitation "a cutting insert" in line 22. The use of the article “a” makes it unclear whether or not this limitation is intended to refer to the same cutting insert previously claimed in line 4 of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 15 recites the limitation "a cutting insert" in line 2. The use of the article “a” makes it unclear whether or not this limitation is intended to refer to the same cutting insert previously claimed in line 4 of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required. 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) 1-2, 10-11, 13, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hecht (US 20130149054), and further in view of Amstibovitsky et al. (US 20190160549, hereinafter ‘Amstibovitsky’). Regarding claim 1, Hecht discloses a turning tool for metal cutting 20 comprising: a tool body 30 having a tool body top surface (shown in the annotated figure below), and arranged at a front end of the tool body top surface, an insert seat 36 arranged for receiving a cutting insert 24, and a tool body bore 62 (lower portion, Fig 5) that is spaced apart from the insert seat 36 and extends downward from an opening in the tool body top surface (Fig 5); a clamping member (shown in the annotated figure below) arranged at the tool body top surface (Fig 1), the clamping member including a base body having a base body top surface (shown in the annotated figure below), and a base body bottom surface (shown in the annotated figure below) facing the tool body top surface (Figs 1-2), a clamping member through hole 62 (upper portion, Fig 5) extending from an opening in the base body top surface to an opening in the base body bottom surface (Fig 5), the clamping member through hole being aligned with the tool body bore (Fig 5), and a clamping arm 48 protruding from the base body and at least a portion of the clamping arm extending over the insert seat 36 (Fig 3); a clamping pin 56 connecting the tool body and the clamping member (Fig 5), the clamping pin including a longitudinal shaft 58 that has a longitudinal axis A2 and that extends through the clamping member through hole (Fig 5) and into the tool body bore, wherein the shaft 58 is axially movably received in the tool body bore ([0070]) and operable to move to a first axial position, a head 60 at an upper end of the shaft 58, wherein the clamping pin 56 is configured to, in the first axial position, engage the base body and force the base body, together with the protruding clamping arm 48, toward the tool body top surface, whereby, when a cutting insert 24 is received in the insert seat 36, the cutting insert is clamped in the insert seat ([0055]), the shaft 58 is axially movably received in the tool body bore 62 by being axially slidable ([0070]); and a locking mechanism 52 configured to, in the first axial position, releasably lock the shaft 58 in the tool body bore 62 against relative rotation by positive locking ([0076]). PNG media_image1.png 356 462 media_image1.png Greyscale Hecht does not explicitly disclose a coolant fluid channel having a first outlet opening in the head and wherein in the first axial position, the first outlet opening in the head is located above the base body top surface. However, Amstibovitsky teaches a coolant fluid channel 56 having a first outlet opening 34 in the head 22; wherein in the first axial position the first outlet opening 34 in the head 22 is located above the base body top surface (lower portion of 92 where 30 rests, Figs 18-19). It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hecht to incorporate the fluid channel of Amstibovitsky into the clamping pin in order to provide high-pressure fluid conveyance with minimal additional cost (Amstibovitsky, [0006-0007]). Regarding claim 2, Hecht in view of Amstibovitsky discloses the turning tool for metal cutting according to claim 1. Hecht also discloses the locking mechanism 52 is configured to, in the first axial position, releasably lock the shaft 58 in the tool body bore against relative rotation by positive locking ([0091] where there are two mirror symmetrical abutment surfaces 54 that the locking mechanism 52 may engage, this surface does not extend completely around the circumference of the shaft 58, and the clamping of the pin would prevent rotation). Regarding claims 10-11, Hecht in view of Amstibovitsky discloses the turning tool for metal cutting according to claim 1. Hecht does not explicitly disclose the head has a longitudinally extending front side surface, wherein the first outlet opening is located in the front side surface, wherein the coolant fluid channel includes a first internal exit channel, the first internal exit channel having a central longitudinal axis and extending from an inner position in the head to the first outlet opening, and wherein the central longitudinal axis of the first exit channel and the longitudinal axis of the shaft form a sharp angle having a value of 45° or more. Hecht also does not disclose an extension of the central longitudinal axis of the first exit channel intersects a point where, when a cutting insert is clamped in the insert seat, an active cutting edge of the cutting insert is located. However, Amstibovitsky teaches the head 22 has a longitudinally extending front side surface (side facing toward the insert), wherein the first outlet opening 34 is located in the front side surface (Fig 3), wherein the coolant fluid channel 56 includes a first internal exit channel (Fig 7, the channels extending from 56 to the outlets 34), the first internal exit channel having a central longitudinal axis of the first exit channel and the longitudinal axis of the shaft form a sharp angle having a value of 45° or more (Fig 4). Amstibovitsky also teaches an extension of the central longitudinal axis of the first exit channel intersects a point where, when a cutting insert is clamped in the insert seat, an active cutting edge of the cutting edge is located (Fig 16). It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hecht to incorporate the fluid channel of Amstibovitsky into the clamping pin in order to provide high-pressure fluid conveyance with minimal additional cost (Amstibovitsky, [0006-0007]). Regarding claim 13, Hecht in view of Amstibovitsky discloses the turning tool for metal cutting according to claim 1. Hecht does not explicitly disclose the clamping member is a separable component. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to make the clamping part a separate component from the tool body, as taught by Amstibovitsky, in order to simplify the manufacturing process of the tool body and the clamping member and create more easily replaceable parts, as would be readily understood to be a benefit to one of ordinary skill in the art. It has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlicnrnan, 168 USPQ 177, 179. Regarding claim 15, Hecht in view of Amstibovitsky discloses the turning tool for metal cutting according to claim 1. Hecht also discloses a cutting insert 24 received in the insert seat 36. Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hecht in view of Amstibovitsky as applied at least to claim 1 above, and further in view of Amstibovitsky et al. (US 20190160549, hereinafter ‘Amstibovitsky’). Regarding claim 14, Hecht in view of Amstibovitsky discloses the turning tool for metal cutting according to claim 1. Hecht does not explicitly disclose the clamping member is biased away from the tool body top surface. However, Breisch teaches the clamping member 15 is biased away from the tool body top surface (via compression spring 13. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hecht as previously modified to incorporate the compression spring of Breisch into the cavity holding the clamping pin of Hecht in order to more easily release and mount a cutting insert (Breisch, [0017]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC DANIEL WHITMIRE whose telephone number is (703)756-4729. The examiner can normally be reached 8 AM - 4 PM. 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. /ERIC DANIEL WHITMIRE/Examiner, Art Unit 3722 /SUNIL K SINGH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3722
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 18, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599973
STRUCTURE AND CHUCK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594609
HYDRO CHUCK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12557596
ELECTROSTATIC CHUCK
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12521803
MILLING TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12496643
ROTARY CUTTING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+38.2%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 67 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