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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on October 6, 2022 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Otken et al (US 4,122,570).
As to claim 12, Otken et al discloses a method for replacing a blade on a digging tool, as illustrated in Figures 1-10, the method comprising the steps of providing a handle (1), the handle having a first end (on the opposite end where the user grips the handle) and a second end (adjacent to receiving portion 3); providing fasteners (17), wherein the fasteners have a head and a body; removing the fasteners from a first blade (15), the first blade have a front surface (on opposite side of the back surface in annotated Figure 3 below) and a back surface (see annotated Figure 3 below), wherein the first blade being removably attached to the second end of the handle via fasteners such that the head of the fastener is substantially flush with the back surface of the first blade (see annotated Figure 3 below); and attaching a second blade (19) (see Figures 4-5), the second blade have a front surface (on opposite side of back surface 23) and a back surface (23), wherein the second blade being removably attached to the second end of the handle via fasteners such that the head of the fastener is substantially flush with the back surface (23) of the second blade.
PNG
media_image1.png
232
366
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With claim 13, the digging tool further comprises a receiving plate (4), wherein the receiving plate is fixedly attached to the second end of the handle, and the first or second blade is removably attached to the receiving plate.
With claim 14, the receiving plate and the first and second blades have matching openings through which the fasteners attach.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 1-2 and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Groom (US 243,246) in view of Carmien (US 5,699,700).
As to claims 1, 5-7, and 9, Groom discloses a digging tool (shovels, spades, and scoops – see col. 1, line 27), as illustrated in Figures 1-2, comprising a handle (received in the handle-socket B and see annotated Figure 2 below) having a first end (not shown - opposite end on the handle where a user would grip) and a second end (see annotated Figure 2 below), a yoke (handle-socket B) being at the second end of the handle; a receiving plate (A) being substantially u-shaped to accept the yoke, wherein the receiving plate is fixedly attached to the yoke, wherein the receiving plate has multiple openings (rivet holes); wherein the fasteners (rivets G) have a head and a body; a blade (C) having a front surface and a back surface, wherein the blade has openings corresponding to the openings on the receiving plate, wherein the blade is attached to the receiving plate via the fasteners such that the head of the fastener is substantially flush with the back surface of the blade. However, Groom doesn’t show that the blade can be removable from the receiving plate.
PNG
media_image2.png
261
346
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Carmien teaches a hand tool comprising a tool head (22) being removably attached to handle adapter (24) with fasteners (54) (simply remove the machine screws 54 from the nuts 50 and threaded recesses 56 in the base 34 of the handle adapter 24 – see col. 6, lines 3-6).
Thus, the manner of enhancing a particular device was made part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art based upon the teaching of such improvement in Carmien. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known “improvement” technique in the same manner to the prior art digging tool of Groom and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art, namely, one skilled in the art would have readily recognized that modifying Groom to use the combination of the machine screws with nuts and threaded recesses, instead of the rivets and rivets holes in Groom would allow the plate and plate to be manually removable for cleaning.
With claims 2 and 8, the second end of the handle has an angled portion (see annotated Figure 2 above) having an angled face, wherein the angled face is fixedly attached to the receiving plate.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4,10-11, and 15-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Pettebone, Mundt, Mourelatos, Barwick, and Goucher are cited as being relevant art, because each prior art discloses a digging tool comprising a handle and a yoke.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN VU whose telephone number is (571)272-1961. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:00 am - 3:30 pm EST.
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, Victoria Augustine can be reached at (313) 446-4858. 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.
STEPHEN VU
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3651
/STEPHEN A VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights