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 .
Drawings
The drawings received on 01/30/2026 are accepted.
Specification
The amendment filed 01/30/2026 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows:
In Paragraph [0026]:
As shown in FIG. 6, the recess 126 defines a first flat surface 127 that is generally perpendicular to the longitudinal axis 98, a second ramped surface 128 that is angled relative to the longitudinal axis 98, and a third flat surface 129 positioned between the first flat surface 127 and the second ramped surface 128 that is generally parallel to the longitudinal axis 98.
In Paragraph [0027]:
Specifically, the first flat surface 127 inhibits axial movement of the sleeve 78 in a direction towards the first end 90 of the shank 74. Additionally, the second ramped surface 128 guides the locking member 150 to disengage the recess 126 when the sleeve 78 is moved from the first position to the second position.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
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 21-24 and 26 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 written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
New claim 21 recites “the recess includes a flat surface that is generally perpendicular to the longitudinal axis”. However, the specification as originally filed is silent as to the recess including a flat surface that is generally perpendicular to the longitudinal axis. The Examiner notes that the disclosure gives no indication that the drawings were drawn to scale. "[I]t is well established that patent drawings do not define the precise proportions of the elements and may not be relied on to show particular sizes if the specification is completely silent on the issue."). Thus, it is not proper to rely on the drawings to set forth that the recess includes a flat surface that is generally perpendicular to the longitudinal axis, unless this feature is set forth in the specification as originally filed. The Examine suggests changing the language with something along the lines of: the recess includes a shoulder surface extending in a radial direction towards the longitudinal axis.
New claim 24 recites “the ramped surface guides the locking member to disengage the recess when the sleeve is moved from the first position to the second position”. However, the specification as originally filed is silent as to the ramped surface guiding the locking member to disengage the recess when the sleeve is moved from the first position to the second position.
New claim 26 recites “the recess is an annular recess”. However, the specification as originally filed is silent as to the recess being an annular recess. The Examiner notes that the specification as filed does set forth in paragraph [0026] that the recess is “an annular recess that is interrupted by the flat surfaces 120”. As such, the Examiner suggest clearly setting forth that the recess is an annular recess that is interrupted by a flat surface”.
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 21-25 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 21 recites “the recess includes a flat surface that is generally perpendicular to the longitudinal axis” in lines 1-2. However, the term “generally” renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear how and when exactly the flat surface is actually being perpendicular to the axis. Is it mostly perpendicular? Is it perpendicular or not? Further clarification is needed.
Claim 23 recites “a ramped surface that is angled relative to the longitudinal axis” in lines 1-2. However, it is unclear what exactly the angle of this ramped surface is. Angled can be any angle, as such, it is unclear what the metes and bounds of how the angled surface is being disposed. The Examiner suggest replacing “angled” with “inclined”.
Claim 24 recites the conditional term “when”, which renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear what will happen when the sleeve is not moved from the first position to the second position. Further clarification is needed.
Claim 25 recites the conditional term “when”, which renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear what will happen when the sleeve is not moved from the first position to the second position. Further clarification is needed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-4 and 5 are allowed.
The Examiner’s reasons for allowance will be set forth once all the outstanding issues identified above have been resolved.
Response to Arguments
Rejections not based on Prior Art
In view of Applicant's amendments, the previous 35 U.S.C. § 112 rejection of claims 1-5 has been withdrawn.
In view of Applicant' s amendments, a new 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph rejection of claims 21-24 and 26 has been incorporated as aforementioned.
In view of Applicant' s amendments, a new 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph rejection of claims 21-25 has been incorporated as aforementioned.
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 NICOLE N RAMOS whose telephone number is (571)272-5134. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 7:00 am -5:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, 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.
/NICOLE N RAMOS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722