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 . 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 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.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 10-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Groups II-III, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/17/2025.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the legal phraseology comprising in line 1. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Feuerstein (U.S. Patent No. 10,343,295).
Regarding claim 1, Feuerstein teaches a bolt cutter (10) (Figure 1) comprising:
a bolt cutting head (14) including a pair of blades (26,30)(Figure 1) and a pair of links (54,58), each link being coupled to one of the pair of blades (Figure 1 and Col. 2 Lines 39-67); and
a pair of handles (18,22), each handle defining a longitudinal axis (Figure 1) and including:
a handle portion coupled to one of the pair of links, the handle portion having an outer surface with a tip (122) projecting therefrom (Figure 3; Examiner notes the handle portion having an outside surface with a tip is coupled to the pair of links through the remaining structural elements as shown in Figures 1-2), and
a grip sleeve portion (98) surrounding the handle portion and being movable along the handle axis of the corresponding handle between a retracted position and an extended position to adjust a length of the corresponding handle, the grip sleeve portion including an inner surface having a slot (126) provided thereon, the slot selectively receiving the tip to adjust the length (Figures 2 and 3; Col. 3, Lines 33-66; Note Figure 3 where the grip portion surrounds the outer surface of the tip 122).
Regarding claim 2, Feuerstein the bolt cutter of claim 1, wherein each slot extends along the longitudinal axis of the corresponding handle (Figures 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 3, Feuerstein the bolt cutter of claim 1, wherein each grip sleeve portion is movable between a locked position and an unlocked position relative to the corresponding handle portion (Col. 3, Lines 12-31, Col. 3, Lines 60-67, Col. 4, Lines 1-27).
Regarding claim 4, Feuerstein the bolt cutter of claim 3, wherein each grip sleeve portion includes a notch (130A-130C) in communication with the slot, and wherein in the locked position, the tip of each handle portion is received within the notch of the corresponding grip sleeve portion and the corresponding grip sleeve portion is inhibited from translation along the handle axis, and in the unlocked position, the tip of each handle portion is received within the slot of the corresponding grip sleeve portion and the corresponding grip sleeve portion is permitted to translate along the handle axis (Figures 2-3; Col. 3, Lines 12-31, Col. 3, Lines 60-67, Col. 4, Lines 1-27).).
Regarding claim 5, Feuerstein the bolt cutter of claim 4, wherein the notch of each grip sleeve portion is one of a plurality of notches in communication with the slot (Figure 2).
Regarding claim 6, Feuerstein the bolt cutter of claim 4, each grip sleeve portion is rotatable about the corresponding handle axis between the locked position and the unlocked position (Figure 2; Col. 3, Lines 12-31, Col. 3, Lines 60-67, Col. 4, Lines 1-27).
Regarding claim 8, Feuerstein the bolt cutter of claim 1, wherein each handle portion further includes a second tip (122) projecting from the outer surface, and the slot of each grip sleeve portion also selectively receives the second tip of each corresponding handle portion (Figures 2-3).
Regarding claim 9, Feuerstein the bolt cutter of claim 8, wherein the tip and the second tip of each handle portion oppose each other relative to the handle axis (Figure 3).
Regarding claim 7, Feuerstein the bolt cutter of claim 4, wherein each grip sleeve portion defines an aperture in communication with the notch, the aperture permitting a user to view the position of the corresponding tip from the outside of the grip sleeve portion.
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feuerstein (U.S. Patent No. 10,343,295) in view of Knutson (U.S. Patent No. 2019/0168090)
Regarding claim 7, Feuerstein the bolt cutter of claim 4, but does not provide wherein each grip sleeve portion defines an aperture in communication with the notch, the aperture permitting a user to view the position of the corresponding tip from the outside of the grip sleeve portion.
Knutson teaches it is known in the art of handle adjustments to incorporate a grip portion (200) with an aperture (220) in communication with a notch (330) the aperture permitting a user to view the position of the corresponding tip from the outside of the grip sleeve portion (Figures 14A and 14B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the device of Feuerstein to incorporate the teachings of Knutson to provide the grip portion with an aperture. In doing so, it allows access to multiple portions of the handle without interfering with the locking notches.
Related Prior Art
Below is an analysis of the relevance of references cited but not used
- "892 cited references B-M on page 1 and A-D on Page 2 establish the state of the art with a variety of handheld cutting tools with various handle designs.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD D CROSBY JR whose telephone number is (571)272-8034. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00.
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, Adam Eiseman can be reached at 571-270-3818. 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.
/RICHARD D CROSBY JR/ 10/31/2025Examiner, Art Unit 3724