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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed 23 April 2026.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-2 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allen et al. (US 9,731,358) in view of Stoyanov (US 2016/0332236 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Allen et al. discloses a step drill bit 10 comprising: a shank 12/16 operatively couplable to a tool; a body portion 18 coupled to the shank, the body portion including a tool bit tip 21 at a first end of the body portion and a plurality of progressively sized, axially stacked steps 20A-20M, the plurality of steps define a terminal step 20M at a second end of the body portion opposite the first end and adjacent the shank.
Allen et al. does not disclose the body portion defining a hollow interior cavity extending between the bit tip and the terminal step; and an inner structure having a plurality of support members extending within the hollow interior cavity, the plurality of support members is formed as a plurality of cylinders or a lattice structure. Stoyanov teaches the use of a drill bit 30 with a single piece body having a hollow interior cavity 34 comprising inner structure support members in the form of a lattice structure 36 for the purpose of reducing the overall material used to make the drill while maintaining strength of the drill bit. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have combined the step drill bit of Allen et al. with the hollow interior cavity and lattice structure of Stoyanov in order to be able to manufacture the step drill bit using less material while maintaining strength of the tool bit.
Regarding claim 2, the modified invention of Allen et al. discloses wherein the plurality of support members and the body portion are formed as a single piece (as modified by Stoyanov).
Regarding claim 7, the modified invention of Allen et al. discloses wherein the body portion 18 includes a helical flute 46.
Regarding claim 8, the modified invention of Allen et al. discloses wherein the tool bit tip 21 includes a plurality of chisel faces 24/26, the chisel faces converge to a cutting edge 28.
Regarding claim 9, the modified invention of Allen et al. discloses wherein the tool bit tip 21 includes a plurality of chisel faces 24/26, the chisel faces converge to a cutting point (central point as seen in figure 3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 ERIC ANDREW GATES whose telephone number is (571)272-5498. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 9-6, Alt Fr 9-5.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sunil Singh, can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ERIC A. GATES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722 20 May 2026
Prosecution Insights