DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Medicine
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the communications filed on 11/5/2025.
The Examiner notes claims 1, 3-4, 6, 8-15, & 21-27 are currently pending and have been examined; claim(s) 2, 5, 7, & 16-20 is/are canceled without prejudice, claim(s) 1, 3-4, 6, 8-11, & 15 is/are currently amended, and claim(s) 21-27 is/are newly added; all other claims are original or previously presented. Please see the Response to Amendments and Response to Arguments sections below for more details..
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 22 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 22.
The claim states "The tool according to claim 22,…” It is unclear what claim 22 depends from as it is written as a dependent claim but depends from itself. For examining purposes the limitation will be interpreted as “The tool according to claim [[22]]21,…”
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, 3-4, 6, 8, 11-12, 15, & 23-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muramatsu et al. (JP 2001180799 A) in view of Camp (US 20150266710), hereinafter Muramatsu & Camp.
Regarding claim 1. (Each claim status is listed above in the Status of Claims section) Muramatsu discloses a tool [Fig 10; 12] comprising a planar body [Fig 10; the plane that bisects though 13 is the same plane that bisects though the rest of the tool; therefore the tool is planar as it all lies in the same plane; the examiner notes that the Applicant’s definition of planar body is “a unitary structure” (see Applicant specification ¶29) and the upper and lower surfaces are coplanar to a single plane (Applicant specification ¶30; the Examiner interprets this to mean parallel to the same plane as both surfaces cannot be in the same plane simultaneously due to the thickness of the body separating the two surfaces) by this definition the main body can have section of different thickness as long as the upper and lower surfaces are parallel to the same plane] that includes:
a main portion defining an aperture extending therethrough [Fig 10; 13 has an aperture extending through it], the main body having a first linear edge that partially defines a perimeter of the aperture [Fig 10; 13 has a first linear edge], and a projection that extends from the first linear edge into the aperture [Fig 10; there is a projection off the first linear edge that]…
Muramatsu may not explicitly disclose a curved hook portion extending from the main portion, wherein the main portion includes a convex edge that faces the curved hook portion, the convex edge and the curved hook portion defining a first slot therebetween.
However Muramatsu further teaches that a curved hook portion [Fig 11; 13 is a curved hook portion] extending from the main portion [The Examiner notes that Fig 11 shows that the planar body can all be the same thickness which could make the portion of 13 in Fig 12 be the same thickness as 12], wherein the main portion includes a … edge that faces the curved hook portion, the … edge and the curved hook portion defining a first slot therebetween [Fig 11; the hooked curved portion (13 of Fig 11) is formed by the main portion having an edge that forms a slot between the hook and the main body].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the main body as disclosed by Muramatsu to have a curved hook portion extending from the main portion, wherein the main portion includes an edge that faces the curved hook portion, the edge and the curved hook portion defining a first slot therebetween as taught by Muramatsu for the purpose of increasing the versatility of the tool by adding another object interacting portion to the tool [Muramatsu: Pg3:¶11 of the translation].
Muramatsu as modified may not explicitly disclose a convex edge.
Camp teaches a tool [1] including a curved hook portion extending from the main portion [Fig 1; 10 is a curved hook portion], wherein the main portion includes a convex edge that faces the curved hook portion, the convex edge and the curved hook portion defining a first slot therebetween [Fig 1; 7 is a slot that is formed by 10 and the convex edge of the main body].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the edge as taught by Muramatsu as modified to be a convex edge as a simple substitution of a concave edge (Muramatsu, see Fig 11) to a convex edge (Camp, see Fig 1).
Regarding claim 3. Muramatsu as modified teaches the tool according to claim 1, the planar body further includes a tapered hook portion extending from the main portion [Muramatsu: Fig 1 & 10; 8 in Fig 1 is the same in Fig 10 and is a tapered hook portion extending from the main body].
Regarding claim 4. Muramatsu as modified teaches the tool according to claim 3, wherein the tapered hook portion includes a first linear hook edge and a second linear hook edge extending from the main portion to a tip of the tapered hook portion, wherein the first linear hook edge extends at an acute angle relative to the second linear hook edge [Muramatsu: Fig 1 & 10; 8 has two linear edges that come together at an acute angle relative to each other to form the hook tip].
Regarding claim 6. Muramatsu as modified teaches the tool according to claim 1, wherein the curved hook portion includes a convex hook edge extending from the main portion to a tip of the curved hook portion [Camp: Fig 7; 7 is formed by a convex edge on the main body and a convex hook edge that is part of 10], said convex hook edge being configured to slidably engage a portion of a can to guide a tip of the curved hook portion under a pull tab of a can and then through an opening in the pull tab [Camp: Fig 1; the convex hook edge can slidably engage a portion of a can to guide a tip of the curved hook portion under a pull tab of a can and then through an opening in the pull tab].
Regarding claim 8. Muramatsu as modified teaches the tool according to claim 1, wherein the planar body includes a second linear edge that intersects with the convex edge, wherein the second linear edge and the convex edge are configured to slidably engage with and guide a pull tab into the slot [Muramatsu: Fig 11; The edge of Muramatsu leading up to the curved hook portion is a linear edge that combined with convex edge (taught by Camp) can slidably engage with and guide a pull tab into the slot].
Regarding claim 11. Muramatsu disclose the tool according to claim 1, wherein the planar body includes a tapered hook portion extending from the main portion [Fig 1 & 10; the hook (8) shown in more detail in Fig 1 is the same in Fig 10 that extends from the main body].
Regarding claim 12. Muramatsu as modified teaches the tool according to claim 2, wherein the main portion defines a second linear edge that is spaced from and parallel to the first linear edge [Fig 10; there is an edge on the outer part of the main body that is spaced apart from and parallel to the first linear edge]…
Muramatsu may not explicitly disclose wherein a distance between the first linear edge and the second linear edge is at least about 0.080”.
However it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the distance between the first and second linear edges as disclosed by Muramatsu to be about 0.08” since it has been held that "where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimension would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device" MPEP 2144.04-IV-A. In the instant case, the device of Muramatsu would not operate differently with the claimed distance.
Regarding claim 15. Muramatsu as modified teaches the tool according to claim 1, wherein: the planar body includes a tapered hook extending from the main portion [Muramatsu: Fig 1 & 10; 8 in Fig 1 is the same in Fig 10 and is a tapered hook portion extending from the main body], and the main portion includes a second linear edge facing the tapered hook portion and defining a second slot therebetween [Fig 1 & 10; the groove (9) by 8 in Fig 1 is formed by a linear edge of 8 and another linear edge of the main body].
Regarding claim 23. A tool comprising a planar body that includes:
a main portion defining an aperture extending therethrough, the main portion having a first linear edge that partially defines a perimeter of the aperture, and a projection that extends from the first linear edge into the aperture;
a curved hook portion extending from the main portion; and
a tapered hook portion extending from the main portion, [All of the limitations above are the same as claimed in claims 1 & 3 and are similarly rejected]
wherein the planar body has a substantially planar surface that at least partially defines each of the first linear edge, the aperture, the projection, the curved hook portion, and the tapered hook portion [Fig 10-11; Pg3:¶10-¶11 of the translation; Muramatsu as modified further teaches that 13 can be a variety of different jigs (or additional object interacting portions) on the main body and shows in Fig 11 13 can be formed by the same planar surface as the main body therefore 13 of Fig 10 can also be formed with the same planar surface].
Regarding claim 24. Muramatsu as modified teaches the tool according to claim 23, wherein the main portion includes a convex edge that faces the curved hook portion, the convex edge and the curved hook portion defining a first slot therebetween. [Claim 24 recites the same or similar limitations as claim 1 and rejected for the same or similar reasons]
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muramatsu in view of Camp further in view of Whiteley (US 20150266710), hereinafter Whiteley.
Regarding claim 9. Muramatsu as modified teaches the tool according to claim 1, but may not explicitly disclose wherein the main portion includes a pair of concave edges disposed on opposite sides of the main portion to define a pair of gripping edges.
However Whiteley teaches a similar tool wherein the main portion includes a pair of concave edges disposed on opposite sides of the main portion to define a pair of gripping edges [Fig 1-2; the portion of 10 where the reference number for 10 is has a pair of concave edges that are gripping edges, see Fig 2].
Claim(s) 10 & 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muramatsu in view of Camp further in view of Jacobs (US 4633740), hereinafter Jacobs.
Regarding claim 10. Muramatsu as modified teaches the tool according to claim 1, wherein the main portion includes a … edge spaced from and parallel to the first linear edge [Fig 10; there is an edge on the outer part of the main body that is spaced apart from and parallel to the first linear edge].
Muramatsu may not explicitly disclose wherein the main portion includes a beveled edge spaced from and substantially parallel to the first linear edge
However Jacobs teaches a similar tool wherein the main portion includes a beveled edge spaced from the aperture [Fig 1 & 12; the edge along 151 is beveled and is spaced apart from the aperture 132].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the edge spaced from and parallel to the first linear edge as disclosed by Muramatsu to be a beveled edge for the purpose of allowing the edge to be slide underneath a pull tab to more easily slide underneath said pull tab [Jacobs: Fig 12; Col5:line25-35].
Regarding claim 25. The tool according to claim 24, wherein the main portion includes a beveled edge spaced from and substantially parallel to the first linear edge. [Claim 25 recites the same or similar limitations as claim 10 and rejected for the same or similar reasons]
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muramatsu in view of Camp further in view of McCarty et al. (US 20200146377), hereinafter McCarty.
Regarding claim 13. Muramatsu as modified teaches a kit comprising: the tool according to claim 1; but may not explicitly disclose and a sleeve defining a pocket configured to accommodate the tool therein.
However McCarty teaches a similar tool [Fig 1; 16] and a sleeve defining a pocket configured to accommodate the tool therein [Fig 1; ¶33; the tool (16) is accommodated in pocket of a sleeve (24)].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the kit/tool as disclosed by Muramatsu to have a sleeve defining a pocket configured to accommodate the tool therein as taught by Tran for the purpose of having a location to store the tool which provides portability and accessibly other than just in a pocket [McCarty: Fig 2-12; ¶4-¶7, ¶11, & ¶43].
Regarding claim 14. Muramatsu as modified teaches the kit according to claim 13, wherein the sleeve comprises an adhesive thereon adapted to removably secure the sleeve to another object [McCarty: ¶33; the sleeve can be attached via an adhesive].
Claim(s) 21-22 & 26-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muramatsu in view of Camp further in view of Fesler (US 20140237952), hereinafter Fesler.
Regarding claim 21. Muramatsu tool according to claim 1, wherein: the curved hook portion has a concave hook edge and a … hook edge extending from the main portion to a tip of the first hook portion [Camp: Fig 7; 7 is formed by a concave edge facing the main body and a linear hook edge that faces away from the main body], the planar body includes a tapered hook portion extending from the main portion [Fig 1 & 10; 8 in Fig 1 is the same in Fig 10 and is a tapered hook portion extending from the main body], the tapered hook portion having a first linear hook edge and a second linear hook edge extending from the main portion to a tip of the tapered hook portion [Fig 1 & 10; 8 is formed by a first linear edge facing the groove (9) and a second linear edge facing away the main body], … [Muramatsu: Fig 10 there is a linear edge connecting the .
Muramatsu as modified may not explicitly disclose the curved hook portion has a concave hook edge and a convex hook edge extending from the main portion to a tip of the first hook portion or the main portion includes a second linear edge that extends between and connects the convex hook edge of the curved hook portion and the first linear hook edge of the tapered hook portion.
Fesler teaches a similar tool with a curved hook portion [Fig 8; 36] on a convex surface facing the opposite direction of a tapered hook portion [Fig 8; 32].
Applying this teaching to Muramatsu as modified relocates the curved hook portion [Muramatsu: 13 of Fig 11] to be located on the convex portion opposite the tapered hook portion [Muramatsu: 13 of Fig 11 would be located on 10 (see Fig 1 & 11) facing the opposite direction that 8 is pointing]. Thereby the linear edge that forms part of the tapered hook portion would extend between the tapered hook portion and the convex edge of the curved hook portion.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the curved hook portion as taught by Muramatsu to be rearranged and thereby have the curved hook portion have a concave hook edge and a convex hook edge extending from the main portion to a tip of the first hook portion and the main portion includes a second linear edge that extends between and connects the convex hook edge of the curved hook portion and the first linear hook edge of the tapered hook portion as taught by Fesler as a rearrangement of parts which does not change the functions of either hook nor changes the function of the curved guide of Muramatsu (10). Pursuant of MPEP 2144.04-VI-C, it has been held that shifting the position or placement of parts that does not modify the operation of the device has no patentable significance, it considered to be matters of design/engineering choice which a person skilled in the art would have found obvious.
Regarding claim 22. The tool according to claim 22, wherein the first linear edge is provided on a first end of the planar body, and the second linear edge is provided on a second end of the planar body, opposite to the first end [Muramatsu: Fig 10-11; the first linear edge is on one end of the main body on 13 of Fig 10 while the second linear edge is on the opposite end of the main body by 8 (see Fig 1 & 11).
Regarding claim 26. Muramatsu as modified teaches the tool according to claim 23, wherein: the curved hook portion has a concave hook edge and a convex hook edge extending from the main portion to a tip of the first hook portion, the tapered hook portion has a first linear hook edge and a second linear hook edge extending from the main portion to a tip of the tapered hook portion, and the main portion includes a second linear edge that extends between and connects the convex hook edge of the curved hook portion and the first linear hook edge of the tapered hook portion. [Claim 26 recites the same or similar limitations as claim 21 and rejected for the same or similar reasons]
Regarding claim 27. Muramatsu as modified teaches the tool according to claim 26, wherein the first linear edge is provided on a first end of the planar body, and the second linear edge is provided on a second end of the planar body, opposite to the first end. [Claim 27 recites the same or similar limitations as claim 22 and rejected for the same or similar reasons]
Response to Arguments
35 U.S.C. 112(b) Rejections
Applicant's amendments and arguments, see Pages 6, filed 11/5/2025 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of 8/21/2025 are withdrawn.
35 U.S.C. 102 & 103 Rejections
Applicant's arguments, see Pages 6-10, filed 11/5/2025 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
The Applicant claims that Muramatsu does not disclose the hook portion is curved and the main portion includes a convex edge that faces the hook portion such that a first slot is defined between the convex edge and the hook portion.A different embodiment of Muramatsu is used to teach this feature as well as teachings from Camp. See the claim 1 rejection for details.
The arguments involving Whiteley’s combination with Muramatsu are now moot in light of the new grounds of rejection using other references.
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 AARON R MCCONNELL whose telephone number is (303)297-4608. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 0700-1600 MST [0900-1800 EST] 2nd Friday 0700-1500 MST [0900-1700 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, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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.
/AARON R MCCONNELL/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723