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 .
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.
Claims 1, 2, and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (U.S Patent No. 6,871,569) in view of Hsieh (U.S Patent No. 9,132,535) and in further view of Hsieh (U.S Patent No. 6,295,898), hereinafter Hsieh’928, Lussier (U.S Patent No. 308,969), and Pardue et al (US Publication No. 20050223562), hereinafter Pardue, Hung (U.S Patent No. 6,336,383), Nickipuck (U.S Patent No. 5,694,818), and Kady et al (U.S Publication No. 20020069728), hereinafter Kady.
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches (Figures 1-7) a multi-angle ratchet wrench having a handle (10) with first (12) and second (13) pivoting ends wherein a shared space (11) is formed between the first and second ends. The first end has a shaft hole (14) and the second end has a shaft hole (15). Each shaft hold is connected to the shared space. The first and second ends each have a detent hole (17) below their respective shaft holes. The detent hole (17) of the second pivoting end (13) stops before passing through the entirety of the second pivoting end to form a blocking wall (see Figure 3). The ratchet wrench additionally includes a working head (30) having a working end (end with ratchet tool 31) and a third pivoting end (32). The third pivoting end has an axial through hole (33) coupled with a shaft bolt 34) to pivot the third pivoting end (32) in the shared space (Col. 2, lines 64-67) and a ratchet portion (36) having a plurality of ratchet teeth (38) disposed at an edge of the third pivoting end and centered on the axial through bore (Figures 5, 7, and 8 show the capability of 180 degree movement which would inherently requiring centering of the teeth on the axis of the through bore; see also Col. 4, lines 42-45). The wrench additionally includes a ratchet unit (40-47) mounted in the detent hole. The ratchet unit includes an elastic member (47) and a switching button (42). The switching button has an idling section (44) and an engagement section (45) facing the shared space and a limiting wall (43) adjacent the engagement section. The engagement (45) section is disposed between the idling section (44) and the limiting wall (43). The idling section is adjacent along an entire length of the engagement section (45; See Figures 2 and 4 which clearly show the engagement section 45 being adjacent along its entire length with the idling section 43). The engagement section is located higher than the idling section (Figure 4). The elastic member is located between the blocking wall and the switching button for controlling the angle of adjustment of the working head.
Regarding claim 2, Chen teaches (Figure 2) the shaft hole (15) of the second pivoting end has an inner thread and the shaft bolt has an outer threaded portion (35) and a stopping portion (enlarged circular end opposite the threaded portion) that together lock the shaft bolt in the shaft hole.
Regarding claim 4, Chen teaches (Figures 3 and 5) upper ends of the first and second pivoting ends are centered about their respective shaft hole and the shared space has a flat bottom allowing for a 180-degree swing angle (see discussion in claim 1 regarding the inherency of the swing angle).
Regarding claim 6, Chen teaches the working end (31) is a ratchet end (inherent, see pivotable ratchet direction switching member that is unnumbered to the right of reference numeral 13 in Figure 5).
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above except the engagement member having a plurality of teeth to form a toothed section, wherein the toothed and idling sections having concave arc profiles. However, Chen does teach the idling section is constructed of a shape that prevents contact of the idling section with the teeth of the working head.
Hsieh teaches (Figure 4) it is old and well known to construct an engagement member of a ratchet unit designed to adjust and retain the angular position of a handle (100) and working head (200) such that multiple teeth (310) can be utilized to simultaneously engage multiple teeth (211) of the work head (200).
Because both Chen and Hsieh teach known ways to construct an engagement portion of a ratchet unit utilized to both adjust and set the angular position of a working head to a handle it would have been obvious to try to utilize multi-tooth construction of Hsieh for the engagement portion in an attempt to provide a more secure connection between the handle and working head which would thereby allow more torque to be applied to a work piece.
Regarding claim 1, the combination of Chen and Hsieh together do not teach the toothed and idling sections having concave arc profiles.
Hsieh’928 teaches (Figure 5) teaches it is known for a ratchet unit (3) to utilize a concave arc profile (Col. 2, lines 25-27). This type of construction is used to reduce wear on the pivoting mechanism (Col. 1, lines 20-25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to modify the modified device of Chen to make the toothed section having a concave arc shape to allow for better connection between the teeth of the ratchet unit and the working head thereby reducing wear at the connection.
Lussier teaches (Figure 1) it is known to make those portions of a ratchet unit (e) that face the teeth of a pivotable working head (B and C) that are adjacent to the fixing teeth of the ratchet unit (e) curved.
Because both the modified device of Chen and Lussier teach known constructions for parts of a ratchet unit that face the teeth of a working head it appears to be an obvious matter of design choice to make idling section have a concave arc shape, or any other shape that prevents contact of the idling section and the teeth of the working section, as evidenced by Chen and Lussier above and because it has been held that changing the form or shape of something does not constitute a patentable advance if the operation of the device would not thereby be modified.
Regarding claim 1, the modified device of Chen teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above except the second pivoting end being thicker than the first pivoting end to accept the elastic member. Instead, Chen appears to teach the first and second ends having equal thickness while still allowing for sufficient depth to accommodate the elastic member (Figure 3 and 4).
Pardue teaches (Figures 13 and 15) it is known in handles for pivotable tools to have one side (18) be thicker than the other side (16; side 18 has an accommodation groove for the blade and is therefore thicker) and the elastic member (18) utilize in conjunction with a pivot detention unit (38) to be accommodated in the thicker side.
Hung teaches (Figure 3) it is known to accommodate the spring (17) in a slot that extends further into a support portion (11) than a correspondingly sized slot on the opposite side of the support portion.
Nickipuck (Figures 1, 2, and 7) and Kady (Figure 1) each teach it is known to create spring biased locking pivot connections in offset wrenches having parts (50 and 14 of Nickipuk; 21 of Kady) of different thicknesses used to support wrench portions (12 and 44 respectively).
Chen, Pardue, Hung, Nickipuck, and Kady together teach it is within the level of ordinary skill to adjust both relative size and shape of opposing pivoting ends of the handle supporting the working head and to adjust the size and shape of an accommodating recess for the spring to properly support the spring. Therefore, making these types of changes to the handle appears to be nothing more than an obvious matter of design choice to make the second pivoting end thicker than the first pivoting end as doing so is well within the level of ordinary skill in the art as evidenced by the references above and because it has been held that changing the form or shape of something does not constitute a patentable advance if the operation of the device would not thereby be modified.
Regarding claim 1, the modified device of Chen, further does not teach a top of each tooth having a guiding slope towards the idling section.
However, Chen does teach (Figure 4; Col. 4, lines 10-15) that it is preferable for the engagement portion (45) of the ratchet unit to have a transition section (46) inclined toward the idling section (44) to allow for easier engagement of the engagement portion (45) with the teeth (36) of the working head.
Because Chen teaches it is known to provide an incline between the idling and engagement sections of a ratchet unit it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to modify the modify device of Chen by making each tooth of the modified device of Chen include an inclined guiding slope in an attempt to aid initial engagement between the teeth of the ratchet unit and the teeth of the working head.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s arguments directed to Pardue and one side of the handle not being thicker than the other, examiner directs applicant to Figure 13 of Pardue. Please note that the blade accommodation groove found in handle member 18 and more easily seen in Figure 3 has a thickness identical to that of the blade 14. Because of this thickness built into the handle member 18 to accommodate the blade it is thicker than handle member 16. Regarding applicant’s additional arguments directed to the thickness of one pivoting end as compared to the other, examiner has provided additional references that show changing the form or shape of the pivoting ends to accommodate the type of spring and or the desire to offset the wrench itself is an obvious matter of design choice that does not modify the operation of the device. Changing the form or shape of something does not constitute a patentable advance if the operation of the device would not thereby be modified.
Regarding applicant’s argument directed to “along an entire length”, it appears applicant is arguing that the toothed and idling portions have the same length. Figures 2 and 4 of Chen clearly show that for the entire length of the engagement portion (45) there is an idling portion (44) adjacent thereto. Since there is no break in the circumference of either portion that means one is adjacent the other for the entire length. The combination of references would therefore teach concave surfaces that were adjacent for their entire lengths.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hu (US Publication No. 20040144217), Lin (US Publication No. 20040144219), Hsieh (US Publication No. 20140202290), Hsien (U.S Patent No. 6,895,839), Chen (U.S Patent No. 8,671,809), Shieh (U.S Patent No. 4,901,608), Lee (U.S Patent No. 6,886,429), Lee (U.S Patent No. 6,131,490), Chang (U.S Patent No. 6,745,650), Jeff (U.S Patent No. 4,100,677), Chen (U.S Patent No. 8,276,485), Huddy (U.S Publication No. 20160144491), and Tsai (U.S Publication No. 20110072941) teach elements of the current invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWARD F LANDRUM whose telephone number is (571)272-5567. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Marivelisse Santiago-Cordero can be reached at 571-272-7839. 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.
/EDWARD F LANDRUM/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights