DETAILED ACTION
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, 3-4, 8-9 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Chen (US 6,116,942) in view of Achille (US 4,488,843). Chen discloses a screw (3) fitting into a screw hole (241). The screw comprising: a screwhead (321) with opposite first and second surfaces; a central slot (324) formed in the first surface; an internal shaft (322) attached to the second surface; a plurality of thread segments (331); wherein the thread segments and internal shaft can occupy an extended position where the thread segments can be at an end of the internal shaft (Fig. 3) and can occupy compact position where the thread segments overlap the internal shaft (Fig. 4). The plurality of thread segments can move into the screw hole without rotation in the extended position (column 3, line 23-26) and would be capable of rotating out of the screw hole in the compact position with a screwdriver engaging the central slot (column 3, lines 5-7). Each of the thread segments have an arcuate shape which together form a circular footprint; the internal shaft includes a central hub (325); the screw thread segments can mesh with the screw hole thread in the compact position after they have slid past the screw hole thread (Fig. 4). The screw segments can move axially into the screw hole and the internal shaft including its central hub and can be forced into the center of the screw segments forcing the thread segments radially outward into engagement with the screw hole to fastener the screw within the hole such that the center shaft would be capable of rotation to rotate the thread segments to move the screw out of the hole. Chen further teaches a base (2), a cover (1), and one or more to the screws attaching the base to the cover.
Chen does not disclose thread segments initially affixed to the end of the internal shaft to be separated with an axial force. Achille discloses a screw (10) with an internal shaft for radially expanding a plurality of thread segments (19) where the internal shaft is initially affixed to the thread segments by tabs (46) wherein an axial force applied to the internal shaft severs the tabs to separate the thread segments from the shaft (column 1, paragraph beginning line 58). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to initially affix the thread segments to the end of the internal shaft in Chen as disclosed in Achille to simply the installation of the screw as discussed in Achille.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 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.
Claims 10-18 are allowable.
Response to Remarks
The 112 rejection(s) have been withdrawn as a result of applicant’s amendment(s).
After consideration of applicant’s remarks the 103 rejection Chen (US 6,116,942) in view of Achille (US 4,488,843) remains unchanged except for the consideration of amended claim 21.
Applicant argues the claims define over Chen in view of Achille because Achille does not disclose the drive pin is ever attached to the shaft for which it is relied upon. Applicant points to the element 46 which the examiner relies upon for teaching of the attachment as not being discussed anywhere in the description of Achille and instead would be friction connection. In response the examiner disagrees for two reason:
First, because the drawings can be relied upon for what they clearly show. See In re Mraz, 455 F.2d 1069, 173 USPQ 25 (CCPA 1972). In this case Achille clearly shows an attachment between the drive pin and shaft at the lead line of reference numeral 46.
Second, throughout the description of Achille the drive pin is described as a “frangible drive pin” which is further described as “integrally molded” with the shank (column 3, lines 53-56) as is supported by the drawings. And further even makes the distinction of the frangible and a friction connection (column 3, paragraph beginning line 31).
Therefore, even lacking a description of reference numeral 46 there is no doubt that in Achille the drive pin is initially affixed to the shaft then disconnected with a blow to the drive pin.
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 FLEMMING SAETHER whose telephone number is (571)272-7071. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 - 7:00 eastern.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at 571-272-8322. 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.
/FLEMMING SAETHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675