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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 8-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 03/24/2025.
Status of Claims
The action is in reply to the Application filed on 03/24/2025. Claims 1-15 are currently pending. Claims 8-15 are withdrawn. Claims 1-7 are being examined.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claims 1-7, line 1 “The cleaning tool for a grease fitting according to claim” should be “The cleaning tool for [[a]] the grease fitting according to claim”
In claim 3, line 3 “the same direction in an axial direction” should be “[[the]] a same direction in an axial direction”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 4 and 6 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “the first cambered surface (241) extends away from an axis in a direction far away from the hand-held portion” in claim 4 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “far” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The examiner is to interpret the claim limitation to be wherein the first cambered surface (241) extends away from an axis in a direction .
The term “the second cambered surface (242) extends close to the axis in the direction far away from the hand-held portion” in claim 4 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “close” and “far” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The examiner is to interpret the claim limitation to be wherein “the second cambered surface (242) extends away from the hand-held portion”
The term “wherein an end, far away from the hand-held portion” in claim 4 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “far” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The examiner is to interpret the claim limitation to be “wherein an end,
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Buzard (US Patent No. 6,754,932).
Regarding claim 1, Buzard discloses: a cleaning tool (Figures 1-4 element 10 and see also col. 2, ll. 34-37) for a grease fitting (Applicant is reminded, a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim (See MPEP 2114 (II)), comprising a hand-held portion (1) (see figure 2 annotated below Detail A) and a cleaning portion (2) (see figure 2 annotated below Detail B), wherein the hand-held portion (1) and the cleaning portion (2) are integrally formed (see figure 2 annotated below showing the handle portion (Detail A) and cleaning portion (Detail B) having a plurality of components and being formed as a unit with each other parts when assembled together, thus being integrally formed); and
the cleaning portion (2) is arranged at one end (see figure 2 annotated below Detail C) of the hand-held portion (1), and an inner side end (see figure 2 annotated below Detail D) of a cleaning claw (22) (element 22) is a cambered surface (24) (see figures 2-3 annotated below Detail E), and fits a shell of the grease fitting (3) in shape (The examiner indicates that the grease fitting and any associated structure (i.e. shell) has not been positively recited as part of the claimed invention (i.e. cleaning tool). Furthermore, see col. 3, ll. 1-6 where the prior art discloses when in use the workpiece (element 12) is “received” within element 24 (i.e. empty space between element 22) and is engaged by “the upper inner surfaces” of element 22 (cleaning claw that includes the cambered surfaces). Therefore, giving that the prior art meets the structural limitation of the cleaning tool including the cleaning portion (Detail B) comprising the cleaning claw (element 22) having the cambered surface (Detail E) and there is no structural difference or any additional structure provided, thus the prior art would be capable of having the cleaning portion having the cleaning claw having the cambered surface fit the shell of the grease fitting in shape, as recited.).
PNG
media_image1.png
946
700
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
722
793
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Buzard discloses: the cleaning tool for a grease fitting according to claim 1, wherein a center of an end face (see figure 2 annotated below Detail A) of the cleaning portion (2) is provided with a press bump (21) (element 40), the periphery of the press bump (21) is provided with several cleaning claws (22) (see figure 2 annotated below), the press bump (21) presses a hole plugging ball (31) of the grease fitting (3) (The examiner indicates that the grease fitting and any associated structure (i.e. hole plugging ball) has not been positively recited as part of the claimed invention (i.e. cleaning tool). Furthermore, see col. 3, ll. 1-6 where the prior art discloses when in use the workpiece (element 12) is “received” within element 24 (i.e. empty space) and further discloses that an end of element 12 is engaged by “inner end” of element 40 (press bump). Therefore, giving that the prior art meets the structural limitation of the cleaning tool including having the press bump (element 40) and there is no structural difference or any additional structure provided, thus the prior art would be capable of having the press bump press the hole plugging ball of the grease fitting, as recited.), and the cleaning claw (22) has a longer length than the press bump (21) for cleaning the grease fitting (3) (The examiner indicates that the grease fitting and any associated structure has not been positively recited as part of the claimed invention (i.e. cleaning tool). Furthermore, see figure 2 annotated below showing the cleaning claw (element 22) having a longer length that the press bump (element 40). Therefore, giving that the prior art meets the structural limitation of the cleaning tool including cleaning claw (element 22) being longer in length than the press bump (element 40), and there is no structural difference or any additional structure provided, thus the prior art would be capable of having the cleaning claw clean the grease fitting, as recited.).
PNG
media_image3.png
890
757
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Buzard discloses: the cleaning tool for a grease fitting according to claim 2, wherein at least two cleaning claws (22) are provided (see figures 2-3 annotated above on pages 6-7 showing a plurality of cleaning claws (element 22) including at least two cleaning claws), and cambered surfaces (24) see figure 2 annotated above on page 6 showing each of the plurality of cleaning claws (element 22) including at least two cleaning claws having cambered surfaces (Detail E)) are arranged to incline in the same direction in an axial direction (see figure 2 annotated above on page 6 showing the cambered surfaces (Detail E) being arranged to incline in a same direction in an axial direction (up-down)).
Regarding claim 4, Buzard discloses: the cleaning tool for a grease fitting according to claim 3, wherein the cambered surfaces (24) comprise a first cambered surface (241) (see figure 2 annotated below Detail A) and a second cambered surface (242) (see figure 2 annotated below Detail B) connected to the first cambered surface (241) (see figure 2 annotated below), the first cambered surface (241) extends away from an axis in a direction (see figure 2 annotated below showing the first cambered surface (Detail A) extending away from an axis (X-X axis) in a direction far away from the hand-held portion), and the second cambered surface (242) extends (see figure 2 annotated below showing the second cambered surface (Detail B) extending close to the axis (X-X axis) in a direction far away from the hand-held portion).
PNG
media_image4.png
946
669
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Buzard discloses: the cleaning tool for a grease fitting according to claim 3, wherein the cleaning claws (22) are arranged to incline in the same direction in the axial direction (see figure 2 annotated above on page 6).
Regarding claim 6, Buzard discloses: the cleaning tool for a grease fitting according to claim 3, wherein an end (see figure 2 annotated below Detail A), (see figure 2 annotated below showing the end (Detail A) away from the handle portion of the cleaning claw having inclined surface (Detail B)).
PNG
media_image5.png
968
740
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Harder (US Patent No. 2,670,536).
Regarding claim 1, Harder discloses: a cleaning tool (Figures 1-6 element 10 and see also col. 2, ll. 34-37) for a grease fitting (Applicant is reminded, a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim (See MPEP 2114 (II)), comprising a hand-held portion (1) (see figure 2 annotated below Detail A) and a cleaning portion (2) (see figure 2 annotated below Detail B), wherein the hand-held portion (1) and the cleaning portion (2) are integrally formed (see figure 2 annotated below showing the handle portion (Detail A) and cleaning portion (Detail B) being formed as a single piece, thus being integrally formed); and
the cleaning portion (2) is arranged at one end (see figure 2 annotated below Detail C) of the hand-held portion (1), and an inner side end (see figure 4 annotated below Detail D) of a cleaning claw (22) (element 3) is a cambered surface (24) (see figure 4 annotated below Detail E), and fits a shell of the grease fitting (3) in shape (The examiner indicates that the grease fitting and any associated structure (i.e. shell) has not been positively recited as part of the claimed invention (i.e. cleaning tool). Furthermore, figure 4 annotated below shows a workpiece (element O) fitting within the cleaning portion including the cleaning claw (element 3) having the cambered surface (Detail E). Therefore, giving that the prior art meets the structural limitation of the cleaning tool including the cleaning portion (Detail B) comprising the cleaning claw (element 3) having the cambered surface (Detail E) and there is no structural difference or any additional structure provided, thus the prior art would be capable of having the cleaning portion having the cleaning claw having the cambered surface fit the shell of the grease fitting in shape, as recited.).
PNG
media_image6.png
790
1364
media_image6.png
Greyscale
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 Harder (US Patent No. 2,670,536).
Regarding claim 7, Harder discloses: the cleaning tool for a grease fitting according to claim 1, wherein the other end, relative to the cleaning portion (2), of the hand-held portion (1) is provided with a hollowed interior (see figure 2 annotated figure below Detail A), and an inner hole (11) (element 2) is provided inside the hollowed interior (see figure 2 annotated figure below phantom lines of element 2 (inner hole) provided inside the hollowed interior (Detail A)).
PNG
media_image7.png
790
919
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Furthermore, the prior art discloses the inner hole (element 2) as being “rectangular shape” (see col. 2, ll. 26) whereby a conventional socket drive handle may be operatively connected so that the tool may be operated by a conventional socket wrenches (see col. 2, ll. 25-31). However, the prior art does not explicitly disclose that the inner hole is a hexagonal inner hole.
However, it would have been it would have been to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Harder to provide wherein the inner hole is a hexagonal inner hole since a change in shape of an element involves only routine skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having the inner hole with a desired shape including a hexagonal would necessarily provide the same result of allowing the tool to interact with a conventional socket drive handle having a hexagonal driving bit on order to be operated in combination with by a wrench. (See MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(B))
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBERTO SAENZ whose telephone number is (313)446-6610. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-4:30PM 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.
/A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights