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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the Amendments/Response filed on 03/23/2026. Claims 1-5, 7, 9-13, 15, 17, 18, 21, and 22 are amended. No additional claims have been added.
Response to Amendment
The examiner fully acknowledges the amendments to claims 1-5, 7, 9-13, 15, 17, 18, 21, and 22 filed on 03/23/2026.
The amendments to paragraphs [0052, 56, 61, 66, 68 & 73] have addressed the objections previously submitted and the claim objections set forth in the previous office action pertaining to the claims are withdrawn.
The amendments to claims 10 and 18 have addressed the objections previously submitted and the claim objections set forth in the previous office action pertaining to the claims are withdrawn.
The amendments to claim 10 have addressed the 112(b) rejection previously submitted and the claim rejection set forth in the previous office action pertaining to the claim is withdrawn.
Please see the new rejection set forth in the present action in light of limitations now required within the presently filed claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
35 USC 112 Claim Rejections: Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 3, 11, 17 & 19 have been considered.
The examiner acknowledges the applicant’s citation of Anchor Wall Sys., Inc. v. Rockwood Retaining Walls, Inc., 340 F.3d 1298, 1310-11 (Fed. Cir. 2003), however the examiner maintains the indefiniteness of the claimed phrase “about” in claims 3 & 17 and the claimed phrase “substantially” in claims 11 & 19. Applicant states that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand what is claimed in light of the application specification. However, neither the application specification, the prosecution history nor the prior art provide indication as to what range of activity is covered by the terms, see MPEP 2173.05(II)(A). Further, examiner notes that tolerances, in manufacturing and/or measuring, are usually provided with a range of definite values to indicate acceptable dimensions, not terms of approximation, such as “about” or “substantially”.
35 USC 102 Claim Rejections: Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 & 15 and their respective dependent claims have been considered.
The examiner acknowledges the applicant’s citation of In re Miller, 418 F.2d 1392, 1396, 164 USPQ 46, 49 (CCPA 1969), however the examiner maintains that the claimed sockets and markings, such as the numeric indicia and one or more lines, are not in a functional relationship with the sockets. The sockets do not need the markings to perform the intended function and a user may properly operate the sockets without the markings. When it has been determined that the matter is not functionally or structurally related to the associated physical substrate/device, the printed matter is owed no patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05(I)(A,B).
In response to applicant’s argument that the reference fails to show all the features of the claimed invention, it is noted element in the amended and presently filed claims have yet to be examined.
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 3, 11, 17 & 19 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 phrases “about 180 degrees apart” in claims 3 and 17 and “spaced substantially equally apart” in claims 11 and 19 include the relative terms “about” and “substantially” respectively, which render the claims indefinite. The terms “about” and “substantially” are 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.
In the interest of compact prosecution and for purposes of this Office action, “about 180 degrees apart” will be interpreted as recited in claim 3, line 1 & 2, and claim 17, line 2, and “spaced substantially equally apart” will be interpreted as recited in claim 11, line 2, and claim 19, line 2, however, broadest reasonable interpretation will apply in interpreting references in the following rejections.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 9, 13, 15, 17, 18 & 20-22 are rejected 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Clafton (US 2020/0016728).
Regarding claim 1, Clafton discloses:
First and second sockets (para. [0003, 4, 8 & 9]) with identification (element 102, fig. 1; para. [0037]; “a plurality of socket indicators 100 are included in a set, each size indicator 100 in the set sized to fit a different size socket wrench”) and respectively having first and second sizes (para. [0037]), each of the first and second sockets having a driving portion (para. [0003, 4]; “square recess to accept the socket wrench's drive size”), a work portion (para. [0003, 4]; note, socket wrench size), and an outer surface (element 108, fig. 1; para. [0003, 4]), the first and second sockets comprising:
first and second numerical indicia (element 102, fig. 1) respectively formed in or on the outer surfaces of the first and second sockets to respectively identify the first and second sizes (para. [0011]), wherein the first socket includes a first line (see annotated fig. 1 below; note, Clafton describes sections breaks (element 114) as functional in identifying socket size indicia (para. [0018 – 0019]) and improving handling of socket and sleeve (para. [0018 – 0019, 0039]); an area (see annotated fig. 3 below) formed between the ridges of the section break form a line; this line is a visible marking, separating a first and second numerical indicia on the outer surface of the socket, consistent with applicant’s definition of line (element 1314, fig. 2) in Instant Application para. [0034 - 0036, 0041 - 0043]) formed in or on the outer surface of the first socket and extending partially circumferentially (see annotated fig. 1; note, diagonal line formed by section break (element 114) is “partially circumferential”, section break traverses diagonal across outer surface, which includes a circumferential component) around the first socket between the first numerical indicia.
PNG
media_image1.png
713
983
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
545
1006
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Clafton discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses:
wherein each of the first and second numerical indicia includes two numerical indicia that are 180 degrees apart (see 112(b); see annotated fig. 3).
Regarding claim 4, Clafton discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses:
wherein each of the first and second numerical indicia includes three numerical indicia (see annotated fig. 3).
Regarding claim 9, Clafton discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses:
wherein the outer surface of the first socket includes a raised portion (element 114, 120, fig. 1; see annotated fig. 1 & 3).
Regarding claim 13, Clafton discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses:
wherein the first numerical indicia of the first socket have a first color, and the second numerical indicia of the second socket have a second color that is different than the first color (para. [0042-45]; “size indicator 200 is color coordinated to indicate a unit of size measurement including metric and fractional inch”).
Regarding claim 15, Clafton discloses a set of sockets (para. [0003, 4, 8 & 9]) with identification (element 102, fig. 1; para. [0037]; “a plurality of socket indicators 100 are included in a set, each size indicator 100 in the set sized to fit a different size socket wrench”), the set of sockets comprising:
first and second sockets respectively having first and second sizes (para. [0037]), each of the first and second sockets including:
an outer surface (para. [0003, 4]),
a drive portion having a drive end (para. [0003, 4]; “square recess to accept the socket wrench's drive size”),
a work piece engaging end (para. [0003, 4]; note, socket wrench size), and
first and second numerical indicia (element 102, fig. 1) formed in or on the outer surface,
wherein the first socket includes a first line (see annotated fig. 1; note, Clafton describes sections breaks (element 114) as functional in identifying socket size indicia (para. [0018 – 0019]) and improving handling of socket and sleeve (para. [0018 – 0019, 0039]); an area (see annotated fig. 3 below) formed between the ridges of the section break form a line; this line is a visible marking, separating a first and second numerical indicia on the outer surface of the socket, consistent with applicant’s definition of line (element 1314, fig. 2) in Instant Application para. [0034 - 0036, 0041 - 0043]) formed in or on the outer surface of the first socket and extending circumferentially around the first socket (see annotated fig. 1; note, diagonal line formed by section break (element 114) is partially circumferential, section break traverses diagonal across outer surface, which includes a circumferential component), wherein the first line is between the drive or work piece engaging ends and the first and second numerical indicia and is closer to the first and second numerical indicia than the drive or work piece engaging ends (note, diagonal line formed by section break (element 114) bisects adjacent numerical indicia; line ends are drive and work piece engaging ends; center portion of line closer to indicia than to the drive and work piece engaging ends).
Regarding claim 17, Clafton discloses the limitations of claim 15 and further discloses:
wherein the first and second numerical indicia are 180 degrees apart (see 112(b); see annotated fig. 3).
Regarding claim 18, Clafton discloses the limitations of claim 15 and further discloses:
wherein each of the first and second sockets includes first, second, and third numerical indicia disposed on the outer surface (see annotated fig. 3).
Regarding claim 21, Clafton discloses the limitations of claim 15 and further discloses:
wherein the first and second numerical indicia indicate a size of the work piece engaging end (element 102, fig. 1; para. [0011]).
Regarding claim 22, Clafton discloses the limitations of claim 15 and further discloses:
wherein the first and second numerical indicia of the first socket have a first color, and the first and second numerical indicia of the second socket have a second color that is different than the first color (para. [0042-45]; “size indicator 200 is color coordinated to indicate a unit of size measurement including metric and fractional inch”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 2, 5-7 & 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clafton in view of Pieri (US 6,047,618 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Clafton teaches claim limitations of claim 1, but fails to teach:
wherein the second socket further comprises a different number of lines between the second numerical indicia compared to the first socket.
Pieri teaches an improved socket (element 10, fig. 1) having numerical indicia (element 12, fig. 1) and a varying number of rings or grooves (element 16, fig. 1),
wherein the second socket further comprises a different number of lines (element 16.1,2,3, fig. 3, fig. 7; note, Pieri describes rings or grooves (element 16, fig. 1) as identifying markings (para. [0046]), wherein the rings or grooves form a line to separate between the working or drive ends and the numerical indicia; this line is a visible, linear marking, consistent with applicant’s definition of line (element 3314, fig. 13) in para. [0056]) between the second numerical indicia compared to the first socket.
Pieri teaches a socket set containing both S.A.E. and metric size sockets (col. 1, line 21-46). The different sized sockets are distinguished by indicating the individual socket sizes on the sockets in four, equally spaced, locations on the socket and by a varying number of rings or grooves (col. 2, line 39-50). The sockets of varying sizes for each measurement standard (S.A.E. and metric) are distinguished from each other by the placement of the rings or grooves (col. 3, line 16-32).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Pieri to modify Clafton to provide a socket set wherein the second socket further comprises a different number of lines between the first and second numerical indicia compared to the first socket. As previously described, the raised ridges of the section break of Clafton form a line on the outer surface of the socket. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to vary the number of ridges to include an additional feature to improve the identifiability of the sockets in the manner suggested by Pieri. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the improvement in functionality and identifiability of having an additional distinguishing feature between two near size sockets or sockets of different measurement standards to aid in selection of the required socket.
Regarding claim 5, Clafton teaches claim limitations of claim 1, but fails to teach:
wherein the first line includes a pair of lines disposed between the first numerical indicia.
Pieri teaches an improved socket (element 10, fig. 1) having numerical indicia (element 12, fig. 1) and a varying number of rings or grooves (element 16, fig. 1),
wherein the first line includes a pair of lines (element 16.1,2,3, fig. 3, fig. 7; note, see Office Action para. [0025]) disposed between the first numerical indicia.
Pieri teaches a socket set containing both S.A.E. and metric size sockets (col. 1, line 21-46). The different sized sockets are distinguished by indicating the individual socket sizes on the sockets in four, equally spaced, locations on the socket and by a varying number of rings or grooves (col. 2, line 39-50). The sockets of varying sizes for each measurement standard (S.A.E. and metric) are distinguished from each other by the placement of the rings or grooves (col. 3, line 16-32).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Pieri to modify Clafton to provide a socket set wherein the first line includes a pair of lines disposed between the first numerical indicia. As previously described, the raised ridges of the section break of Clafton form a line on the outer surface of the socket. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to vary the number of ridges to include an additional feature to improve the identifiability of the sockets in the manner suggested by Pieri. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the improvement in functionality and identifiability of having an additional distinguishing feature between two near size sockets or sockets of different measurement standards to aid in selection of the required socket.
Regarding claim 6, Clafton teaches claim limitations of claim 2, but fails to teach:
wherein the second socket does not include any lines.
Pieri teaches an improved socket (element 10, fig. 1) having numerical indicia (element 12, fig. 1) and a varying number of rings (element 16, fig. 1)
wherein the second socket does not include any lines (element 16.1,2,3, fig. 3, fig. 7; note, see Office Action para. [0025])
Pieri teaches a socket set containing both S.A.E. and metric size sockets (col. 1, line 21-46). The different sized sockets are distinguished by indicating the individual socket sizes on the sockets in four, equally spaced, locations on the socket and by a varying number of rings or grooves (col. 2, line 39-50). The sockets of varying sizes for each measurement standard (S.A.E. and metric) are distinguished from each other by the placement of the rings or grooves (col. 3, line 16-32).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Pieri to modify Clafton to provide a socket set wherein the second socket does not include any lines. As previously described, the raised ridges of the section break of Clafton form a line on the outer surface of the socket. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to vary the number of ridges, including forming a singular ridge, so there is no apparent line to more readily distinguish between sockets, as suggested by Pieri. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the improvement in functionality and identifiability of having the distinguishing feature between two near size sockets or sockets of different measurement standards to aid in selection of the required socket.
Regarding claim 7, Clafton teaches claim limitations of claim 5, but fails to teach:
wherein the second socket further comprises a second line between the second numerical indicia.
Pieri teaches an improved socket (element 10, fig. 1) having numerical indicia (element 12, fig. 1) and a varying number of rings or grooves (element 16, fig. 1),
wherein the second socket further comprises a second line (element 16.1,2,3, fig. 3, fig. 7; note, see Office Action para. [0025]) between the second numerical indicia numerical indicia and the work or drive end.
Pieri teaches a socket set containing both S.A.E. and metric size sockets (col. 1, line 21-46). The different sized sockets are distinguished by indicating the individual socket sizes on the sockets in four, equally spaced, locations on the socket and by a varying number of rings or grooves (col. 2, line 39-50). The sockets of varying sizes for each measurement standard (S.A.E. and metric) are distinguished from each other by the placement of the rings or grooves (col. 3, line 16-32).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Pieri to modify Clafton to provide a socket set wherein the second socket further comprises a second line between the second numerical indicia. As previously described, the raised ridges of the section break of Clafton form a line on the outer surface of the socket. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to vary the number of ridges to include an additional feature to improve the identifiability of the sockets in the manner suggested by Pieri. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the improvement in functionality and identifiability of having an additional distinguishing feature between two near size sockets or sockets of different measurement standards to aid in selection of the required socket.
Regarding claim 16, Clafton teaches all claim limitations of claim 15, but fails to teach:
wherein the second socket has a different number of lines compared to the first socket.
Pieri teaches an improved socket (element 10, fig. 1) having numerical indicia (element 12, fig. 1) and a varying number of rings or grooves (element 16, fig. 1),
wherein the second socket has a different number of lines (element 16.1,2,3, fig. 3, fig. 7; note, see Office Action para. [0025]) compared to the first socket.
Pieri teaches a socket set containing both S.A.E. and metric size sockets (col. 1, line 21-46). The different sized sockets are distinguished by indicating the individual socket sizes on the sockets in four, equally spaced, locations on the socket and by a varying number of rings or grooves (col. 2, line 39-50). The sockets of varying sizes for each measurement standard (S.A.E. and metric) are distinguished from each other by the placement of the rings or grooves (col. 3, line 16-32).
40. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Pieri to modify Clafton to provide a socket set wherein the second socket has a different number of lines compared to the first socket. As previously described, the raised ridges of the section break of Clafton form a line on the outer surface of the socket. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to vary the number of ridges to include an additional feature to improve the identifiability of the sockets in the manner suggested by Pieri. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the improvement in functionality and identifiability of having an additional distinguishing feature between two near size sockets or sockets of different measurement standards to aid in selection of the required socket.
Claims 8 & 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clafton in view of Vogel (US 6082227 A).
Regarding claim 8, Clafton teaches all claim limitations of claim 1, but fails to teach:
wherein the first line is a dashed line.
Vogel teaches a visual coding system for sockets wherein the sockets are marked with indicia and a various number, color and style of marker, including a band
wherein the first line (fig. 2; note, Vogel describes bands (element 23, 24) as identifying markings (col. 3, line 40-50), wherein the bands form a line to separate between the working end and the numerical indicia; line is a visible, linear marking, consistent with applicant’s definition of line (element 3314, fig. 13) in para. [0056]) is a dashed line (element 23, 24, fig. 2).
Vogel teaches that the line formed of the dash marks (element 23, 24) can be used to identify the tool size according to the discloses coding system and in further combination with the numerical indicia present on the tool (col. 3, line 40-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Clafton to incorporate the teachings of Vogel to provide a socket set wherein the first line is a dashed line. Clafton discloses coloring sections (element 108) to indicate the measurement standard of the socket (S.A.E. or metric). As previously described, the section breaks (element 114) of Clafton create a line between their ridges to distinguish between adjacent numerical indicia. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to apply the color-coding system of Vogel to Clafton by providing a color-dashed line in the space formed by the section break, to increase the functionality and identifiability of the socket. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the improvement in identifiability of the socket and the increased functionality of the structure already present in Clafton.
Regarding claim 24, Clafton teaches all claim limitations of claim 15, but fails to teach:
wherein the first line is a dashed line.
Vogel teaches a visual coding system for sockets wherein the sockets are marked with indicia and a various number, color and style of marker, including a band
wherein the first line (fig. 2; note, see Office Action para. [0040]) is a dashed line (element 23, 24, fig. 2).
Vogel teaches that the line formed of the dash marks (element 23, 24) can be used to identify the tool size according to the discloses coding system and in further combination with the numerical indicia present on the tool (col. 3, line 40-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Clafton to incorporate the teachings of Vogel to provide a socket set wherein the first line is a dashed line. Clafton discloses coloring sections (element 108) to indicate the measurement standard of the socket (S.A.E. or metric). As previously described, the section breaks (element 114) of Clafton create a line between their ridges to distinguish between adjacent numerical indicia. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to apply the color-coding system of Vogel to Clafton by providing a color-dashed line in the space formed by the section break, to increase the functionality and identifiability of the socket. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the improvement in identifiability of the socket and the increased functionality of the structure already present in Clafton.
Claims 10, 12, 14, 20 & 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clafton in view of Arnold (US 4,800,786 A).
Regarding claim 10, Clafton teaches claim limitations of claim 9, but fails to teach:
wherein the first numerical indicia and the first line are formed in or on the raised portion.
Arnold teaches a socket (second embodiment; element 29, fig. 15) having a raised portion (element 32 & 34, fig. 15) having numerical indicia (element 18, fig. 15), a line (element 33A, fig. 15), and a knurled area (element 33, fig. 15) disposed on a socket (element 10, fig. 15),
wherein the first numerical indicia and the first line are formed in or on the raised portion.
Arnold teaches disposing the numerical indicia as raised or project from a surface is preferable as it provides for easy identification and selection and facilitates gripping of the sleeve and socket (fig. 15; col. 6, line 16-26, 59-68, col. 7, line 1-7).Further, Arnold teaches, that embossing (raising), engraving (recessing), printing (disposing on), and stamping are among some of the suitable means of disposing and displaying markings on the socket (col. 5, line 9-16; col. 6, line 59-68, col. 7, line 1-7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Clafton to incorporate the teachings of Arnold to provide a socket set wherein the first numerical indicia and the first line are formed in or on the raised portion. Clafton teaches indicia on the raised areas of the socket (element 106) and further teaches a second embodiment having indicia on the raised second breaks (element 502; para. [0054]), the section breaks functioning identical to the boss (element 34) of Arnold, to prevent the socket from rolling. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the benefit in improving the identifiability of provide the markings on the existing raised surfaces of Clafton.
Regarding claim 12, Clafton teaches all claim limitations of claim 1, but fails to teach:
wherein the first numerical indicia and the first line are recessed into the outer surface of the first socket.
Arnold teaches a socket (first embodiment; element 10, fig. 11) having numerical indicia (element 18, fig. 11), a line (element 17A; col. 4, line 62-68, col. 5, line 1-8), and a knurled area (element 17, fig. 11),
wherein the first numerical indicia and the first line are recessed into the outer surface of the first socket (fig. 11; col. 5, line 45-55).
Arnold teaches recessed the indicia and the line, provide easier inspection, recognition, and selection of the socket (col. 5, line 45-55)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Clafton to incorporate the teachings of Arnold to provide a socket set wherein the first numerical indicia and the first line are recessed into the outer surface of the first socket. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the benefit of the ease in recognition and selection suggested by Arnold. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand the viability of substituting the recessed markings of Arnold for the surface-level markings of Clafton.
Regarding claim 14, Clafton teaches all claim limitations of claim 1, but fails to teach:
wherein the first line is raised.
Arnold teaches a socket (second embodiment; element 29, fig. 15) having a raised portion (element 32 & 34, fig. 15) having numerical indicia (element 18, fig. 15), a line (element 33A, fig. 15), and a knurled area (element 33, fig. 15) disposed on a socket (element 10, fig. 15),
wherein the first line is raised (element 33A, fig. 11).
As previously described, Arnold teaches disposing the numerical indicia as raised or project from a surface is preferable as it provides for easy identification and selection (col. 5, line 59-66). Arnold further teaches that the raised outer diameter facilitates gripping of the sleeve and socket (col. 6, line 64-68; col. 7, line 1-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Clafton to incorporate the teachings of Arnold to provide a socket set wherein the first line is raised. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the void between the ridges of the section break of Clafton could form a solid structure to provide a better grip, similar as shown in the section breaks (element 502) of Clafton second embodiment, which also prevent the socket from rolling on a surface (para. [0054]). Further, Clafton teaches that the second breaks may be knurled to provide better grip during manual operation (para. [0039]). One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that raising the line would provide improved grip, as taught in both Clafton and Arnold (col. 4, line 62-68, col. 5, line 1-8), and still permit use of the feature for identification.
Regarding claim 20, Clafton teaches all claim limitations of claim 15, but fails to teach:
wherein the first and second numerical indicia and the first line are recessed into the outer surface.
Arnold teaches a socket (first embodiment; element 10, fig. 11) having numerical indicia (element 18, fig. 11), a line (element 17A; col. 4, line 62-68, col. 5, line 1-8), and a knurled area (element 17, fig. 11),
wherein the first numerical indicia and the first line are recessed into the outer surface.
Arnold teaches recessed the indicia and the line, provide easier inspection, recognition, and selection of the socket (col. 5, line 45-55)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Clafton to incorporate the teachings of Arnold to provide a socket set wherein the first and second numerical indicia and the first line are recessed into the outer surface. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the benefit of the ease in recognition and selection suggested by Arnold. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand the viability of substituting the recessed markings of Arnold for the surface-level markings of Clafton.
Regarding claim 23, Clafton teaches all claim limitations of claim 15, but fails to teach:
wherein the first line is raised.
Arnold teaches a socket (second embodiment; element 29, fig. 15) having a raised portion (element 32 & 34, fig. 15) having numerical indicia (element 18, fig. 15), a line (element 33A, fig. 15), and a knurled area (element 33, fig. 15) disposed on a socket (element 10, fig. 15),
wherein the first line is raised.
As previously described, Arnold teaches disposing the numerical indicia as raised or project from a surface is preferable as it provides for easy identification and selection (col. 5, line 59-66). Arnold further teaches that the raised outer diameter facilitates gripping of the sleeve and socket (col. 6, line 64-68; col. 7, line 1-6). Arnolds additionally teaches that multiple sleeves can be provided to equip sockets of varying sizes in a set (col. 8, line 59-68; col. 9, line 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Clafton to incorporate the teachings of Arnold to provide a socket set wherein the first line is raised. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the void between the ridges of the section break of Clafton could form a solid structure to provide a better grip, similar as shown in the section breaks (element 502) of Clafton second embodiment, which also prevent the socket from rolling on a surface (para. [0054]). Further, Clafton teaches that the second breaks may be knurled to provide better grip during manual operation (para. [0039]). One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that raising the line would provide improved grip, as taught in both Clafton and Arnold (col. 4, line 62-68, col. 5, line 1-8), and still permit use of the feature for identification.
Claims 11 & 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clafton in view of Staton (D477,198 S).
Regarding claim 11, Clafton teaches all claim limitations of claim 1, but fails to teach:
wherein the three numerical indicia are spaced substantially equally apart.
Staton teaches various design embodiments for a socket having numerical indicia and various, identifying markings,
wherein the three numerical indicia are spaced substantially equally apart (In the interest of compact prosecution and for purposes of this Office action, “spaced substantially equally apart” will be interpreted the numerical indicia being disposed 120 degrees apart; fig. 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Clafton to incorporate the teachings of Arnold to provide a socket set wherein the three numerical indicia are spaced substantially equally apart. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand the uniform spacing of the indicia improves the identifiability of the multiple numerical indicia on the socket, as the user can expect to see the markings at regular intervals. Clafton discloses the benefit in having multiple numerical indicia to identify a socket’s size more readily (para. [0044]).
Regarding claim 19, Clafton teaches all claim limitations of claim 15, but fails to teach:
wherein the first, second, and third numerical indicia are spaced substantially equally apart.
Staton teaches various design embodiments for a socket having numerical indicia and various, identifying markings,
wherein the first, second, and third numerical indicia are spaced substantially equally apart (In the interest of compact prosecution and for purposes of this Office action, “spaced substantially equally apart” will be interpreted the numerical indicia being disposed 120 degrees apart; fig. 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Clafton to incorporate the teachings of Arnold to provide a socket set wherein the first, second, and third numerical indicia are spaced substantially equally apart. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand the uniform spacing of the indicia improves the identifiability of the multiple numerical indicia on the socket, as the user can expect to see the markings at regular intervals. Clafton discloses the benefit in having multiple numerical indicia to identify a socket’s size more readily (para. [0044]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shih (EP 1473119 A2) discloses a socket having numerical indicia and banding on the outer surface to permit easy identification of the socket and sockets of adjacent sizes for the user.
Su Zi-Hao (TW M605147) discloses a socket having multiple numerical indicia, dashed lines between said numerical indicia and other distinguishing features for identification.
Hsien (US 2003/0221954 A1) discloses a system for identifying sockets comprising various numbers and orientations of electro-plated banding on the outer surface of the sockets.
Johnson (US 4982627 A) discloses a system for identifying sockets comprising a color chart and a range of colors where the number of colors bands and the colors themselves correlate to a specific socket size.
Arnold (US 4947713 A) discloses a socket sleeve having lines and numerical indicia for improving the functionality and identifiability of the socket.
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 KEEGAN T MARTIN whose telephone number is (571) 272-7452. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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.
/KEEGAN T MARTIN/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights