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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the window portion extending around four sides of the second adjuster, claims 6 and 17 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 6 and 17 are finally 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 language as written for each of claims 6 and 17, renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear how a window portion covers four sides of a cylindrical second adjuster 210, as disclosed in Fig. 6B, and leaves two remaining sides exposed. Clarification is required without new matter, particularly in view of instant application disclosure, e.g., paragraph [0033], PG Pub.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3-12 and 14-20 are finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chervenak et al. (8,776,646 “Chervenak”) in view of Grayo et al. (6,227,08 “Grayo”).
PNG
media_image1.png
320
401
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Chervenak meets all of the limitations of claim 1, i.e., a hand tool comprising:
a handle assembly comprising a top handle 111/112 and a bottom handle 116/119;
a jaw assembly comprising a top jaw 113 and a bottom jaw 117, the top and bottom jaws being operably coupled to the top and bottom handles to compress the top and bottom jaws toward each other responsive to compression of the top and bottom handles toward each other Figs. 1-5, adjustable overcenter locking pliers; and
an adjustment assembly Fig. 14 configured to enable a grip size defined by the jaw assembly to be modified, wherein the adjustment assembly comprises a first adjuster 152 disposed at a distal end of the top handle Fig. 14, a second adjuster 158 disposed at a point between a middle portion and proximal end of the top handle Fig. 14, and an adjustment rod 150 operably coupled via 154, 166, 150 to each of the first and second adjusters 152, 158 via a first interface mechanism @152 (e.g., 156, 170…) and a second interface mechanism @158 (e.g., 160, narrow proximal end of 150), respectively, and rotatably disposed relative to the top handle Fig. 14, and
wherein the adjustment assembly is operable for two-handed adjustment via the first adjuster one pressing handles, while the other adjust the screw and one-handed adjustment via the second adjuster, reachable by pressing hand, except for the adjustment rod to move along a longitudinal axis of the top handle responsive to rotation of either the first adjuster or the second adjuster and to the adjustment rod to comprise a threaded portion in threaded engagement with a threaded collar fixed at the distal end of the top handle, and a non-threaded portion configured to interface with the
PNG
media_image2.png
241
553
media_image2.png
Greyscale
second adjuster.
Grayo teaches a one-hand operated pliers having an adjustment mechanism including an adjustment rod 21 and an adjustment nut 20, wherein adjusting spacing of the jaws by rotating the adjuster 20 which is incapable of translation movement causes the adjustment rod 21 to move relative to the top handle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to modify the invention of Chervenak with the adjusting arrangement as taught by Grayo for as an alternative means of adjusting the distance between jaws. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to form the fixed collar at the distal end, i.e., at the first adjuster for ease of operation, varying the distance of jaws opening and/or ease of manufacturing, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikes, 86 USPQ 70.
PNG
media_image1.png
320
401
media_image1.png
Greyscale
CLAIM 12
Chervenak meets all of the limitations of claim 12, i.e., a hand tool comprising:
a handle assembly comprising a top handle 111/112 and a bottom handle 116/119;
a jaw assembly comprising a top jaw 113 and a bottom jaw 117, the top and bottom jaws being operably coupled to the top and bottom handles to compress the top and bottom jaws toward each other responsive to compression of the top and bottom handles toward each other Figs. 1-5, adjustable overcenter locking pliers; and
an adjustment assembly Fig. 14 configured to enable a grip size defined by the jaw assembly to be modified, wherein the adjustment assembly comprises a first adjuster 152 disposed at a distal end of the top handle Fig. 14, a second adjuster 158 disposed at a point between a middle portion and proximal end of the top handle Fig. 14, and an adjustment rod 150 operably coupled via 154, 166, 150 to each of the first and second adjusters 152, 158 via a first interface mechanism @152 and a second interface mechanism @158, respectively, and rotatably disposed relative to the top handle Fig. 14,
wherein the second adjuster 158 includes an axial channel opening receiving the distal end (@160) of the adjustment rod 150 formed along a rotational axis thereof Fig. 14, the axial channel having a cross sectional shape circular presenting one or more faces an annular face that extend along an axial direction, and
wherein the adjustment rod 150 comprises an interface portion distal end at 160 configured to receive the axial channel Fig. 14, the interface portion including one or more corresponding faces smooth face to engage with the one or more faces of the axial channel such that rotation of the second adjuster causes corresponding rotation of the adjustment rod, except for the adjustment rod to slidingly engage the second adjuster at the axial channel and to move axially within the axial channel and to the adjustment rod to comprise a threaded portion in threaded engagement with a threaded collar fixed at the distal end of the top handle, and a non-threaded portion configured to interface with the second adjuster.
PNG
media_image2.png
241
553
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Grayo teaches a one-hand operated pliers having an adjustment mechanism including an adjustment rod 21 and an adjustment nut 20, wherein adjusting spacing of the jaws by rotating the adjuster 20 which is incapable of translation movement causes the adjustment rod 21 to move relative to the top handle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to modify the invention of Chervenak with the adjusting arrangement as taught by Grayo for as an alternative means of adjusting the distance between jaws. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to form the fixed collar at the distal end, i.e., at the first adjuster for ease of operation, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikes, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claims 3 and 14, PA (prior art, Chervenak modified by Grayo) meets the limitations, i.e., the hand tool of claim 1 or 12, wherein the adjustment assembly further comprises a cross link 122 Chervenak extending from the bottom handle to the adjustment rod Fig. 14.
Regarding claims 4 and 15, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the hand tool of claim 3 or 14, wherein the cross link 122 is operably coupled to the adjustment rod 150 at a fixed location on the adjustment rod modified by Gyro @pivot 15, Fig. 10, and wherein the fixed location moves with 21 relative to the top handle responsive to rotation of the adjustment rod.
PNG
media_image3.png
121
425
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 5 and 16, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the hand tool of claim 4 or 15, wherein the first adjuster 152 of Chervenak modified for 22 Gyro extends off the distal end of the top handle and alternately gets closer to and farther away from the top handle responsive to rotation of the adjustment rod.
Regarding claims 6 and 17, as best understood, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the hand tool of claim 5 or 16, wherein the second adjuster 158 as modified by Gyro is disposed in a window portion formed in the top handle, and wherein the window portion 37, Fig. 5 extends around four sides of the second adjuster and leaves two remaining sides of the second adjuster exposed for operation by a user Fig. 10, Gyro.
Regarding claim 7, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the hand tool of claim 1, wherein rotation of the first adjuster 152/22 Chervenak modified by Gyro and the second adjuster 158/20, Fig. 10 of Gyro each cause corresponding rotation of the adjustment rod with a 1:1 ratio same threaded configuration.
Regarding claims 9 and 19, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the hand tool of claim 7 or 12, wherein the first adjuster 152/20 is disposed at a first end of the adjustment rod Fig. 5 Gyro, wherein the second adjuster 158/20 Gyro interfaces with a second end of the adjustment rod Fig. 10 Gyro, except for disclosing interface mechanisms between the adjustment rod and the first and second adjusters to be different. Chervenak discloses that the actuating member may comprise a gear train or the like 04:50-52. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to modify the invention of PA with other transmission means such as gear train as suggested by Chervenak to adjust the speed of the translation and/or to provide a different speed fine, coarse for each actuator.
Regarding claim 10, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the hand tool of claim 1, wherein rotation of the first adjuster 152 Chervenak and the second adjuster 158 Chervenak cause corresponding rotation of the adjustment rod, except for disclosing the ratio not to be 1:1. Chervenak discloses that the actuating member may comprise a gear train or the like 04:50-52. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to modify the invention of PA with other transmission means such as gear train as suggested by Chervenak to adjust the speed of the translation to be different for each actuator, e.g., coarse and fine.
Regarding claims 11 and 20, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the hand tool of claim 1 or 12, further comprising a clamping assembly over-the-center locking mechanism 122 127, 166 configured to enable the top and bottom jaws to be locked at a selected distance from each other in a locked position, the selected distance being determined by the adjustment assembly.
Regarding claim 18, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the hand tool of claim 12v, wherein the adjustment rod 150 Chervenak modified b Gyro comprises a threaded portion 21 Gyro in threaded engagement with a threaded collar 20 Gyro disposed at the distal end of the top handle Fig. 3, and a non-threaded portion interface at 15, Fig. 10 Gyro defining the interface at least partially, i.e., interface between 20 and 15.
Claims 2 and 13 are finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PA as applied to claim 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Hyma et al. (10,207,394).
PA (prior art, Chervenak modified by Grayo) as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, meets all of the limitations of claims 2 and 13, except for the first adjuster to comprise an eyelet from which the hand tool is suspendable for hanging storage.
PNG
media_image4.png
358
470
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Hyma et al. teaches a pair of pliers with a rear adjustment member 66 having an eyelet 110. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to further modify the modified invention of PA with the eyelet as taught by Hyma et al. hang the pliers when not in use.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 is 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.
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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 25, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regards to the drawings objections, applicant remarks that Figs. 5 and 6 disclose the window that extends for four sides. Examiner, respectfully disagrees. As clearly shown in the indicated drawings, e.g., Fig. 5A, B, the window 280 does not extend around the top or bottom and the figures do not illustrate a window portion form in the top handle extending around four sides of the second adjuster.
The arguments regarding claims 6 and 17 are not persuasive, since claims recited for a window portion to extend around four sides, since a rectangular window as shown in, e.g., Fig. 5A does not extend around four sides of the second adjuster, at least not wherein the adjuster is stationary.
with regards to the combination, Applicant argues that the teaching reference does teach a fixe knob but the knob is not at a distal end. This argument is not persuasive firstly because the teaching reference is not bodily incorporated into the base reference, and secondly because rearranging a prat of an invention is considered obvious modification under KSR reasoning’s.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HADI SHAKERI whose telephone number is (571)272-4495. The fax phone number for forwarding unofficial documents for discussion purposes only is (571) 273-4495. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F.
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 on 571 272 8548. The fax number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Hadi Shakeri/
March 5, 2026 Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723