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
In response to the amendment filed on 04/23/2026, claims 1 and 28-35 have been amended, and new claims 36-40 are added. Claims 1-40 are pending and under examination.
Election/Restrictions
In response to the election requirement, Applicant has elected Group I with traverse in the reply filed on 04/23/2026.
However, Applicant has amended claims, therefore, it requires third restriction/election supported by a new prior art which provides that the technical features of the instant application are not special technical features as they do not make a contribution over the prior art.
Yet in order to expedite the prosecution of the instant application, Examiner has withdrawn the requirement of restriction/election, and claims 1-40 are under examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/06/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 first projection and the second projection extend from the shaft not in opposing directions” recited in claim 3, “the “asymmetrical first and second projections” recited in claim 7, the “first size content” and the “second size content” recited in claims 16-19, the “third projection” recited in claim 26, and the “level” recited in claim 27 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.
Specification
The attempt to incorporate subject matter into this application by reference to PCT/US2022/011895 is ineffective because the incorporation by reference was filed after the PCT date of 01/11/2022, which considered the filing date of the US application. As such, the incorporation by reference statement must be removed, as it introduces new matter by being filed after the filing date of the application.
See MPEP 608.01(p) I B: For the incorporation by reference to be effective as a proper safeguard, the incorporation by reference statement must be filed at the time of filing of the later-filed application. An incorporation by reference statement added after an application s filing date is not effective because no new matter can be added to an application after its filing date and MPEP 1893.03(b): An international application designating the U.S. has two stages (international and national) with the filing date being the same in both stages. Often the date of entry into the national stage is confused with the filing date. It should be borne in mind that the filing date of the international stage application is also the filing date for the national stage application. Specifically, 35 U.S.C. 363 provides that an international application designating the United States shall have the effect, from its international filing date under Article 11 of the treaty, of a national application for patent regularly filed in the Patent and Trademark Office as well as:
PCT Article 11(3) - ...an international filing date shall have the effect of a regular national application in each designated State as of the international filing date, which date shall be considered to be the actual filing date in each designated State. The specification amendment filed on 07/06/2023 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: the incorporation by reference to PCT/US2022/011895.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 13, lines 5-6, the phrase may be amended as “wherein the first surface area is smaller than the second surface area”. Specification of the instant application states the first surface area 114 is lesser in area than the second surface area 120 (¶ 0064). It appears fig. 1 also shows the first surface area 114 is smaller than the second surface area 120 due to difference of diameters.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 6, 8-11, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todd et al. (US 10,328,554, cited on 07/06/2023 IDS, hereinafter Todd), in view of Ely (US 2015/0190909).
Regarding claim 1, Todd discloses, in fig. 1, a device (socket and driver 10) comprising:
a driver including a shaft (fig. 1, a drive shank 12 [corresponds to the recited driver] has a shaft), wherein the shaft includes a first end portion (socket drive end 24) and a second end portion (tool mounting end 18); and
a socket (socket 32) having a third end portion (hex end 40) and a fourth end portion (hex end 42), wherein the third end portion is open according to a first size, wherein the fourth end portion is open according to a second size (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is an opening having a size and the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] is another opening having a size), wherein the first size is different from the second size (col. 3:35-37, an internal size of the hex end 42 is 3/8 in and an internal size of the hex end 40 is 1/4 in), wherein each of the third end portion and the fourth end portion is configured to be mounted onto the first end portion up to or against each of the first projection and the second projection (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is mounted onto a collar 20 [corresponds to the recited projection]; col. 2:59-60, the socket 32 is reversible, thus the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] can be mounted onto the collar 20), but does not disclose the driver includes a first projection, and a second projection, wherein each of the first projection and the second projection extends from the shaft between the first end portion and the second end portion.
Ely teaches, in an analogous a driver tool field of endeavor, the driver includes a first projection, and a second projection, wherein each of the first projection and the second projection extends from the shaft between the first end portion and the second end portion (fig. 4 and ¶ 0033, an anvil 26 [corresponds to the recited driver] includes impact jaws 28A, 28B [correspond to the recited first and second projections] extending from an output shaft 30 between a first end portion and a second end portion of the driver).
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 the driver of Todd to provide the first and second projections as taught by Ely. The impact jaws of Ely are periodically impacted by corresponding impact jaws of a hammer in order to help rotation of the anvil/driver (Ely ¶ 0033).
Regarding claim 2, Todd as modified by Ely teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the first projection and the second projection extend from the shaft in opposing directions (Ely, fig. 4, the impact jaws 28A, 28B [correspond to the recited first and second projections] extend from the output shaft 30 in opposing directions).
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 the driver to provide the first and second projections in opposing directions as taught by Ely so that the two projections receive balanced rotational force from the hammer for uniform rotation of the driver.
Regarding claim 3, Todd as modified by Ely teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose the first projection and the second projection extend from the shaft not in opposing directions.
However, Ely discloses the first and second projections extending from the shaft. 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 the driver of Todd as modified by Ely to provide the first and second projections not in opposing directions as long as the impact jaws 28A, 28B engage the corresponding impact jaws of the hammer 24 in order to rotate the anvil 26. It has been held that shifting position of a part would be unpatentable unless it modifies the operation of the device. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
Regarding claim 6, Todd as modified by Ely teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the first projection and the second projection are symmetrical to each other (Ely fig. 4, the impact jaws 28A, 28B [correspond to the recited first and second projections] are symmetrical to each other).
Regarding claim 8, Todd as modified by Ely teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the first projection and the second projection are identical to each other in shape (Ely fig. 4, the impact jaws 28A, 28B [correspond to the recited first and second projections] are identical to each other in shape).
Regarding claim 9, Todd as modified by Ely teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the first projection and the second projection are identical to each other in size (Ely fig. 4, the impact jaws 28A, 28B [correspond to the recited first and second projections] have the identical size).
Regarding claim 10, Todd as modified by Ely teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose explicitly the first projection and the second projection are identical to each other in material.
However, it appears there is no particular reason to have the projections made of different materials. Ely does not present the impact jaws/projections are made of different materials. Because the purpose of the Ely’s impact jaws is for transferring the rotational force to the anvil, it would be reasonable that projections have the identical shape, size, and material. 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 the driver of Todd as modified by Ely to provide the projections made of the identical material so that they can transfer the rotational force uniformly.
Regarding claim 11, Todd as modified by Ely teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the first projection and the second projection are monolithic with the shaft (Ely fig. 4, the impact jaws 28A, 28B [correspond to the recited first and second projections] are fixed to the output shaft 30 so that they form a monolithic body).
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 the driver of Todd as modified by Ely to provide the projections to be monolithic with the shaft as taught by Ely so that the projections can transmit the rotational force securely.
Regarding claim 26, Todd as modified by Ely teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose the shaft includes a third projection extending therefrom between the first end portion and the second end portion.
Ely discloses the two projections, and 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 the driver of Todd as modified by Ely to provide the third projection in order to couple to output shaft 30 to the hammer 24 more securely for transferring the rotational force. It has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B).
Todd as modified by Ely further teaches each of the third end portion and the fourth end portion is configured to be mounted onto the first end portion up to or against the third projection (Todd fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is mounted onto a collar 20 [corresponds to the recited projection]; col. 2:59-60, the socket 32 is reversible, thus the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] can be mounted onto the collar 20. By combining with Ely, the protrusions of Ely can replace the collar 20 of Todd to receive the third and fourth end portions of the socket).
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 the driver of Todd as modified by Ely to provide the third projection in order to provide better coupling with the hammer.
Claims 4, 5, 7, and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todd in view of Ely, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Plotkin (US 9,107,721).
Regarding claim 4, Todd as modified by Ely teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose the shaft has a flat portion extending between the first projection and the second projection.
Plotkin teaches, in an analogous driver field of endeavor, the shaft has a flat portion (torque limiting spring 20) extending between the first projection and the second projection (see annotated Plotkin fig. 1 below).
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 the driver of Todd as modified by Ely to provide the flat portion as taught by Plotkin. The spring 20 of Plotkin secures a tool bit and permits the tool bit to be easily removed or attached (Plotkin col. 2:65-3:12).
PNG
media_image1.png
639
1057
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Plotkin Fig. 1
Regarding claim 5, Todd as modified by Ely teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose at least one of the first projection or the second projection has a side that is flush with the shaft.
Plotkin teaches, in an analogous driver field of endeavor, at least one of the first projection or the second projection has a side that is flush with the shaft (fig. 5 and annotated Plotkin fig. 1 above, a part of the spring 20 is the recited projection, and the projection is flush with the shaft).
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 the driver of Todd as modified by Ely to provide the projection that is flush with the shaft as taught by Plotkin. The flushing surface allows the shaft of the driver to be a simpler shape than having a protruding surface. The protruding surface may cause the tool to be caught at the protruding edge when moving/operating the tool.
Regarding claim 7, Todd as modified by Ely teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose the first projection and the second projection are asymmetrical to each other.
Plotkin teaches, in an analogous driver field of endeavor, the first projection and the second projection are asymmetrical to each other (see annotated Plotkin fig. 1 above, the first and second projections are not symmetrical to each other. The second projection has an open space as seen in fig. 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 the driver of Todd as modified by Ely to provide the asymmetrical projections as taught by Plotkin. The asymmetrical configuration of the Plotkin’s spring 20 allows it to be easily removed from the shaft (Plotkin col. 3:9-12).
Regarding claim 36, Todd as modified by Ely teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose the driver includes a first flat portion, wherein the first flat portion extends between the first projection and the second projection, wherein the first projection is flush with the first flat portion and the second flat portion.
Plotkin teaches, in an analogous driver field of endeavor, the driver includes a first flat portion (torque limiting spring 20), wherein the first flat portion extends between the first projection and the second projection (see annotated Plotkin fig. 1 above), wherein the first projection is flush with the first flat portion (fig. 5 and annotated Plotkin fig. 1 above, a part of the spring 20 is the recited projection, thus the first projection is flush with the first flat portion).
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 the driver of Todd as modified by Ely to provide the flat portion as taught by Plotkin. The spring 20 of Plotkin secures a tool bit and permits the tool bit to be easily removed or attached (Plotkin col. 2:65-3:12).
However, Todd as modified by Ely and Plotkin does not disclose the driver includes a second flat portion, wherein the second flat portion extends between the first projection and the second projection, wherein the second projection is flush with the first flat portion and the second flat portion, and wherein the first projection is flush with the second flat portion.
Plotkin discloses the spring 20 as the first flat portion. However, 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 the driver of Todd as modified by Ely and Plotkin to duplicate the spring 20 of Plotkin to have the second flat portion at a bottom of the spring.
Having the second flat portion at an opposing side of the first flat portion would allow the second flat portion to extend between the first and second projections wherein the second projection is flush with the first and second flat portions and the first projection is flush with the second flat portion.
The flushing surface allows the shaft of the driver to be a simpler shape than having a protruding surface. The protruding surface may cause the tool to be caught at the protruding edge when moving/operating the tool. It has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todd in view of Ely, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Hsien et al. (DE 202004016836U1, cited on 07/06/2023 IDS, hereinafter Hsien).
Regarding claim 12, Todd as modified by Ely teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose explicitly the first projection and the second projection are assembled with the shaft.
Hsien teaches, in an analogous socket field of endeavor, the first projection and the second projection are assembled with the shaft (fig. 2, a socket 20 has a plurality of pins 30 [correspond to the recited projections]. The pins are inserted into a shaft body of the socket. Hsien discloses the socket instead of a driver, but it shows a first pin and a second pin are inserted into a shaft to teach that the first projection and the second projection can be assembled with a shaft of a driver).
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 the driver of Todd as modified by Ely to provide the first and second projections assembled with the shaft as taught by Hsien in order to enable the adjustment of the spacing between each of the pins to selectively increase or decrease the rolling of the device before stopping on a surface (Hsien English translation, p. 2:5-9).
Claims 13-15 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todd in view of Ely, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Hui (US 9,272,395, cited on 07/06/2023 IDS).
Regarding claim 13, Todd as modified by Ely teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the socket includes a first tubular portion and a second tubular portion, wherein the first tubular portion includes the third end portion, wherein the second tubular portion includes the fourth end portion, wherein the first tubular portion has a first outer side with a first surface area, wherein the second tubular portion has a second outer side with a second surface area (see annotated Todd fig. 3 below, the first tubular portion has a first outer side with a first surface area and the second tubular portion has a second outer side with a second surface area), but does not disclose the first surface area is larger than the second surface area.
Hui teaches, in an analogous socket field of endeavor, the first surface area is larger than the second surface area (see annotated Hui fig. 1 below, a socket 1 includes first and second tubular portions. The first tubular portion has greater diameter than the second tubular portion to have a greater surface area).
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 the socket of Todd as modified by Ely to provide the greater surface area for the first tubular portion as taught by Hui. Hui’s socket has greater exterior size when the interior cavity is larger. Thus, it allows easy visual identification of a relative size of the internal cavities at each end of the socket by correlating a size of the internal cavities with the relative size of the outer diameter of each end of the socket.
PNG
media_image2.png
496
897
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Todd Fig. 3
PNG
media_image3.png
499
811
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Hui Fig. 1
Regarding claim 14, Todd as modified by Ely and Hui teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 13, wherein the first tubular portion gradually tapers to the second tubular portion (see annotated Hui fig. 1 above).
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 the socket of Todd as modified by Ely and Hui to provide the gradual tapering portion as taught by Hui so that the first and second tubular portions of the socket having different sizes form a single socket.
Regarding claim 15, Todd as modified by Ely and Hui teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 14, wherein the socket includes a tapering tubular portion interposed between the first tubular portion and the second tubular portion (see annotated Hui fig. 1 above).
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 the socket of Todd as modified by Ely and Hui to provide the tapering tubular portion as taught by Hui so that the first and second tubular portions of the socket having different sizes form a single socket.
Regarding claim 21, Todd as modified by Ely and Hui teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 13, wherein the first tubular portion and the second tubular portion are identical in length (annotated Todd fig. 3 above, the first tubular portion and the second tubular portion of the socket 32 are symmetrical with each other, thus they have the identical lengths).
Regarding claim 22, Todd as modified by Ely and Hui teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 13, but does not disclose explicitly the first tubular portion and the second tubular portion are not identical in length.
Hui shows the socket having the first tubular portion and the second tubular portion wherein each tubular portion has a length (see annotated Hui fib. 1 above).
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 the socket of Todd as modified by Ely and Hui to provide the first tubular portion and the second tubular portion having non-identical lengths in order to couple to a driver or fastener of a particular size at each end of the socket. Such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
Regarding claim 23, Todd as modified by Ely and Hui teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 13, wherein the first tubular portion and the second tubular portion are internally in fluid communication with each other (Hui, fig. 1 and col. 1:60-67, an intermediate hole 10 is formed through the socket body 1 between two end cavities 13, 14).
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 the socket of Todd as modified by Ely and Hui to provide the internal fluid communication as taught by Hui. A socket having an open internal cavity through a length of the socket is easier to manufacture than a socket having a closed internal cavity.
Claims 16, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todd in view of Ely and Hui, as applied to claim 13 above, and in further view of Wallden (US 7,117,765, cited on 07/06/2023 IDS).
Regarding claim 16, Todd as modified by Tsai and Hui teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 13, but does not disclose the first outer side hosts a first size content thereon, wherein the second outer side hosts a second size content thereon.
Wallden teaches, in an analogous socket field of endeavor, the first outer side hosts a first size content thereon, wherein the second outer side hosts a second size content thereon (fig. 2 and col. 4:37-61, an outer surface of a socket 18 can defined as a first outer side and a second outer side. The socket has a first color coded indicia 16 [corresponds to the recited first size content] on the first outer side and a second color coded indicia 24 [corresponds to the recited second size content] on the second outer side).
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 the socket of Todd as modified by Ely and Hui to provide the first size content and the second size content as taught by Wallden in order to identify an exact size of the internal cavities at each end of the device easily (Wallden col. 1:53-61).
Regarding claim 17, Todd as modified by Ely, Hui, and Wallden teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 16, wherein the first size content and the second size content are co-planar (see Wallden fig. 2, at least a part of the first color coded indicia 16 [corresponds to the recited first size content] and at least a part of the second color coded indicia 24 [corresponds to the recited second size content] are disposed on the same plane).
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 the socket of Todd as modified by Ely, Hui, and Wallden to provide the co-planar contents as taught by Wallden so that a size of ratchet driver (first indicia) and a size of nut (second indicia) can be easily identified at once (Wallden col. 1:56-59).
Regarding claim 20, Todd as modified by Ely, Hui, and Wallden teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 16, wherein at least one of the first size content or the second size content is not a sticker adhered onto a respective outer side (Wallden, col. 5:14-18, the color-coded indicia [corresponds to the recite size content] is recessed into the socket).
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 socket of Todd as modified by Ely, Hui, and Wallden to provide the first or second size content as not a sticker as taught by Wallden so that the color-coded indicia is visible permanently so that a user can figure out the driver or socket size anytime when he/she uses the tool.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todd in view of Ely, Hui, and Wallden, as applied to claim 16 above, and in further view of I (KR 20170136789A).
Regarding claim 18, Todd as modified by Ely, Hui, and Wallden teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 16, but does not disclose the first size content and the second size content are not co-planar.
I teaches, in an analogous socket field of endeavor, the first size content and the second size content are not co-planar (fig. 2, a socket 100 have two marks. Because a diameter of the socket decreases from one end to the other end, the two marks are not disposed on the same plane. The color-coded indicia 16, 24 of Wallden can be disposed on the I’s socket to make the size contents to be not co-planar).
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 the socket of Todd as modified by Ely, Hui, and Wallden to provide the size contents not in co-planar as taught by I so that the mark may indicate appropriate tool size by the diameter of the mark.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todd in view of Ely, Hui, and Wallden, as applied to claim 16 above, and in further view of Kupfer (US 5,079,978, cited on 07/06/2023 IDS).
Regarding claim 19, Todd as modified by Ely, Hui, and Wallden teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 16, but does not disclose at least one of the first size content or the second size content is tactile.
Kupfer teaches, in an analogous socket field of endeavor, at least one of the first size content or the second size content is tactile (fig. 1A and col. 2:43-46, a socket 3 includes grooves along a grasping surface 10. The grooves are tactile).
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 the socket of Todd as modified by Ely, Hui, and Wallden to provide the tactile size content as taught by Kupfer in order to allow a user to differentiate an internal size of the socket from other sockets without looking at the socket because the grooves provide size identification (Kupfer col. 2:53-54).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todd in view of Ely and Hui, as applied to claim 13 above, and in further view of Li et al. (US 2005/0115369, hereinafter Li)
Regarding claim 24, Todd as modified by Ely and Hui teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 13, but does not disclose the first tubular portion and the second tubular portion are not internally in fluid communication with each other. However, specification of the instant application does not provide reason why a partition can be interposed between the first cavity and the second cavity (¶ 0058). The socket also can have an open internal cavity (¶ 0058).
Li teaches, in an analogous socket field of endeavor, the first tubular portion and the second tubular portion are not internally in fluid communication with each other (fig. 2, a socket 10 has a first tubular portion and a second tubular portion and its internal cavity is closed).
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 the socket of Todd as modified by Ely and Hui to provide the closed internal cavity as taught by Li. Internal end of the Li’s socket has teeth 13, 22 which help the socket to apply constant force to a workpiece during locking/unlocking (Li ¶ 0019).
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todd in view of Ely and Hui, as applied to claim 13 above, and in further view of Stephens (US 7,802,499, cited on 07/06/2023 IDS).
Regarding claim 25, Todd as modified by Ely and Hui teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 13, but does not disclose at least one of the first tubular portion or the second tubular portion is perforated thereinto.
Stephens teaches, in an analogous socket field of endeavor, at least one of the first tubular portion or the second tubular portion is perforated thereinto (fig. 1 and col. 3:5-16, a socket 100 has a driving portion 104 [corresponds to the recited first or second tubular portion] which includes slots 108 [corresponds to the recited perforation]).
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 the socket of Todd as modified by Ely and Hui to make it perforated thereinto as taught by Stephens in order to allow the socket to be used for fitting to and driving an eyebolt fastener (Stephens col. 5:12-25).
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todd in view of Ely, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Walker (US 2005/0098001, cited on 07/06/2023 IDS).
Regarding claim 27, Todd as modified by Ely teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose the driver includes a level between the first end portion and the second end portion.
Walker teaches, in an analogous driver field of endeavor, the driver includes a level between the first end portion and the second end portion (fig. 10 and ¶ 0048, a handle 120 [corresponds to the recited driver] includes a bubble level 210 between two end portions).
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 the driver of Todd as modified by Ely to provide the level as taught by Walker in order to allow a user to determine with the device whether a surface upon which the device is resting is aligned with a reference datum (Walker ¶ 0048).
Claims 28, 29, 31-35, and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todd et al. (US 10328554, cited on 07/06/2023 IDS, hereinafter Todd), in view of Chang (US 7,278,342, cited on 07/06/2023 IDS).
Regarding claim 28, Todd discloses, in fig. 1, a device (socket and driver 10) comprising:
a driver including a shaft and a collar, wherein the shaft includes a first end portion and a second end portion, wherein the collar extends from the shaft between the first end portion and the second end portion (fig. 1, a drive shank 12 [corresponds to the recited driver] has a shaft and a collar 20. The collar 20 extends between a socket drive end 24 [corresponds to the recited first end portion] and a tool mounting end 18 [corresponds to the recited second end portion]); and
a socket (socket 32) having a third end portion (hex end 40) and a fourth end portion (hex end 42), wherein the third end portion is open according to a first size, wherein the fourth end portion is open according to a second size (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is an opening having a size and the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] is another opening having a size), wherein the first size is different from the second size (col. 3:35-37, an internal size of the hex end 42 is 3/8 in and an internal size of the hex end 40 is 1/4 in), wherein each of the third end portion and the fourth end portion is configured to be mounted onto the first end portion up to or against the collar (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is mounted onto a collar 20 [corresponds to the recited projection]; col. 2:59-60, the socket 32 is reversible, thus the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] can be mounted onto the collar 20), but does not disclose the collar is a non-annular collar, and the socket avoids extending axially beyond the non-annular collar when the socket is mounted onto the first end portion.
Chang teaches, in an analogous driver field of endeavor, the collar is a non-annular collar (fig. 1 and col. 5:8-23, a tool shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver] includes a peripheral protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar] wherein the protrusion 37 may be non-circular), and the socket avoids extending axially beyond the non-annular collar when the socket is mounted onto the first end portion (fig. 2, when a tool mount 10 [corresponds to the recited socket] is mounted to the shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver], the mount 10 avoids extending axially beyond the non-annular protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar]).
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 the driver of Todd to provide the non-annular collar as taught by Chang. The protrusion 37 may be engaged with or into an enlarged peripheral shoulder of a tool mount to stably or solidly anchor or secure a spatial engaging member of the tool shank to the tool mount and to prevent the tool shank from being slanted or tilted or pivoted relative to a longitudinal axis of the tool mount (Chang col. 6:5-15).
Regarding claim 29, Todd discloses, in fig. 1, a device (socket and driver 10) comprising:
a driver including a shaft including at least one of (a) a collar or (b) a first projection and a second projection, wherein the shaft includes a first end portion and a second end portion, wherein at least one of (a) the collar or (b) each of the first projection and the second projection extends from the shaft between the first end portion and the second end portion (fig. 1, a drive shank 12 [corresponds to the recited driver] has a shaft and a collar 20. The collar 20 extends between a socket drive end 24 [corresponds to the recited first end portion] and a tool mounting end 18 [corresponds to the recited second end portion]); and
a socket (socket 32) having a third end portion (hex end 40) and a fourth end portion (hex end 42), wherein the third end portion is open according to a first size, wherein the fourth end portion is open according to a second size (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is an opening having a size and the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] is another opening having a size), wherein the first size is different from the second size (col. 3:35-37, an internal size of the hex end 42 is 3/8 in and an internal size of the hex end 40 is 1/4 in), wherein each of the third end portion and the fourth end portion is configured to be mounted onto the first end portion up to or against at least one of (a) the collar or (b) each of the first projection and the second projection (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is mounted onto a collar 20 [corresponds to the recited projection]; col. 2:59-60, the socket 32 is reversible, thus the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] can be mounted onto the collar 20), but does not disclose the collar is a non-annular collar, the socket avoids extending axially beyond (a) the non-annular collar or (b) the first projection and the second projection, when the socket is mounted onto the first end portion.
Chang teaches, in an analogous driver field of endeavor, the collar is a non-annular collar (fig. 1 and col. 5:8-23, a tool shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver] includes a peripheral protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar] wherein the protrusion 37 may be non-circular), and the socket avoids extending axially beyond (a) the non-annular collar, when the socket is mounted onto the first end portion (fig. 2, when a tool mount 10 [corresponds to the recited socket] is mounted to the shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver], the mount 10 avoids extending axially beyond the non-annular protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar]).
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 the driver of Todd to provide the non-annular collar as taught by Chang. The protrusion 37 may be engaged with or into an enlarged peripheral shoulder of a tool mount to stably or solidly anchor or secure a spatial engaging member of the tool shank to the tool mount and to prevent the tool shank from being slanted or tilted or pivoted relative to a longitudinal axis of the tool mount (Chang col. 6:5-15).
Regarding claim 37, Todd as modified by Chang teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 29, wherein the shaft includes (a) the non-annular collar (Chang fig. 1 and col. 5:8-23, a shaft of the tool shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver] includes a peripheral protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar] wherein the protrusion 37 may be non-circular).
Regarding claim 31, Todd discloses, in fig. 1, a driver including a shaft (fig. 1, a drive shank 12 [corresponds to the recited driver] has a shaft), including a collar (collar 20), wherein the shaft includes a first end portion (socket drive end 24) and a second end portion (tool mounting end 18), wherein the collar extends from the shaft between the first end portion and the second end portion (fig. 1, the collar 20 extends from the shaft between the socket drive end 24 and the tool mounting end 18); and
a socket (socket 32) having a third end portion (hex end 40) and a fourth end portion (hex end 42), wherein the third end portion is open according to a first size, wherein the fourth end portion is open according to a second size (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is an opening having a size and the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] is another opening having a size), wherein the first size is different from the second size (col. 3:35-37, an internal size of the hex end 42 is 3/8 in and an internal size of the hex end 40 is 1/4 in), wherein each of the third end portion and the fourth end portion is configured to be mounted onto the first end portion up to or against the collar (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is mounted onto a collar 20; col. 2:59-60, the socket 32 is reversible, thus the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] can be mounted onto the collar 20), but does not disclose the collar is at least one of (a) a non- annular collar or (b) a first projection and a second projection, and the socket avoids extending axially beyond (a) the non-annular collar or (b) the first projection and the second projection, based on the socket being mounted onto the first end portion.
Chang teaches, in an analogous driver field of endeavor, the collar is (a) a non-annular collar (fig. 1 and col. 5:8-23, a tool shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver] includes a peripheral protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar] wherein the protrusion 37 may be non-circular), and the socket avoids extending axially beyond (a) the non-annular collar, based on the socket being mounted onto the first end portion (fig. 2, when a tool mount 10 [corresponds to the recited socket] is mounted to the shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver], the mount 10 avoids extending axially beyond the non-annular protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar]).
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 the driver of Todd to provide the non-annular collar as taught by Chang. The protrusion 37 may be engaged with or into an enlarged peripheral shoulder of a tool mount to stably or solidly anchor or secure a spatial engaging member of the tool shank to the tool mount and to prevent the tool shank from being slanted or tilted or pivoted relative to a longitudinal axis of the tool mount (Chang col. 6:5-15).
Todd as modified by Chang does not disclose a method of manufacturing the driver and the socket.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the method of manufacturing the driver and the socket as taught by Todd and Chag. MPEP 2113 states even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.
Regarding claim 32, Todd discloses, in fig. 1, a driver including a shaft (fig. 1, a drive shank 12 [corresponds to the recited driver] has a shaft), including a collar (collar 20), wherein the shaft includes a first end portion (socket drive end 24) and a second end portion (tool mounting end 18), wherein the collar extends from the shaft between the first end portion and the second end portion (fig. 1, the collar 20 extends from the shaft between the socket drive end 24 and the tool mounting end 18); and
a socket (socket 32) having a third end portion (hex end 40) and a fourth end portion (hex end 42), wherein the third end portion is open according to a first size, wherein the fourth end portion is open according to a second size (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is an opening having a size and the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] is another opening having a size), wherein the first size is different from the second size (col. 3:35-37, an internal size of the hex end 42 is 3/8 in and an internal size of the hex end 40 is 1/4 in), wherein each of the third end portion and the fourth end portion is configured to be mounted onto the first end portion up to or against the collar (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is mounted onto a collar 20; col. 2:59-60, the socket 32 is reversible, thus the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] can be mounted onto the collar 20), but does not disclose the collar is at least one of (a) a non- annular collar or (b) a first projection and a second projection, and the socket avoids extending axially beyond (a) the non-annular collar or (b) the first projection and the second projection, based on the socket being mounted onto the first end portion.
Chang teaches, in an analogous driver field of endeavor, the collar is (a) a non-annular collar (fig. 1 and col. 5:8-23, a tool shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver] includes a peripheral protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar] wherein the protrusion 37 may be non-circular), and the socket avoids extending axially beyond (a) the non-annular collar, based on the socket being mounted onto the first end portion (fig. 2, when a tool mount 10 [corresponds to the recited socket] is mounted to the shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver], the mount 10 avoids extending axially beyond the non-annular protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar]).
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 the driver of Todd to provide the non-annular collar as taught by Chang. The protrusion 37 may be engaged with or into an enlarged peripheral shoulder of a tool mount to stably or solidly anchor or secure a spatial engaging member of the tool shank to the tool mount and to prevent the tool shank from being slanted or tilted or pivoted relative to a longitudinal axis of the tool mount (Chang col. 6:5-15).
Todd as modified by Chang does not disclose a method comprising providing the driver and the socket to a user, and instructing the user to respectfully have the third end portion or the fourth end portion engage a fastener while the fourth end portion or the third end portion is respectfully mounted onto the first end portion up to or against the (a) the non-annular collar.
The recitation is an intended use. Todd discloses, in fig. 1, that one end of the reversible socket 32 engages first end portion of the driver 12 against the collar 20 while the other end of the reversible socket 32 engages a fastener 44. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the driver and the socket to a user and to instruct the user to mount the socket to the driver and the fastener in order to fasten the fastener.
Regarding claim 33, Todd discloses, in fig. 1, a driver including a shaft (fig. 1, a drive shank 12 [corresponds to the recited driver] has a shaft), including a collar (collar 20), wherein the shaft includes a first end portion (socket drive end 24) and a second end portion (tool mounting end 18), wherein the collar extends from the shaft between the first end portion and the second end portion (fig. 1, the collar 20 extends from the shaft between the socket drive end 24 and the tool mounting end 18); and
a socket (socket 32) having a third end portion (hex end 40) and a fourth end portion (hex end 42), wherein the third end portion is open according to a first size, wherein the fourth end portion is open according to a second size (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is an opening having a size and the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] is another opening having a size), wherein the first size is different from the second size (col. 3:35-37, an internal size of the hex end 42 is 3/8 in and an internal size of the hex end 40 is 1/4 in), wherein each of the third end portion and the fourth end portion is configured to be mounted onto the first end portion up to or against the collar (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is mounted onto a collar 20; col. 2:59-60, the socket 32 is reversible, thus the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] can be mounted onto the collar 20), but does not disclose the collar is at least one of (a) a non- annular collar or (b) a first projection and a second projection, and the socket avoids extending axially beyond (a) the non-annular collar or (b) the first projection and the second projection, based on the socket being mounted onto the first end portion.
Chang teaches, in an analogous driver field of endeavor, the collar is (a) a non-annular collar (fig. 1 and col. 5:8-23, a tool shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver] includes a peripheral protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar] wherein the protrusion 37 may be non-circular), and the socket avoids extending axially beyond (a) the non-annular collar, based on the socket being mounted onto the first end portion (fig. 2, when a tool mount 10 [corresponds to the recited socket] is mounted to the shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver], the mount 10 avoids extending axially beyond the non-annular protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar]).
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 the driver of Todd to provide the non-annular collar as taught by Chang. The protrusion 37 may be engaged with or into an enlarged peripheral shoulder of a tool mount to stably or solidly anchor or secure a spatial engaging member of the tool shank to the tool mount and to prevent the tool shank from being slanted or tilted or pivoted relative to a longitudinal axis of the tool mount (Chang col. 6:5-15).
Todd as modified by Chang does not disclose a method comprising providing the driver and the socket to a user, and instructing the user to respectfully have the third end portion or the fourth end portion disengage a fastener while the fourth end portion or the third end portion is respectfully mounted onto the first end portion up to or against the (a) the non-annular collar.
The recitation is an intended use. Todd discloses, in fig. 1, that one end of the reversible socket 32 engages first end portion of the driver 12 against the collar 20 while the other end of the reversible socket 32 engages a fastener 44. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the driver and the socket to a user and to instruct the user to disengage the fastener while the socket is mounted to the driver in order to remove the fastener so that it can be replaced.
Regarding claim 34, Todd discloses, in fig. 1, a driver including a shaft (fig. 1, a drive shank 12 [corresponds to the recited driver] has a shaft), including a collar (collar 20), wherein the shaft includes a first end portion (socket drive end 24) and a second end portion (tool mounting end 18), wherein the collar extends from the shaft between the first end portion and the second end portion (fig. 1, the collar 20 extends from the shaft between the socket drive end 24 and the tool mounting end 18); and
a socket (socket 32) having a third end portion (hex end 40) and a fourth end portion (hex end 42), wherein the third end portion is open according to a first size, wherein the fourth end portion is open according to a second size (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is an opening having a size and the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] is another opening having a size), wherein the first size is different from the second size (col. 3:35-37, an internal size of the hex end 42 is 3/8 in and an internal size of the hex end 40 is 1/4 in), wherein each of the third end portion and the fourth end portion is configured to be mounted onto the first end portion up to or against the collar (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is mounted onto a collar 20; col. 2:59-60, the socket 32 is reversible, thus the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] can be mounted onto the collar 20), but does not disclose the collar is at least one of (a) a non- annular collar or (b) a first projection and a second projection, and the socket avoids extending axially beyond (a) the non-annular collar or (b) the first projection and the second projection, based on the socket being mounted onto the first end portion.
Chang teaches, in an analogous driver field of endeavor, the collar is (a) a non-annular collar (fig. 1 and col. 5:8-23, a tool shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver] includes a peripheral protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar] wherein the protrusion 37 may be non-circular), and the socket avoids extending axially beyond (a) the non-annular collar, based on the socket being mounted onto the first end portion (fig. 2, when a tool mount 10 [corresponds to the recited socket] is mounted to the shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver], the mount 10 avoids extending axially beyond the non-annular protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar]).
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 the driver of Todd to provide the non-annular collar as taught by Chang. The protrusion 37 may be engaged with or into an enlarged peripheral shoulder of a tool mount to stably or solidly anchor or secure a spatial engaging member of the tool shank to the tool mount and to prevent the tool shank from being slanted or tilted or pivoted relative to a longitudinal axis of the tool mount (Chang col. 6:5-15).
Todd as modified by Chang does not disclose a method comprising accessing the driver and the socket, and inserting a fastener into the third end portion or the fourth end portion while the fourth end portion or the third end portion is respectfully mounted onto the first end portion up to or against the (a) the non-annular collar.
The recitation is an intended use. Todd discloses, in fig. 1, that one end of the reversible socket 32 engages first end portion of the driver 12 against the collar 20 while the other end of the reversible socket 32 engages a fastener 44. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the driver and the socket and inserting a fastener into one end portion of the socket while the other end of the socket is mounted to the end of the driver in order to install a new fastener after removing an old fastener.
Regarding claim 35, Todd discloses, in fig. 1, a driver including a shaft (fig. 1, a drive shank 12 [corresponds to the recited driver] has a shaft), including a collar (collar 20), wherein the shaft includes a first end portion (socket drive end 24) and a second end portion (tool mounting end 18), wherein the collar extends from the shaft between the first end portion and the second end portion (fig. 1, the collar 20 extends from the shaft between the socket drive end 24 and the tool mounting end 18); and
a socket (socket 32) having a third end portion (hex end 40) and a fourth end portion (hex end 42), wherein the third end portion is open according to a first size, wherein the fourth end portion is open according to a second size (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is an opening having a size and the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] is another opening having a size), wherein the first size is different from the second size (col. 3:35-37, an internal size of the hex end 42 is 3/8 in and an internal size of the hex end 40 is 1/4 in), wherein each of the third end portion and the fourth end portion is configured to be mounted onto the first end portion up to or against the collar (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is mounted onto a collar 20; col. 2:59-60, the socket 32 is reversible, thus the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] can be mounted onto the collar 20), but does not disclose the collar is at least one of (a) a non- annular collar or (b) a first projection and a second projection, and the socket avoids extending axially beyond (a) the non-annular collar or (b) the first projection and the second projection, based on the socket being mounted onto the first end portion.
Chang teaches, in an analogous driver field of endeavor, the collar is (a) a non-annular collar (fig. 1 and col. 5:8-23, a tool shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver] includes a peripheral protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar] wherein the protrusion 37 may be non-circular), and the socket avoids extending axially beyond (a) the non-annular collar, based on the socket being mounted onto the first end portion (fig. 2, when a tool mount 10 [corresponds to the recited socket] is mounted to the shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver], the mount 10 avoids extending axially beyond the non-annular protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar]).
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 the driver of Todd to provide the non-annular collar as taught by Chang. The protrusion 37 may be engaged with or into an enlarged peripheral shoulder of a tool mount to stably or solidly anchor or secure a spatial engaging member of the tool shank to the tool mount and to prevent the tool shank from being slanted or tilted or pivoted relative to a longitudinal axis of the tool mount (Chang col. 6:5-15).
Todd as modified by Chang does not disclose a method comprising accessing the driver and the socket, and removing a fastener from the third end portion or the fourth end portion while the fourth end portion or the third end portion is respectfully mounted onto the first end portion up to or against the (a) the non-annular collar.
The recitation is an intended use. Todd discloses, in fig. 1, that one end of the reversible socket 32 engages first end portion of the driver 12 against the collar 20 while the other end of the reversible socket 32 engages a fastener 44. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the driver and the socket and removing a fastener from one end portion of the socket while the other end of the socket is mounted to the end of the driver in order to disengage the fastener from the tool after completion of a fastening job.
Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todd in view of Chang, as applied to claim 29 above, and in further view of Ely.
Regarding claim 38, Todd as modified by Chang teaches the device as in the rejection of claim 29, but does not disclose the shaft includes (b) the first projection and the second projection.
Ely teaches, in an analogous a driver tool field of endeavor, the shaft includes (b) the first projection and the second projection. (fig. 4 and ¶ 0033, a shaft of the output shaft 30 includes the impact jaws 28A, 28B [correspond to the recited first and second projections]).
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 the driver of Todd as modified by Chang to provide the first and second projections as taught by Ely. The impact jaws of Ely are periodically impacted by corresponding impact jaws of a hammer in order to help rotation of the anvil/driver (Ely ¶ 0033).
Claims 30 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feuerstein et al. (US 9,956,670, cited on 07/06/2023 IDS, hereinafter Feuerstein), in view of Todd et al. (US 10328554, cited on 07/06/2023 IDS, hereinafter Todd) and Chang (US 7,278,342, cited on 07/06/2023 IDS).
Regarding claim 30, Feuerstein discloses, in fig. 1A, a kit (kit 10) comprising: a package (pouch 29); but does not disclose a driver including a shaft including at least one of (a) a collar or (b) a first projection and a second projection, wherein the shaft includes a first end portion and a second end portion, wherein at least one of (a) the collar or (b) each of the first projection and the second projection extends from the shaft between the first end portion and the second end portion, wherein the package contains the driver; and a socket having a third end portion and a fourth end portion, wherein the third end portion is open according to a first size, wherein the fourth end portion is open according to a second size, wherein the first size is different from the second size, wherein each of the third end portion and the fourth end portion is configured to be mounted onto the first end portion up to or against at least one of (a) the collar or (b) each of the first projection and the second projection, wherein the package contains the socket.
Todd teaches, in an analogous tool device field of endeavor, a driver including a shaft including at least one of (a) a collar or (b) a first projection and a second projection, wherein the shaft includes a first end portion and a second end portion, wherein at least one of (a) the collar or (b) each of the first projection and the second projection extends from the shaft between the first end portion and the second end portion, wherein the package contains the driver (fig. 1, a drive shank 12 [corresponds to the recited driver] has a shaft and a collar 20. The collar 20 extends between a socket drive end 24 [corresponds to the recited first end portion] and a tool mounting end 18 [corresponds to the recited second end portion]); and
a socket (socket 32) having a third end portion (hex end 40) and a fourth end portion (hex end 42), wherein the third end portion is open according to a first size, wherein the fourth end portion is open according to a second size (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is an opening having a size and the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] is another opening having a size), wherein the first size is different from the second size (col. 3:35-37, an internal size of the hex end 42 is 3/8 in and an internal size of the hex end 40 is 1/4 in), wherein each of the third end portion and the fourth end portion is configured to be mounted onto the first end portion up to or against at least one of (a) the collar or (b) each of the first projection and the second projection (fig. 1, the hex end 40 [corresponds to the recited third end portion] is mounted onto a collar 20 [corresponds to the recited projection]; col. 2:59-60, the socket 32 is reversible, thus the hex end 42 [corresponds to the recited fourth end portion] can be mounted onto the collar 20).
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 the kit of Feuerstein to provide the driver and the socket as taught by Todd so that the kit includes tools for fastening. The tools can be held in the package of Feuerstein to carry them to a work site conveniently.
Feuerstein as modified by Todd does not disclose the collar is a non-annular collar, and the socket avoids extending axially beyond (a) the non- annular collar or (b) the first projection and the second projection, when the socket is mounted onto the first end portion.
Chang teaches, in an analogous driver field of endeavor, the collar is a non-annular collar (fig. 1 and col. 5:8-23, a tool shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver] includes a peripheral protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar] wherein the protrusion 37 may be non-circular), and the socket avoids extending axially beyond (a) the non- annular collar, when the socket is mounted onto the first end portion (fig. 2, when a tool mount 10 [corresponds to the recited socket] is mounted to the shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver], the mount 10 avoids extending axially beyond the non-annular protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar]).
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 the kit of Feuerstein as modified by Todd to provide the non-annular collar as taught by Chang. The protrusion 37 may be engaged with or into an enlarged peripheral shoulder of a tool mount to stably or solidly anchor or secure a spatial engaging member of the tool shank to the tool mount and to prevent the tool shank from being slanted or tilted or pivoted relative to a longitudinal axis of the tool mount (Chang col. 6:5-15).
Regarding claim 39, Feuerstein as modified by Todd and Chang teaches the kit as in the rejection of claim 30, wherein the shaft includes (a) the non-annular collar (Chang fig. 1 and col. 5:8-23, a shaft of the tool shank 30 [corresponds to the recited driver] includes a peripheral protrusion 37 [corresponds to the recited collar] wherein the protrusion 37 may be non-circular).
Claim 40 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feuerstein in view of Todd and Chang, as applied to claim 30 above, and in further view of Ely.
Regarding claim 40, Feuerstein as modified by Todd and Chang teaches the kit as in the rejection of claim 30, but does not disclose the shaft includes (b) the first projection and the second projection.
Ely teaches, in an analogous a driver tool field of endeavor, the shaft includes (b) the first projection and the second projection. (fig. 4 and ¶ 0033, a shaft of the output shaft 30 includes the impact jaws 28A, 28B [correspond to the recited first and second projections]).
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 the kit of Feuerstein as modified by Todd and Chang to provide the first and second projections as taught by Ely. The impact jaws of Ely are periodically impacted by corresponding impact jaws of a hammer in order to help rotation of the anvil/driver (Ely ¶ 0033).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sakakibara et al. (US 2020/0276652) discloses a driver and a reversible socket.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUKWOO JAMES CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7402. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00a-5:00p.
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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
/SUKWOO JAMES CHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights