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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/25/2023 was filed after the mailing date of the application on 09/21/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 10 & 16 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 10, line 2 recites “wherein at least two of angles between”; consider instead – wherein at least two angles between –
Claim 16, line 2 recites “wherein at least two of angles between”; consider instead – wherein at least two angles between --
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3 & 4 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.
Claims 3 & 4 recites the limitation "the upper edge and the lower edge". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as no upper and lower edge have been established in the claims nor in the claims on which they depend. In the interest of compact prosecution and for the purposes of this office action, “the upper edge and the lower edge” will be interpreted as “an upper edge and a lower edge”.
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 1-4, 6-11 & 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wing (US 3295572).
Regarding claim 1, Wing discloses a fastener (element 50, fig. 6), comprising:
a threaded shaft (element 52, fig. 6),
a flange part (element 72, fig. 6), and
a head part (element 53, fig. 6) comprising a center (element 51, 55, fig. 5), a periphery (element 71, fig. 5, 6), at least three support elements (element 54, fig. 5; col. 3, line 57-63), and at least three groove parts (element 61, fig. 5; col. 3, line 70-73), wherein each of the groove parts are located between two successive support elements and separates the support elements from each other (see annotated fig. 5 below; col. 3, line 70-73);
PNG
media_image1.png
853
865
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein a height (element 54, 58, 59, fig. 6; note, height defined by vertical portion of support element 54, according to surfaces 58 & 59) of each of the support elements, whose longitudinal axes intersect at the center of the head part (see annotated fig. 5) increases while extending radially from the periphery of the head part to the center of the head part (angles L & R, fig. 6; col. 3, line 57-63; note, height of support elements 54 increases radially inwardly according to angles L & R), and
side walls (element 56, 57, fig. 5; col. 3, line 66-69) on both sides of each support element and intermediate walls (element 60, 62, fig. 6; col. 3, line 68-69) connecting the side walls of the two successive support elements facing each other form surfaces in which a drive apparatus is engaged to the fastener for tightening and loosening (col. 3, line 74 – col. 4, line 2) and a torque is transferred to the fastener (col. 3, line 53-56).
Regarding claim 2, Wing discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses:
wherein each side wall of the support elements comprises an upper edge (element 58, 59, fig. 6; note, upper edge defined by intersection of sidewalls 56 & 57 with surfaces 58 & 59) and a lower edge (see annotated fig. 6 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
832
738
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Wing discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses:
wherein [an] upper edge and [a] lower edge of the side wall are axially aligned (element 56, 57, fig. 5; note, fig. 5 shows side walls 56, 57 as being vertical, wherein the upper and lower edges are axially aligned).
Regarding claim 4, Wing discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses:
wherein [an] upper edge and [a] lower edge move away from each other while the side wall extends radially from the periphery of the head part towards the center (element L, K, R, 58, 59 fig. 6; see annotated fig. 6; note, “upper edge” defined by elements 58, 59, and angles L, R, departs, or moves away, from the “lower edge” (see annotated fig. 6) in the initial incline of the lower edge and for a portion of the radius of the lower edge).
Regarding claim 6, Wing discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses:
wherein the flange part comprises an upper surface (element 61, fig. 5) and a lower surface (element 72, fig. 6), and the upper surface extends radially inclined from the periphery of the flange part to the center (element K, fig. 6; see annotated fig. 6).
Regarding claim 7, Wing discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses:
wherein an angle of a lower edge on each side wall of the support elements with a horizontal axis is between 0° and 45° while extending radially from the periphery of the head part to the center (angle K, fig. 6, defined as 20 degrees, col. 6, line 18).
Regarding claim 8, Wing discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses:
wherein an angle of an upper edge on each side wall of the support elements with a horizontal axis is between 5° and 75° while extending radially from the periphery of the head part to the center (angles L, R, fig. 6, col. 6, line 19 & 24; note, angle L is defined as 15°, where its angle reference to the horizontal axis is 75°, and angle R is defined as 5°, both angles being parts of the upper edge of the side walls of the support elements).
Regarding claim 9, Wing discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses:
wherein an angle between the side walls of any two successive support elements facing each other is between 50° and 105° (see annotated fig. 5; note, the six support elements are equally spaced radially, measuring from the longitudinal axis of two successive support elements, where the side walls are parallel to the longitudinal axes, therefore the angle between their adjacent side walls of the support elements is 60°).
Regarding claim 10, Wing discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses:
wherein at least two of angles between the longitudinal axes of any two successive support elements are equal to each other (see annotated fig. 5).
Regarding claim 11, Wing discloses the limitations of claim 10 and further discloses:
wherein angles between the longitudinal axes of the support elements are equal to each other (see annotated fig. 5).
Regarding claim 19, Wing discloses the limitations of claim 2 and further discloses:
wherein the upper edge and the lower edge of the side wall are axially aligned (element 56, 57, fig. 5; note, fig. 5 shows side walls 56, 57 as being vertical, wherein the upper and lower edges are axially aligned).
Regarding claim 20, Wing discloses the limitations of claim 2 and further discloses:
wherein the upper edge and the lower edge move away from each other while the side wall extends radially from the periphery of the head part towards the center (element L, K, R, 58, 59 fig. 6; see annotated fig. 6; note, “upper edge” defined by elements 58, 59, and angles L, R, departs, or moves away, from the “lower edge” (see annotated fig. 6) in the initial incline of the lower edge and for a portion of the radius of the lower edge).
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wing, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Hannay (US 3575080 A).
Regarding claim 5, Wing teaches the fastener of claim 1, but fails to teach:
wherein a width of each of the support elements gradually decreases from the periphery of the head part towards the center.
Hannay teaches a fastener (element 10, fig. 1) comprising a threaded shaft (element 12, fig. 2), a flange (element 11, 27, fig. 2), a head part (element 11, fig. 2), having support elements (element 16, 17, 18, fig. 1),
wherein a width of each of the support elements gradually decreases from the periphery of the head part towards the center (see annotated fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
646
658
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Hannay teaches multiple advantages for a fastener having a width of each of the support elements which gradually decrease from the periphery of the head part towards the center. These advantages include: the shear areas of the support elements across the fastener and the protrusions of the driver being nearly equal (col. 3, line 29-35); the supports elements of the fastener being of full dimension radially, contributing to improved strength (col. 3, line 37-41); planar and parallel driving faces minimize cam-out forces (col. 3, line 58-60); the distribution of material results in a lightweight and recognizable fastener (col. 3, line 63-68).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the width geometry of the supports elements of the fastener of Hannay into the fastener of Wing to provide an improved fastener. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate an improved fastener for all the benefits taught by Hannay.
Claims 12-14 & 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wing in view of Zhang (TW 201226725 A).
Regarding claim 12, Wing discloses a drive apparatus (element 63, fig. 7) configured to be engaged to a fastener, and comprising:
a head part (element 63, fig. 8) comprising a center (element 68a, fig. 8), a periphery (see annotated fig. 7 below), at least three protrusions (element 65, fig. 7), and at least three slots (element 66, fig. 7), wherein each of the slots are located between two successive protrusions and separate the protrusions from each other (see annotated fig. 7),
wherein a depth (element 66, 69, 70, fig. 8; see annotated fig. 8 below; note, depth defined by vertical portion of flute 66, according to surfaces 69 & 70) of each of the slots, whose longitudinal axes intersect at the center of the head part (see annotated fig. 7), increases while extending radially from the periphery of the head part to the center (element 69, 70, fig. 8; see annotated fig. 8; col. 4, line 10-15; note, depth increases radially inwardly according to angles L & R, as walls 69 & 70 are oppositely inclined from walls 58 & 59), and
side walls (element 67, 68, fig. 7) on both sides of each protrusion and intermediate walls (see annotated fig. 7) connecting these side walls form surfaces in which the drive apparatus is engaged to the fastener for tightening and loosening (col. 3, line 74 – col. 4, line 2) and a torque is transferred from the drive apparatus to the fastener (col. 3, line 53-56).
PNG
media_image4.png
805
821
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
865
714
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Wing fails to teach the drive apparatus comprising:
a holding part,
a neck part
Zhang teaches a drive apparatus (element 200, fig. 1) comprising:
a holding part (element 213, 21, fig. 1),
a neck part (element 211, 21, fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the holding and neck portions of Zhang into the drive apparatus of Wing to provide a complete, functional drive apparatus. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that having a holding part, in the form of a handle or shaft (holding part), and a connection (neck part) to the head part would be useful for operating the device, particularly in providing a grip to apply a torque to drive the fastener.
Regarding claim 13, Wing modified teaches the drive apparatus of claim 12, and further teaches,
wherein the protrusions on the head part extend inclined from the periphery of the head part towards the center (element 65, 69, 70, fig. 8; see annotated fig. 8; col. 3, line 57-63; note, protrusions of the driver having mirror geometry to the grooves of the fastener).
Regarding claim 14, Wing modified teaches the drive apparatus of claim 12, and further teaches,
wherein an angle between the side walls of the protrusions on the head part is between 50° and 105° (see annotated fig. 7; note, the six protrusions and their separating slots are equally spaced radially, measuring from the longitudinal axis of two successive slots, where the side walls are parallel to the longitudinal axes and define the slots, the angle between the adjacent side walls of the protrusions is 60°).
Regarding claim 16, Wing modified teaches the drive apparatus of claim 12, and further teaches,
wherein at least two of angles between the longitudinal axes of the two successive slots are equal to each other (see annotated fig. 7; note the six slots are equally spaced radially, therefore measuring from the longitudinal axis of two successive slots the angle between them is 60°).
Regarding claim 17, Wing modified teaches a combination of a fastener (element 50, fig. 6) and a drive apparatus (element 63, fig. 8), comprising:
the fastener comprising a threaded shaft (element 52, fig. 6), a flange part (element 72, fig. 6) and a first head part (element 53, fig. 6) comprising a first center (element 51, 55, fig. 5), a first periphery (element 71, fig. 5, 6), at least three support elements (element 54, fig. 5) and at least three groove parts (element 61, fig. 5), wherein each of the groove parts are located between two successive support elements and separates the support elements from each other (see annotated fig. 5), and
the drive apparatus comprising a holding part (Wing modified; Zhang element 213, 21, fig. 1), a neck part (Wing modified; Zhang element 211, 21, fig. 1) and a second head part (element 63, fig. 8) comprising a second center (element 68a, fig. 8), a second periphery (see annotated fig. 7), at least three protrusions (element 65, fig. 7), and at least three slots (element 66, fig. 7), to which at least three support elements are engaged when the fastener and the drive element are coupled with (col. 4, line 9-15), wherein each of the slots are located between two successive protrusions and separate the protrusions from each other (see annotated fig. 7);
wherein a height (element 54, 58, 59, fig. 6; note, height defined by vertical portion of support element 54, according to surfaces 58 & 59) of each of the support elements, whose longitudinal axes intersect at the center of the first head part (see annotated fig. 5), increases while extending radially from the periphery of the first head part to the center of the first head part (angles L & R, fig. 6; col. 3, line 57-63; note, height of support elements 54 increases radially inwardly according to angles L & R), and
side walls (element 56, 57, fig. 5) on both sides of each support element and the intermediate walls (element 60, 62, fig. 6) connecting the side walls of the two successive support elements facing each other form surfaces (element 56, 57, fig. 5) in which the drive apparatus is engaged to the fastener for tightening and loosening (col. 3, line 74 – col. 4, line 2) and a torque is transferred to the fastener (col. 3, line 53-56).
Regarding claim 18, Wing modified teaches combination of the fastener and the drive apparatus of claim 17, and further teaches,
wherein a depth (element 66, 69, 70, fig. 8; see annotated fig. 8 below; note, depth defined by vertical portion of flute 66, according to surfaces 69 & 70) of each of the slots in the drive apparatus increases while extending radially from the periphery of the head part towards the center (element 69, 70, fig. 8; see annotated fig. 8; col. 4, line 10-15; note, depth increases radially inwardly according to angles L & R, as walls 69 & 70 are oppositely inclined from walls 58 & 59).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wing in view of Zhang, as applied to claim 12, in further view of Hannay.
Regarding claim 15, Wing as previously modified by Zhang, as applied to claim 12, teaches the limitations of claim 12, but fails to teach:
wherein a width of each of the slots decreases while extending radially from the periphery of the head part to the center.
Hannay teaches a drive apparatus (fig. 3; no ref # given for apparatus) comprising a head part (see annotated fig. 3 below) comprising a center (element 37, fig. 3), a periphery (see annotated fig. 3), at least three protrusions (element 34, 35, 36, fig. 4), and at least three slots (see annotated fig. 3),
PNG
media_image6.png
617
571
media_image6.png
Greyscale
wherein a width of each of the slots decreases while extending radially from the periphery of the head part to the center (see annotated fig. 4 below).
PNG
media_image7.png
484
566
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Hannay teaches numerous benefits of the disclosed fastener support element and drive apparatus protrusion geometries, as previously described. Hannay further teaches “The inclusion of the planar driving faces that intersect the axis of the fastener offers a further advantage. This results in maximum application of torque to the fastener, and the driving force produces the most effective resultant for causing rotation of the fastener” (col. 3, line 46-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the width geometry of the supports elements of the fastener of Hannay into the drive apparatus of Wing modified to provide an improved drive apparatus. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate an improved apparatus for all the benefits taught by Hannay.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kozak et al. (US 20060042429 A1) teaches a 3-point fastener and drive apparatus and the combination of the two. Kozak teaches the use in high-torque applications and the advantages over similar, existing fasteners.
Tsai (US 20110048181 A1) teaches a fastener and drive apparatus and the combination of the two. Tsai teaches lobular grooves arranged radially around the center axis of the fastener and suggests benefits in the fastener design in improved torque transmission and decreased fastener weight.
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