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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 1: Plastic injection in the reply filed on November 20, 2025 is acknowledged. Claims 1-20 are pending and under examination.
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 10-12 and 16-18 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.
As to claims 10, 17 and 18 the claims recite there is a float margin between the body and the first fastening portion. However, the first fastening portion is part of the body as set forth in claim 1. As such, it is not clear where the margin is necessarily located since the first fastening portion is part of the body and there is no distinction between the components. Further, Figure 32 labels (a1) as the corresponding float margin. However, it is not clear how (a1) is a float margin between body (11) and first fastening portion (111) of the body since it is not located between (11) and (111). Appropriate correction and clarification are required.
As to claim 11, the claim recites “the coupler”. The limiting effect of the recitation is unclear. Both claim 1 and claim 11 separately utilize “a coupler”. When the claim later refers to “the coupler”, it is not clear whether the coupler introduced in claim 11 is in view or intended or whether the coupler of claim 1 is in view or intended. Appropriate correction and clarification are required. Further, the claim includes connecting words “and” and “or” between different limitation. It is not clear whether the first wherein limitation is necessarily required in the claim or whether it is only required in connection with the first “and”. It is not clear whether the scope of the claim is met if the last “or” limitation is met by itself. Appropriate correction and clarification are required.
As to claim 12, the claim recites “the coupling counterpart comprises a corresponding anti-rotation portion configured to prevent rotation of the second fastening portion”. The limiting effect of the recitation is unclear. The claims are directed to a method of manufacturing “a handle with a fastening portion”. The second fastening portion of the handle is “configured to be receivingly fastened into, assembled into of fitted with a coupling counterpart”. The claims do not positively require a coupling counterpart. The second fastening portion must merely be capable of being fastened into, assembled into, or fitted with something that is reasonably understood to be a coupling counterpart. By attempting to add structural limitations to the coupling counterpart it is not clear whether the intent is to positively introduce a coupling counterpart into the claims at claim 12 or whether the intent is for a coupling counterpart to be positively required in claim 1 or whether recitation is intended to further define the structure of the second fastening portion in an unclear manner. Appropriate correction and clarification are required.
Additionally, claim 12 recites “position a direction of the second fastening portion or position an assembly position of the second fastening portion and the coupling counterpart”. The limiting effect of the recitation is unclear. It is not clear what positive action is being required by the recitation. It’s not clear if “positioning” is intended or if something else is intended and not set forth in claim. Further, it is not clear whether the claim is intended to require “positioning” of the coupling counterpart, which is not a necessary component related to producing the handle with a fastening portion as claimed. Appropriate correction and clarification are required.
As to claim 16, the claim recites “is a formed integral with the body”. The limiting effect of the recitation is unclear. It is not clear whether the intended recitation is “formed integrally with the body” or whether something else is intended. Further, it is not clear how the second fastening portion and the body are possibly “formed integrally” in this claim and “assembled by a coupler” in claim 1. It’s not clear whether some unclear assembly is in view or whether the claim may fail to further limit the claim from which it depends. Appropriate correction and clarification are required.
For the purposes of examination, the handle with a fastening portion produced by the claimed method must have a structure that is capable of being received into, assembled into or fitted with a coupling counterpart. Limitations directed to the coupling counterpart throughout the claims are only understood to limit the structure of the handle with a fastening portion itself, to the appropriate extent required by the recitations (e.g. the handle with a fastening portion must merely be capable of being received into, assembled into, or fitted with such a coupling counterpart). Said differently, a coupling counterpart is not itself understood to be a structural component positively required in the instant claims. The language of claim 1 is understood to make this positively clear. The recitations in the dependent claims are understood in this light, absent further specificity and clarity.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2003/0198706) in view of either one of Barker (US 5,800,751) or Polosky (US 2004/0178537).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches a manufacturing method of a handle with a fastening portion, the handle comprising a body/handle (Figures 3, 6 and 7 (300)) and a second fastening portion/connecting member (200); the body comprising a first fastening portion (Figures 6 and 7 (the left end of (300) and/or insertion groove (310)); the second fastening portion/connecting member (200) being provided at the body and configured to be receivingly fastened into, assembled into or fitted with a coupling counterpart (Figures 6 and 7 components (210) & (211) of scoop (100)); wherein the first fastening portion is assembled or connected to the second fastening portion (Figure 7); wherein the body is formed in a mold by plastic injection (paragraphs [0028]-[0032]), wherein the body (300) and the second fastening portion (200) are assembled by a coupler/pin (460); wherein the body comprises an inserted portion/pin hole (320), and the coupler/pin (460) passes through the inserted portion/pin hole (320) so as to assemble the body (300) and the second fastening portion (200) (Figures 6 and 7).
Kim teaches the body is formed by plastic injection molding, but do not positively recite the molding takes place in a mold comprising a flow channel so that liquid plastic passes through the flow channel, enters the mold and is cured to form the body and wherein the inserted portion of the body is formed in the mold by plastic or metal injection, and the mold comprises the flow channel and a limiting portion so that liquid plastic or metal passes through the flow channel, enters the mold, evades the limiting portion to become cured to form the inserted portion of the body.
However, each of Barker (col. 2, line 57-col. 3, line 37; Figure 1 (12) (78); Figure 4 (40) (76)) and Polosky (paragraphs [0032] and [0043]-[0049]; Figures 3A and 3B (260)) teach an analogous injection molding method wherein the molding comprises flowing liquid/molten/melted plastic through a flow channel which enters the mold and is cured to form the body/article and wherein, for the production of an inserted portion/hole/aperture/opening/recess in the article/body, a limiting portion (e.g. a section blocked off by a core pin) is provided in the mold so that the liquid plastic, while still passing through the flow channel and entering the mold, evades the limiting portion to become cured and form the inserted portion/hole/aperture/opening/recess of the body.
Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Kim and either one of Barker or Polosky and to have utilized injection molding steps as claimed in the method of Kim, as suggested by either one of Barker or Polosky, for the purpose, as suggested by the references, of effectively injection molding the handle of Kim in an art recognized suitable and conventional manner. The combination teaches and suggests each and every limitation of the claimed invention. It is further noted that the injection molding limitations related to flowing liquid polymer material through flow channels substantially correspond to the definition of a conventional polymer injection molding process. Further, utilizing something that reads upon “a limiting portion” in the mold to produce something that reads upon an “inserted portion” (e.g. hole/opening/recess/aperture) is also well-established in the injection molding art.
As to claim 2, Kim discloses a fixing connection portion in addition to a first fastening portion under a reasonable interpretation (Figures 6 and 7 (the left end of (300) and/or insertion groove (310)).
As to claims 3 and 4, Kim discloses the second fastening portion/connecting portion (200) comprises a neck portion as claimed and that is capable of being pressed as claimed (Figures 6 and 7 left end of (220) with (211) & (210)). The application of an external force can further press a shoulder on the body (Figure 7 assembly).
As to claims 5 and 6, the second fasting portion/connection portion (200) of Kim includes a neck that having a structure formed as claimed and that has a surface and structure as claimed (Figures 3, 6 and 7; paragraphs [0027]-[0030], [0034]).
As to claim 7, the handle of Kim is capable of being connected to and is also connected to a coupling counterpart as set forth above. Whatever means by which the coupling is performed (even if it is by a human hand), as suggested in paragraphs [0028]-[0030], is understood to be, or render prima facie obvious, a tool.
As to claim 8, the first fastening portion of Kim is assembled with the body (Figure 6 (300) with left end of 300 and/or groove (310)).
As to claim 9, Kim discloses a second fastening portion that comprises an interference portion capable of interfering with or blocking a coupling counterpart (Figures 6 and 7 (200) (220) (210) (2110).
As to claim 10, Kim discloses sliding the end of (200) into handle (300) and inserting pin (460) into handle. To the extent required, and in view of the section 112b rejection, this is understood to be a float margin.
As to claim 11, Kim discloses coupler/pin (460) is inserted into opening (320). To the extent required, and in view of the section 112b rejection, this is understood to be a float margin.
As to claim 12, the second fastening portion/connector (200) is understood to comprise an anti-rotation portion to the extent required (Figures 6 and 7 (210) (211) (220) (221); Figure 3).
As to claim 13, Kim applies a solder/welded layer on the downstream end of the second fastening portion at the location is to be connected to the corresponding counterpart (paragraph [0029]). The claim is not understood to be structurally limited to a process that further includes attaching the handle to a printed circuit board absent further specificity.
As to claim 14, Kim teaches a second fastening portion that is capable of coupling with the counterpart as claimed (Figures 6 and 7).
As to claim 15, Kim discloses a fixing connection portion in addition to a first fastening portion under a reasonable interpretation (Figures 6 and 7 (the left end of (300) and/or insertion groove (310)) and it is understood to be configured as claimed to not rotate (Figures 3, 6 and 7).
As to claim 16, Kim discloses the second fastening portion is movably assembled with the body (Figures 6 and 7).
As to claims 17-20, Kim discloses sliding the end of (200) into handle (300) and inserting coupler/pin (460) is inserted into opening (320). To the extent required, and in view of the section 112b rejection of claims 17 and 18, this is understood to provide a float margin as required.
Claims 10, 11, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2003/0198706) in view of either one of Barker (US 5,800,751) or Polosky (US 2004/0178537), as applied to claims 1-20 above, and further in view of Bowers (US 5,531,551) and/or Radigan (US 3,792,735). Note: this is an alternative rejection of claims 10, 11 and 17-20.
As to claims 10, 11, and 17-20, the combination teaches and suggests the method set forth above. Alternatively, to the extent an explicit margin is not taught in Kim each of Barker (Figure 3 – see the small gap between the components) and Radigan (Figure 2; col. 3, lines 1-4) disclose analogous handles/levers and pinned connections wherein an explicit margin as claimed is utilized.
Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Kim with Bowers and/or Radigan to have included margins as claimed in the method of Kim, as suggested by Bowers and/or Radigan, for the purpose, as suggested by the references of facilitating rapid changing of the pin, as may be required, and that allows for less accurate production tolerances between the components.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following prior art references are understood to disclose applicable methods of producing a handle with a fastening portion by plastic injection molding and which could be used alternatively to the teaching of Kim set forth above: Porche (US 10,131,499; Figure 22); Howson (US 2017/0065480; Figures 1B and 1C; paragraphs [0023] and [0025]); Beckerman et al. (US 2016/0296003; Figure 2; paragraphs [0025], [0058], [0065], [0066] (301) (302) (303)); Choong et al. (US 8,998,913; Figures 1-8); Kuhlen (US 6,223,384; Figures 4 and 7); Dreith (US 5,942,261; Figure 6); Doolittle (US 5,881,605; Figures 2-4).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeff Wollschlager whose telephone number is (571)272-8937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-3:30.
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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1176. 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.
/JEFFREY M WOLLSCHLAGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742