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 .
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 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.
Status of Claims
Below is the Final Action on the merits for claims 1, 4 – 6, 8 – 11, 15 and 21 – 22. Claims 16 – 20 are withdrawn from consideration. Claims 2 – 3, 7 and 12 – 14 are cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 29 – 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lau et al. (U. S. D767,340 S).
Regarding Independent Claim 29, Lau teaches a multi-purpose tool (Fig. 1) for vehicles (The recitation in the preamble of the intended use – for vehicles, does not define the structure of the prior art), the multi-purpose tool consisting of: a body portion (Annotated Fig. 1) being substantially planar and having a front surface (Annotated Fig. 1) and a back surface (Annotated Fig. 1), the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1) having a perimeter (Annotated Fig. 1) defined by at least four outer edges (Annotated Fig. 1); an outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 1) extending from each outer edge of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1) and away from the back surface (Annotated Fig. 1) of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1), wherein an entirety of the outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 1) comprises a free end surface (Annotated Fig. 1) spaced from the back surface (Annotated Fig. 1) of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1), wherein the free end surface (Annotated Fig. 1) is parallel to the front surface (Annotated Fig. 1) of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1), and wherein the back surface (Annotated Fig. 1) of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1) and the outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 1) define a cavity (Annotated Fig. 1); and a first handle portion (Annotated Fig. 1) integrated with the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1) and configured to accommodate a user's hand for gripping (Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
382
930
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 30, Lau teaches the multi-purpose tool (Fig. 1) wherein the outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 1) extends from the entire perimeter of the body portion.
Regarding Claim 31, Lau teaches the multi-purpose tool (Fig. 1) wherein all portions of the free end surface (Annotated Fig. 1) are coplanar with one another (Annotated Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 32, Lau teaches the multi-purpose tool (Fig. 1) wherein a portion of the free end surface (Annotated Fig. 1) of the outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 1) extending from a first outer edge of the at least four outer edges (Annotated Fig. 1) is coplanar with portions of the free end surface (Annotated Fig. 1) of the outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 1) extending from each of the remaining edges of the at least four outer edges (Annotated Fig. 1).
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, 4 – 6, 8 – 11 and 21 – 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jenkins et al. (U. S. Patent No. 5,056,245) in view of Lau et al. (U. S. D767,340 S).
PNG
media_image2.png
406
753
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Jenkins teaches a multi-purpose tool for vehicles (device, 10; Fig. 1), the multi-purpose tool comprising: a body portion (Annotated Fig. 2) having a front surface (Annotated Fig. 2 ) and a back surface (opposite of the front surface as shown in Annotated Fig. 2); an outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 2) extending around a periphery of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 2) and extending away from the back surface (Annotated Fig. 2) of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 2) in an extension direction, the back surface (Annotated Fig. 2) of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 2) and the outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 2) defining a cavity (Annotated Fig. 2); and a first handle portion (openings, 22 and 24) integrated with the body portion (Annotated Fig. 2) and configured to accommodate a user’s hand for gripping (Fig. 2).
Jenkins does not teach a body portion being substantially planar; the body portion having a perimeter defined by at a first outer edge, a second outer edge, a third outer edge and a fourth outer edge, an outer edge portion extending from each outer edge of the body portion and away from the back surface of the body portion, wherein an entirety of the outer edge portion comprises a free end surface spaced from the back surface of the body portion, wherein the free end surface is parallel to the front surface of the body portion; wherein a portion of the free end surface of the outer edge portion extending from the first outer edge is coplanar with portions of the free end surface of the outer edge portion extending from each of the second, third, and fourth outer edges.
Lau, however teaches a body portion (Annotated Fig. 1) being substantially planar (Annotated Fig. 1); the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1) having a perimeter defined by at a first outer edge (Annotated Fig. 1), a second outer edge (Annotated Fig. 1), a third outer edge (Annotated Fig. 1) and a fourth outer edge (Annotated Fig. 1), an outer edge portion extending from each outer edge of the body portion and away from the back surface of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1), wherein an entirety of the outer edge portion comprises a free end surface spaced from the back surface of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1), wherein the free end surface is parallel to the front surface of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1); wherein a portion of the free end surface (Annotated Fig. 1) of the outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 1) extending from the first outer edge (Annotated Fig. 1) is coplanar with portions of the free end surface of the outer edge portion extending from each of the second (Annotated Fig. 1), third (Annotated Fig. 1), and fourth outer edges (Annotated Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image3.png
382
916
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Jenkins to further include a body portion being substantially planar; the body portion having a perimeter defined by at a first outer edge, a second outer edge, a third outer edge and a fourth outer edge, an outer edge portion extending from each outer edge of the body portion and away from the back surface of the body portion, wherein an entirety of the outer edge portion comprises a free end surface spaced from the back surface of the body portion, wherein the free end surface is parallel to the front surface of the body portion; wherein a portion of the free end surface of the outer edge portion extending from the first outer edge is coplanar with portions of the free end surface of the outer edge portion extending from each of the second, third, and fourth outer edges, as taught by Lau, to provide a tool were strength is added to the supporting area, thus preventing the tool from being destroyed under extreme pressures.
Regarding Claim 4, Jenkins, as modified, teaches the multi-purpose tool for vehicles (device, 10; Fig. 1) wherein the first handle portion (22 or 24) comprises finger notches configured to accommodate fingers of a user's hand for gripping (Fig. 2; the opening forms notches for a user to place their fingers for use).
Regarding Claims 5 and 15, Jenkins, as modified, teaches the multi-purpose tool for vehicles of claims 4 and 11, as discussed above.
Jenkins further teaches a thumb resting area as shown in Fig. 1 but fails to explicitly teach multi- the outer edge portion comprises a thumb notch that extends inward towards an inner area of the body the first handle portion and that is configured to accommodate a thumb of the user's hand when gripping the first handle portion.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Jenkins to further include a thumb notch that extends inward towards the first handle portion, as claimed, to provide a tool were a user has agronomical comfort, thus alleviating injury during use.
It would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Jenkins to include a thumb notch that extends inward towards the first handle portion, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size/shape of a component. A change in size/shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 6, Jenkins, as modified, teaches the multi-purpose tool for vehicles (device, 10; Fig. 1) wherein the outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 2) comprises a scraping region (26) extending along an outer edge of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 2) that is opposite to the first handle portion (22 or 24), wherein the scraping region (12) of the outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 2) comprises a rounded corner (Figs. 1 and 2) such that the scraping region (26) is concave with respect to the cavity (Figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding Claim 7, Jenkins, as modified, teaches the multi-purpose tool for vehicles (device, 10; Fig. 1) wherein the outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 2) comprises a scraping region (26) extending along an outer edge of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 2) that is opposite to the first handle portion (22 or 24), and wherein the scraping region (26) has a wedge-like profile (Fig. 1) configured to chisel ice away from a surface and/or configured to squeegee a material from a surface (Col. 2, lines 57 – 60).
Regarding Claim 8, Jenkins, as modified, teaches the multi-purpose tool for vehicles (device, 10; Fig. 1) further comprising a second handle portion (24) laterally spaced from the first handle portion (22), and wherein the first and second handle portions (22 and 24) are arranged opposite to a first outer edge of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 9, Jenkins, as modified, teaches the multi-purpose tool for vehicles of claim 8, as discussed above.
Jenkins does not teach a third handle portion arranged opposite to a second outer edge of the body portion, wherein the second outer edge is shorter than the first outer edge, and wherein the second outer edge abuts the first outer edge.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Jenkins to further include a third handle portion arranged opposite to a second outer edge of the body portion, wherein the second outer edge is shorter than the first outer edge, and wherein the second outer edge abuts the first outer edge, as claimed, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.06).
Regarding Independent Claim 11, Jenkins teaches a multi-purpose tool for vehicles (device, 10; Fig. 1) the multi-purpose tool comprising: a body portion (Annotated Fig. 1) having a front surface (Annotated Fig. 1) and a back surface (opposite the front surface as shown in Annotated Fig. 2); an outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 1) extending around a periphery of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1) and extending away from the back surface of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1), wherein the back surface of the body portion and the outer edge portion define a cavity (Annotated Fig. 1), wherein the outer edge portion comprises a gripping side configured to accommodate a user's hand (Fig. 1), and wherein the outer edge portion comprises a scraping side (26) arranged opposite to the gripping side (Figs. 1 and 2).
Jenkins does not teach a body portion being substantially planar; the body portion having a perimeter defined by at a first outer edge, a second outer edge, a third outer edge and a fourth outer edge, an outer edge portion extending from each outer edge of the body portion and away from the back surface of the body portion, wherein an entirety of the outer edge portion comprises a free end surface spaced from the back surface of the body portion, wherein the free end surface is parallel to the front surface of the body portion; wherein a portion of the free end surface of the outer edge portion extending from the first outer edge is coplanar with portions of the free end surface of the outer edge portion extending from each of the second, third, and fourth outer edges.
Lau, however teaches a body portion (Annotated Fig. 1) being substantially planar (Annotated Fig. 1); the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1) having a perimeter defined by at a first outer edge (Annotated Fig. 1), a second outer edge (Annotated Fig. 1), a third outer edge (Annotated Fig. 1) and a fourth outer edge (Annotated Fig. 1), an outer edge portion extending from each outer edge of the body portion and away from the back surface of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1), wherein an entirety of the outer edge portion comprises a free end surface spaced from the back surface of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1), wherein the free end surface is parallel to the front surface of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1); wherein a portion of the free end surface (Annotated Fig. 1) of the outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 1) extending from the first outer edge (Annotated Fig. 1) is coplanar with portions of the free end surface of the outer edge portion extending from each of the second (Annotated Fig. 1), third (Annotated Fig. 1), and fourth outer edges (Annotated Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Jenkins to further include a body portion being substantially planar; the body portion having a perimeter defined by at a first outer edge, a second outer edge, a third outer edge and a fourth outer edge, an outer edge portion extending from each outer edge of the body portion and away from the back surface of the body portion, wherein an entirety of the outer edge portion comprises a free end surface spaced from the back surface of the body portion, wherein the free end surface is parallel to the front surface of the body portion; wherein a portion of the free end surface of the outer edge portion extending from the first outer edge is coplanar with portions of the free end surface of the outer edge portion extending from each of the second, third, and fourth outer edges, as taught by Lau, to provide a tool were strength is added to the supporting area, thus preventing the tool from being destroyed under extreme pressures.
Regarding Claim 12, Jenkins, as modified, teaches the multi-purpose tool for vehicles of claim 11, as discussed above.
Jenkins further teaches finger notches as shown in Figure 1 but fails to explicitly teach finger notches extending inward toward the opening and configured to receive fingers of a user's hand for gripping.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Jenkins to further include finger notches extending inward toward the opening and configured to receive fingers of a user's hand for gripping, as claimed, to provide a tool were a user has agronomical comfort, thus alleviating injury during use.
It would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Jenkins to include finger notches extending inward toward the opening and configured to receive fingers of a user's hand for gripping, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size/shape of a component. A change in size/shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 13, Jenkins, as modified, teaches the multi-purpose tool for vehicles (device, 10; Fig. 1) wherein the scraping side (26) meets the back surface of the body portion at an obtuse angle (Figs. 3 and 5).
Regarding Claim 22, Jenkins, as modified, teaches the multi-purpose tool for vehicles of claim 1 as discussed above.
Jenkins does not teach wherein the outer edge portion extends away from the back surface of the body portion in an extension direction, the extension direction being perpendicular to the back surface of the body portion, the outer edge portion extending away from the back surface such that the outer edge portion has an upper region adjacent to the back surface of the body portion and a lower region arranged below the upper region, wherein the entirety of the lower region of the outer edge portion extends in the extension direction.
Lau, however, teaches the outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 1) extends away from the back surface of the body portion in an extension direction (Annotated Fig. 1), the extension direction being perpendicular to the back surface of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1), the outer edge portion extending away from the back surface such that the outer edge portion has an upper region adjacent to the back surface of the body portion and a lower region arranged below the upper region (Annotated Fig. 1), wherein the entirety of the lower region of the outer edge portion extends in the extension direction (Annotated Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Jenkins to further include the outer edge portion extends away from the back surface of the body portion in an extension direction, the extension direction being perpendicular to the back surface of the body portion, the outer edge portion extending away from the back surface such that the outer edge portion has an upper region adjacent to the back surface of the body portion and a lower region arranged below the upper region, wherein the entirety of the lower region of the outer edge portion extends in the extension direction, as taught by Engler, to provide a tool were strength is added to the supporting area, thus preventing the tool from being destroyed under extreme pressures.
Regarding Claim 23, Jenkins, as modified, teaches the multi-purpose tool for vehicles of claim 22 as discussed above.
Jenkins does not teach wherein the upper region of the outer edge portion is curved.
It would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Jenkins to include the upper region of the outer edge portion is curved, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size/shape of a component. A change in size/shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 24, Jenkins, as modified, teaches the multi-purpose tool for vehicles of claim 11 as discussed above.
Jenkins, as modified, does not teach wherein the length of the scraping side of the outer edge portion is greater than or equal to each length of remaining sides of the outer edge portion.
It would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Jenkins to include the length of the scraping side of the outer edge portion is greater than or equal to each length of remaining sides of the outer edge portion, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size/shape of a component. A change in size/shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 25, Jenkins, as modified, teaches the multi-purpose tool for vehicles of claim 11 as discussed above.
Jenkins does not explicitly teach wherein the outer edge portion extends away from the back surface of the body portion in a direction perpendicular to the back surface of the body portion.
Lau, however, teaches wherein the outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 1) extends away from the back surface of the body portion in a direction perpendicular to the back surface of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1).
It would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Jenkins to include the outer edge portion extends away from the back surface of the body portion in a direction perpendicular to the back surface of the body portion, as taught by Lau, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size/shape of a component. A change in size/shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 26, Jenkins, as modified, teaches the multi-purpose tool for vehicles of claim 11 as discussed above.
Jenkins, as modified, does not explicitly teach wherein the outer edge portion comprises an outermost sidewall, wherein the outermost sidewall is perpendicular to the front surface of the body portion.
Lau, however, teaches the outer edge portion (Annotated Fig. 1) comprises an outermost sidewall (Annotated Fig. 1), wherein the outermost sidewall (Annotated Fig. 1) is perpendicular to the front surface of the body portion (Annotated Fig. 1).
It would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Jenkins to the outer edge portion comprises an outermost sidewall, wherein the outermost sidewall is perpendicular to the front surface of the body portion, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size/shape of a component. A change in size/shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claims 27 and 28, Jenkins, as modified, teaches the multi-purpose tool for vehicles of claims 1 and 11 as discussed above.
Jenkins, as modified, does not explicitly teach wherein all portions of the free end surface are coplanar with one another.
Lau, however, teaches wherein all portions of the free end surface (Annotated Fig. 1) are coplanar with one another (Annotated Fig. 1).
It would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Jenkins to further include wherein all portions of the free end surface are coplanar with one another, as taught by Lau, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size/shape of a component. A change in size/shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Claim 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jenkins et al. (U. S. Patent No. 5,056,245) in view of Engler et al. (US D1,041,605 S) and JP3048620 U as cited by Applicant herein referred to as JP304.
Regarding Claim 10, Jenkins teaches the multi-purpose tool for vehicles of claim 1, as discussed above.
Jenkins does not teach a barrier structure coupled to the body portion at the first handle portion, wherein the barrier structure comprises a first piece and a second piece, wherein the first piece and second piece are configured to close the opening of the first handle portion when the barrier structure is in a first configuration, and wherein the first piece and the second piece are configured to provide passageway through the opening of the first handle portion when the barrier structure is in a second configuration.
JP304, however, teaches wherein the first handle portion is defined by an opening in the body portion (5) and comprises a barrier structure (Fig. 3) coupled to the body portion (5) at the first handle portion (1), wherein the barrier structure (Fig. 3) comprises a first piece (3) and a second piece (13), wherein the first piece (3) and second piece (13) are configured to close the opening of the first handle portion when the barrier structure is in a first configuration (Fig. 2), and wherein the first piece (3) and the second piece (13) are configured to provide passageway through the opening of the first handle portion (Fig. 1) when the barrier structure is in a second configuration (Fig. 1; Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Jenkins to a barrier structure coupled to the body portion at the first handle portion, wherein the barrier structure comprises a first piece and a second piece, wherein the first piece and second piece are configured to close the opening of the first handle portion when the barrier structure is in a first configuration, and wherein the first piece and the second piece are configured to provide passageway through the opening of the first handle portion when the barrier structure is in a second configuration., as taught by JP304, to provide a tool were a user’s hand is protected in use, thus alleviating injury during use.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicants Arguments/Remarks dated November 25, 2025 with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 4 – 6, 8 – 11, 15 and 21 – 26 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Lau.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATINA N HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8024. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday; 5:30am to 3:30pm.
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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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.
/KATINA N. HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723