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 with traverse of Group I (Claims 1-10) in the reply filed on 2/24/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is a substantial overlap between claims 1 and 11. This is not found persuasive because claim 11 requires an additional search/consideration with respect to additional limitations such as a plurality of first apertures in a tooling plate and a plurality of adjustable bushing assemblies.
Claims 11-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (U.S. Patent No. 2,857,790) in view of Perlin (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2015/0336181).
Regarding Claim 1, Lee teaches a drill template comprising:
a tooling plate (Fig. 1, 13) having a first side (Fig. 1, an upper side of the tooling plate (13)), an opposite second side (Fig. 1, a lower side of the tooling plate (13)), and a plate thickness (Fig. 1, a thickness of the tooling plate (13)) between the first and second sides, wherein the tooling plate defines a first aperture (Fig. 1, 12) extending through the plate thickness along a first axis (Fig. 1, a vertical axis through a center of the aperture (12)), and wherein the first axis is perpendicular to each of the first and second sides; and
an adjustable bushing assembly (see Fig. 4) including:
an outer eccentric element (Fig. 1, 11) arranged rotatably inside the first aperture (Fig. 1, 12) and defining a second aperture (Fig. 4, 17) disposed along a second axis (Fig. 4, a vertical axis through a center of the second aperture (17)), wherein the second axis is parallel to and is spaced apart from the first axis (Due to the eccentrically placed second aperture, the second axis would be offset from the first axis);
an inner eccentric element (Fig. 1, 10) arranged rotatably inside the second aperture (Fig. 4, 17) and defining a third aperture (Fig. 4, 15) disposed along a third axis (Fig. 4, a vertical axis through a center of the third aperture (15)), wherein the third axis is parallel to and is spaced apart from each of the first and second axes (Due to the eccentrically placed third aperture, the third axis would be offset from the first and second axes);
a drill bushing (Fig. 1, 14) arranged inside the third aperture (Fig. 4, 15) and defining a fourth aperture (Fig. 1, a hole inside the bushing 14) disposed along a fourth axis (Fig. 1, a vertical axis through a center of the fourth aperture); and
a fastener (Fig. 1, 23) configured to set the drill bushing (Fig. 1, 14) in position relative to the first and second sides of the tooling plate for guiding a drill bit via the fourth aperture (Fig. 1, a hole inside the bushing 14) (Col. 4, lines 24-39).
Lee does not explicitly teach wherein the drill bushing is configured to swivel relative to the inner eccentric element to orient the fourth aperture relative to the first and second sides of the tooling plate; and a system of fasteners.
Perlin teaches the drill bushing (Fig. 5, 46 & 50) configured to swivel relative to the inner eccentric element (Fig. 5, 40 & 54) to orient the fourth aperture (Fig. 5, a hole inside the bushing 46) relative to the first and second sides of the tooling plate (Fig. 3, 24); and
a system of fasteners (Fig. 52) configured to set the drill bushing (Fig. 5, 46 & 50 in position relative to the first and second sides of the tooling plate (Fig. 3, 24) for guiding a rod (Fig. 5, 48) via the fourth aperture (Fig. 5, a hole inside the bushing 46) ([0065]-[0067]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the inner eccentric element (10) of Lee to accommodate a ball joint bushing (46 & 50) and fasteners (52) of Perlin in order to allow for a rotational adjustment of the bushing as suggested in Perlin [0062].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 20 is allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter for claims 2-10 and allowance for claim 20: None of the references of record teach “an eccentric lock fastener” and “at least one busing assembly lock fastener” in combination with remaining limitations in claims 1 and 20.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUN S YOO whose telephone number is (571)270-7141. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM.
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, SUNIL SINGH can be reached at (571) 272-3460. 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.
/JUN S YOO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726 4/29/2026
Prosecution Insights