Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/340,668

TOOL BIT RETAINER WITH DEFORMABLE RING

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 23, 2023
Examiner
SNYDER, ALAN W
Art Unit
3722
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
561 granted / 679 resolved
+12.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
715
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
50.5%
+10.5% vs TC avg
§102
27.4%
-12.6% vs TC avg
§112
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 679 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 Group I, claims 1-11 in the reply filed on 01/12/2026 is acknowledged. As a note, Applicant amended claim 12 in an attempt to overcome the combination-subcombination restriction requirement. However, the same relationship still exists, with the combination (claim 1) not requiring the particulars of the subcombination (claim 12) such as the claimed inner diameter relationship with the outer surface of the drive end portion of the output shaft, deformable wing(s) and ball detent seat(s) as claimed. Accordingly, the restriction requirement is still proper, and the additional claims will not be rejoined at this time, until they require all limitations of an allowed claim. 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 1, 5-6 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sasaki et al. (US 7654779, hereinafter ‘Sasaki’). 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, 5-6 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaki et al. (US 7654779, hereinafter ‘Sasaki’). Regarding claims 1 and 5, Sasaki discloses a tool 100 comprising a housing 103, an electric motor 121 positioned in the housing, a drive assembly including an output shaft 115 having a driving end portion, the output shaft extending away from the housing and including a drive bore 133 configured such that a tool element for performing work on a workpiece is attachable to the output shaft by inserting the tool element into the drive bore (e.g. Fig. 15). A retainer assembly including a collar 239 is positioned about an outer surface of the driving end portion and a deformable retainer ring 247, the deformable retainer ring being positioned between the output shaft and the collar (see e.g. Fig. 14). While Sasaki discloses the ring-like elastic member being elastically deformed by the relatively light pressure of a user inserting a tool into the drive bore (Col. 10, Line 46 – Col. 11, Line 22), Sasaki is silent as to the material used in the elastic ring (i.e. an O-ring). However, Examiner takes Official Notice that one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing would have found it obvious to use rubber as a suitable material to make an elastically-deformable ring from, as rubber O-rings are a common occurrence in the art in various uses. Regarding claim 6, Sasaki discloses the output shaft being an anvil including a body rotatable about a longitudinal axis. Regarding claim 10, Sasaki discloses the collar 239 being movable along the longitudinal axis of the tool (see e.g. Figs. 19A – 19B). Regarding claim 11, Sasaki discloses the tool being an impact driver, and the drive assembly being configured to convert a continuous rotational input from the electric motor into intermittent applications of torque to the output shaft, the drive assembly including a camshaft 112 driven by the electric motor, and a hammer 114 configured to reciprocate along the camshaft. Claims 2-4, 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaki et al. (US 7654779) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Braun et al. (US 20100176561, hereinafter ‘Braun’). Regarding claims 2-4, 7 and 9, Sasaki does not disclose any additional details of the elastic ring, other than it is ring-shaped. Braun discloses a similar tool, wherein a deformable elastic ring 340 is provided, said ring including a plurality of deformable wings 346, each having a ball detent seat (the end thereof) and being associated with a respective one of a plurality of ball detents 32 received on the seat. A slot 60/62 is formed into the drive bore, wherein the deformable wing and ball detent extend into the drive bore in an undeformed state of the deformable retainer ring, and wherein the deformable wing deflects to permit the ball detent to move out of the drive bore and into the slot when the deformable wing of the deformable retainer ring is in a deformed state in response to insertion of the tool element 14 into the drive bore. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the deformable wing(s) corresponding to the ball detent(s) taught by Braun to the tool of Sasaki, in order to reduce overall wear to the deformable retainer ring by focusing the elastic deformation on the deformable wing(s) (Paragraph [0046] of Braun). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alan Snyder whose telephone number is (571)272-4603. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 7:00a - 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, Sunil K 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. /Alan Snyder/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 23, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583036
Conduit Reamer
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576453
MACHINING SYSTEM AND CUTTING INSERT AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569953
CONTROL DEVICE AND CONTROL METHOD FOR MACHINE TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12544838
CUTTING ELEMENT AND THE USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12539544
BORING TOOL AND CUTTING INSERT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+10.9%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 679 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month