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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-3 and 5-6 have been amended. Therefore, claims 1-8 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendment to the Claims have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed September 23, 2025.
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(s) 1-4 and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu (US20030198532A1), hereinafter "Hsu", in view of Omoto (JPS61211510A), hereinafter "Omoto".
Regarding claim 1, Hsu teaches a screw (Fig 1, screw 1) comprising a shank (Fig 1, portion 12) having opposite first (see Fig 1, Paragraph 0018, Examiner notes an end opposite of a front end portion tapering towards a pointed front end as having an opposite first end) and second ends (see Fig 1, Paragraph 0018, Examiner notes an end of the front end portion tapering towards the pointed front end as a second end), a head (see Fig 1, Examiner notes a head of screw 1 as a head) disposed (see Fig 1) at said first end (see Fig 1), a drill section (see Fig 1, Paragraph 0018, Examiner notes the front end portion tapering towards the pointed front end as a drill section) disposed (see Fig 1) at said second end (see Fig 1), and a threaded section (see Fig 1, Examiner notes a section of portion 12 having thread 11 as a threaded section) including a plurality of thread convolutions (Fig 1, thread 11) disposed (see Fig 1) between said first end (see Fig 1) and said second end (see Fig 1) in a spiral direction (see Fig 1), each of said plurality of thread convolutions (11) having an upper thread flank (see Fig 1, Examiner notes flanks of thread 11 facing the head as having an upper thread flank) facing (see Fig 1) said head (see Fig 1) and a lower thread flank (see Fig 1, Examiner notes flanks of thread 11 facing the front end portion tapering towards the pointed front end head as a lower thread flank) facing (see Fig 1) said drill section (see Fig 1);
wherein said shank (12) defines a surface portion (see Fig 1, Examiner notes a surface of portion 12 as defines a surface portion) exposed (see Fig 1) to an outside (see Fig 1) when adjacent (see Fig 1) thread convolutions (11) are axially spaced apart (see Fig 1) in an axial direction (see Fig 1), and
wherein said surface portion (see Fig 1) is configured with a slot region (see Fig 1, Examiner notes a region of portion 12 having trenches 13 as a slot region) shaped in a form of depressions (see Fig 4) recessedly (see Fig 4) formed in said surface portion (see Fig 1) between adjacent (see Fig 1) thread convolutions (11), said slot region (see Fig 1) including a plurality of slots (Fig 1, trenches 13) recessedly (see Fig 4) formed in said surface portion (see Fig 1) and arranged (see Fig 1) along said spiral direction (see Fig 1), said slot region (see Fig 1) being situated (see Fig 1) between said lower thread flank (see Fig 1) of another one (see Fig 1) of said adjacent (see Fig 1) thread convolutions (11), with said plurality of slots (13) of said slot region (see Fig 1) extending (see Fig 1) from said lower thread flank (see Fig 1) in said axial direction (see Fig 1).
Hsu fails to teach wherein said surface portion is configured with a groove, said groove extending annularly in said spiral direction of said threaded section and situated between said upper thread flank of one of said adjacent thread convolutions and said slot region, said slot region being situated between said groove and said lower thread flank of another one of said adjacent thread convolutions, with said plurality of slots of said slot region extending from said lower thread flank to said groove, thereby allowing said plurality of slots to communicate with said groove.
However, Omoto teaches it is known to provide wherein said surface portion (Fig 2, portion 5) is configured with a groove (Fig 2, groove 7), said groove (7) extending (see Fig 2) annularly in said spiral direction (see Fig 2) of said threaded section (Fig 2, portion 2) and situated (see Fig 2) between said upper thread flank (Fig 1, side 10) of one (see Fig 2) of said adjacent (see Fig 2) thread convolutions (Fig 2, thread 3).
Therefore, as evidenced by Omoto, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine wherein said surface portion is configured with a groove, said groove extending annularly in said spiral direction of said threaded section and situated between said upper thread flank of one of said adjacent thread convolutions as taught by Omoto to Hsu. The rationale for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is to facilitate improving frictional resistance resulting in preventing loosening (Omoto, Pg 6, Col 2, line 13 - Pg 7, Col 1, line 20).
Accordingly, Hsu, in view of Omoto teaches said groove (7) extending (Omoto, see Fig 2) annularly in said spiral direction (see Fig 1) of said threaded section (see Fig 1) and situated (Omoto, see Fig 2) between said upper thread flank (see Fig 1) of one (see Fig 1) of said adjacent (see Fig 1) thread convolutions (11) and said slot region (see Fig 1), said slot region (see Fig 1) being situated (see Fig 1) between said groove (7) and said lower thread flank (see Fig 1) of another one (see Fig 1) of said adjacent (see Fig 1) thread convolutions (11), with said plurality of slots (13) of said slot region (see Fig 1) extending (see Fig 1) from said lower thread flank (see Fig 1) to said groove (7), thereby allowing said plurality of slots (13) to communicate with said groove (7).
Regarding claim 2, modified Hsu teaches the screw (1) according to claim 1 and further teaches wherein said groove (7) extends (Omoto, see Fig 2) between some (Omoto, see Fig 2) of said thread convolutions (11).
Regarding claim 3, modified Hsu teaches the screw (1) according to claim 1 and further teaches wherein said slot region (see Fig 1) is arranged (see Fig 1) between some (see Fig 1) of said thread convolutions (11).
Regarding claim 4, modified Hsu teaches the screw (1) according to claim 1 but fails to teach wherein a maximum depth of each of said plurality of slots is different from a maximum depth of said groove.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have modified a maximum depth of each of said plurality of slots as disclosed by modified Hsu to be different from a maximum depth of said groove, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being with the level or ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(A). The rationale for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is to provide respective depths based on application and use requirements, e.g. facilitating use in differing materials such as composition, depth, etc.
Regarding claim 6, modified Hsu teaches the screw (1) according to claim 1 and further teaches wherein said shank (12) defines a central axis (see Fig 1), and wherein an extension (see Fig 1) of said plurality of slots (13) is inclined (see Fig 1) to said central axis (see Fig 1) of said shank (see Fig 1).
Regarding claim 7, modified Hsu teaches the screw (1) according to claim 1 and further teaches wherein said groove (7) is curved in shape (Omoto, see Fig 2, Examiner notes groove 7 extending circumferentially around portion 2 as is curved in shape).
Regarding claim 8, modified Hsu teaches the screw (1) according to claim 1 and further teaches wherein each of said plurality of slots (13) is curved in shape (see Fig 1, Examiner notes trenches 13 extending circumferentially around screw 1 as is curved in shape).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu, in view of Omoto and OTICS FASTENER CO., LTD. (DE202022105650U1), hereinafter "Otics".
Regarding claim 5, modified Hsu teaches the screw (1) according to claim 1 and further teaches wherein said shank (see Fig 1) defines a central axis (see Fig 1) but fails to teach wherein an extension of said plurality of slots is parallel to said central axis of said shank.
However, Otics teaches it is known to provide wherein an extension (see Fig 4) of said plurality of slots (Fig 4, depressions 223) is parallel (see Fig 4) to said central axis (see Fig 4) of said shank (Fig 4, shank 22).
Therefore, as evidenced by Otics, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine wherein an extension of said plurality of slots is parallel to said central axis of said shank as taught by Otics to modified Hsu. The rationale for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is to optimize the function of collecting chips and reducing the friction of the chips so that the user can screw the screw into the workpiece with less effort (Otics, Paragraph 0038).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOCK WONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1349. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30am - 5:00pm (ET).
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, Kristina Fulton can be reached at (571)272-7376. 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.
/J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3675 /KRISTINA R FULTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675