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 (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.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nuzzi et al. (US 2006/0222469).
Claim 9:
Nuzzi discloses a tip (abstract) for use with a tool bit having an axis of rotation, the tip comprising:
a bottom face configured to be joined to the tool bit, a front face, a back face opposite the front face (figs. 2-9, [0018] – see also annotated reproduction of figs. 6 and 7, below),
a first side face (104) extending between the front face and the back face (figs. 6 and 9, [0027]),
a second side face (94) opposite the first side face (104) and extending between the front face and the back face (figs. 6 and 9, [0027]), and
a plurality of top faces (92, 98) opposite the bottom face and extending between the front face and the back face, the plurality of top faces (92, 98) including a first top face (98) extending from the first side face (104) toward the axis of rotation and a second top face (92) extending from the second side face (94) toward the axis of rotation, the first top face (98) is perpendicular to the axis of rotation, the second top face (92) is obliquely angled relative to the axis of rotation (figs. 6-9, [0027] – see also annotated reproduction of figs. 4, 6 and 7, below).
Nuzzi discloses a “spot face 98” (see figs. 6-9 [0027]) formed as the bottom surface of the spot face feature. As shown in figure 6 (side view) and figure 9 (perspective view), spot face (98) is a planar surface extending radially inward from the outer wall (104) toward the rotational axis of the tool. In a drilling/spot-facing operation about the tool holder’s rotational axis, the spot face bottom surface is necessarily formed normal (i.e., perpendicular) to the axis of rotation. Paragraph [0027] further distinguishes spot face (98) from the “outside edge 104,” which “may be configured to have a slight angle between 0 and 5° to shave material and reduce burr. The disclosure of a slight 0-5° angular deviation is expressly associated with the diameter-forming wiper edge (104), not with spot face 98. Accordingly, spot face 98 remains the bottom surface of the spot face feature and is necessarily perpendicular to the axis of rotation during the drilling operation. Thus, Nuzzi discloses the claim limitation the first top face is perpendicular to the axis of rotation.
PNG
media_image1.png
934
1414
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
861
1430
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 10:
Nuzzi discloses the tip of claim 9, wherein the tip is formed from a carbide material ([0021]).
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nuzzi et al. (US 2006/0222469 A1) in view of Novak et al. (US 2022/0371105 A1).
Claim 1:
Nuzzi discloses a tool bit (abstract) comprising:
a body formed from a first material and defining an axis of rotation (figs. 2-9, [0018]); and a tip (60, 80) coupled to the body and formed from a second material (figs. 2-9, [0021]), the tip including:
a bottom face joined to the body, a front face, a back face opposite the front face (figs. 2-9, [0018] – see also annotated reproduction of figs. 6 and 7, above),
a first side face (104) extending between the front face and the back face (figs. 6 and 9, [0027]),
a second side face (94) opposite the first side face (104) and extending between the front face and the back face (figs. 6 and 9, [0027]), and
a plurality of top faces (92, 98) opposite the bottom face and extending between the front face and the back face, the plurality of top faces (92, 98) including a first top face (98) extending from the first side face (104) toward the axis of rotation and a second top face (92) extending from the second side face (94) toward the axis of rotation, the first top face (98) is perpendicular to the axis of rotation, the second top face (92) is obliquely angled relative to the axis of rotation (figs. 6-9, [0027] – see also annotated reproduction of figs. 4, 6 and 7, above).
Nuzzi does not disclose the body is formed from a first material that is different from the second material of the tip, nor does Nuzzi specify a dissimilar material pairing for body vs. tip.
Novak discloses a tool bit (abstract), comprising
a body (12) formed from a first material (tool steel) and defining an axis of rotation (figs. 1A-1B, [0042]); and a tip (26) coupled to the body (12) and formed from a second material (carbide) different than the first material (figs. 1-2, [0042] and [0043]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to select Novak’s known steel-body/carbide-tip material pairing for Nuzzi’s body/bit to obtain predictable durability at the tip while maintaining toughness in the body (Novak, [0042]). See MPEP § 2143 A which describes the prima facie obviousness of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Claim 2:
Nuzzi in view of Novak renders obvious the tool bit of claim 1, wherein the first material is a tool steel, and wherein the second material is a carbide (Novak, [0042]).
Claim 3:
Nuzzi in view of Novak renders obvious the tool bit of claim 1, wherein the bottom face extends between the front face and the back face, and wherein the bottom face includes a chamfered edge (93) (figs. 8-9, [0027]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-20 are allowed.
Claims 4-8 and 11-14 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 4:
The prior art of record fails to disclose or fairly suggest the tool bit of claim 1, wherein the tip includes an extended portion protruding relative to the plurality of top faces and extending parallel to the axis of rotation.
Claim 11:
The prior art of record fails to disclose or fairly suggest the tip of claim 9, further comprising an extended portion protruding relative to the plurality of top faces.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Turner et al. (US 6,102,634) discloses a masonry drill comprising a shaft and a tip.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lee Holly whose telephone number is (571)270-7097. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 to 5:00 EST.
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/Lee A Holly/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726