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 .
Employ Services of Attorney or Agent
It appears the inventor(s) filed the current application pro se (i.e., without the benefit of representation by a registered patent practitioner). While inventors named as applicants in a patent application may prosecute the application pro se, lack of familiarity with patent examination practice and procedure may result in missed opportunities in obtaining optimal protection for the invention disclosed. The inventor(s) may wish to secure the services of a registered patent practitioner to prosecute the application, because the value of a patent is largely dependent upon skilled preparation and prosecution. The Office cannot aid in selecting a patent practitioner.
A listing of registered patent practitioners is available at www.uspto.gov/FindPatentAttorney . Applicants may also obtain a list of registered patent practitioners located in their area by writing to Mail Stop OED, Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 10/17/2025 has been reviewed to expedite prosecution however it could have been considered non-responsive because the changes made to the specification, drawings, and claims are difficult to determine. For example, with respect to the claims the claim amendments filed 10/17/2025 should have appeared as shown below. Further, claim 3 was not canceled as indicated by applicant but instead amended just like claim 2, i.e. if you cancel a claim you cannot utilize that claim number again. If you add a new claim later in prosecution it will need to be claim 8 because claim 7 was canceled. Examiner has examined the claims based on the claims shown below:
(currently amended) A screw startercomprising a claws configured to hold and position a screw, a slide configured to move relative to the claws to lock and unlock the screw, and a band, configured to secure a screwdriver to the screw starter, wherein the claws are made of a flexible material and are configured to flex outward by elastic force to release the screw.
(currently amended) A screw starter comprising a claws to hold and position a screw, a slide configured to move relative to the claw to lock and unlock the screw, a band configured to secure a screwdriver to the screw starter, and a base configured to support and connect the claws, the slide and the band, wherein the claws are made of a rigid material and are pivotally mounted with a spring and a pivot pin configured to bias the claws outward.
(currently amended) The screw starter of claim 1, wherein the claws include a slot and a hook pin positioned at a flange of the claws, the hook pin having a ball-shaped end configured to prevent the band from loosening.
(currently amended) The screw starter of claim 1, wherein the band is made of an elastic material, a first end of the band includes a stop portion sized and shaped to prevent the first end from passing through a slot in a flange of the claws, and a second end of the band includes a plurality of holes configured to engage with the hook pin.
The screw starter of claim 2, wherein a base of the claw includes a slot and a hook pin positioned at a flange of the base, the hook pin having a ball-shaped end configured to prevent the band from loosening.
The screw starter of claim 2, wherein the band is made of an elastic material, a first end of the band includes a stop portion sized and shaped to prevent the first end from passing through a slot in a flange of the base, and a second end of the band includes a plurality of holes configured to engage with the hook pin.
(canceled)
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the:
“the claws are…pivotally mounted with a spring and a pivot pin…” of claim 2.
The specification indicates that each individual claw is attached via its own spring and its own pivot pin.
The “claws including a slot and a hook pin positioned at a flange of the claws, the hook pin having a ball-shaped end” of claims 3 and 5.
The specification provides no discussion of these features and none of the figures presently provided appear to match these requirements.
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
In light of the amendments made by applicant not being identified via strikethrough (deletion) or underline (addition) examiner has not reviewed the updated specification for formal issues or potential new matter. Examiner suggests in applicant’s next response to provide an amended version of the specification and abstract that identifies all changes made. Examiner will note that it appears the previously identified issues with the specification have been remedied.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-6 are objected to because each includes numerous grammatical issues. For example:
For claims 1 and 2:
“a claws” in line 1 of each claim should be “claws”
Appropriate review of the claims and correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 2, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 2, applicant “the claws are…pivotally mounted with a spring and a pivot pin…”. As written, the scope of the claim includes an embodiment wherein all of the claws utilize the same spring and the same pivot pin. As can be clearly seen in Figures 4-11 each claw utilizes its own spring and its own pivot pin. Examiner will examiner the claim as if the limitation reads “the claws are ….independently pivotally mounted with a respective spring and a pivot pin”.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 2:
The phrase, “the claws are…pivotally mounted with a spring and a pivot pin…” is unclear. Please see the 112(a) discussion above for how examiner will be interpreting the limitation.
Regarding claim 3:
Claim 1 requires “the claws…are configured to flex outward by elastic force…”, i.e. there are a plurality of individual claws that are flexibly biased. Therefore the indication that the “claws include a slot and a hook pin positioned at a flange of the claws…” is unclear since the claws are indicated as separate elements in claim 1. For the purposes of examination examiner will consider claim 3 to claim that the claws are connected to a body having a flange.
Regarding claim 4:
The phase “the hook pin” lacks antecedent basis as this was discussed in claim 3 and not claim 1.
Regarding claim 5:
The phrase “the claw” lacks antecedent basis as claim 2 requires “claws”.
Similar to claim 3, claim 5 indicates the individual claws themselves include the flange when claim 2 requires the claws to be pivotally mounted to something. Examiner will consider claim 5 to be claiming the claws are pivotally mounted to a base that includes a flange.
Regarding claim 6:
The phase “the hook pin” lacks antecedent basis as this was discussed in claim 5 and not claim 2.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Boyden (US Patent No. 470,778).
Regarding claim 1, Boyden teaches (Figures 1-4) a screw starter (B-E) having flexibly elastic claws (C1 and C2) to hold and position a screw and a slide (E) configured to move relative to the claws to lock and unlock the screw. The flexible arms are attached to a claw base (C) and the claws and claw base allow a screwdriver (A) to pass therethrough. The device is attached to the screwdriver via a screw (S) via a band (B’) that is attached via a screw (s). The flexibly elastic claws are configured to flex outward by elastic force to release the screw (Figure 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.
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Craig et al (U.S Patent No. 1,575,149), hereinafter Craig, in view of Lohr (US Patent No. 2,534,719).
Regarding claim 2, Craig teaches (Figures 1 and 2) a screw starter having pivotal claws (13) the utilize pivot pins (generally 12) that work in conjunction with a slide (15) to lock and unlock a screw (17). A band (11) is configured to secure a screwdriver (2 and 1). A base (4) is configured to support and connect the claws (13). The claws are made of metal (cross-section hashing of Figures 1 and 2) and not intended to bend during use and are therefore are considered rigid.
Craig teaches all of the elements of the current invention but utilizes ramped surfaces (see Figures 1 and 2) to cause the claws the pivot outward and therefore fails to teach the use of springs.
Lohr teaches (Figures 1-9) a screw starter having pivotal claws (6 and 7) that utilizing a pivot pin (24) and springs (17 and 18) that work in conjunction with a slide (15) to lock and unlock a screw (Figure 2 and Figure 1).
Because both Craig and Lohr teach known equivalents means (ramped biasing and spring biasing) to move claws to an outward, unlocked, position in a screw starter it would have been obvious to substitute one for the other to achieve the predictable result of allowing the claws to be biased outward when the slide was in the up/unlocked position.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyden in view of Warter (U.S Patent No. 1,371,280) and Sternschuss (U.S Patent No. 2,884,675).
Boyden teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above except for the flange of the base of the the claws are includes a slot and a hook pin with a ball shaped end configured to prevent the band from loosening.
Warter (Figures 1 and 2) it is known to utilize an elastic band 20 attached to a screwdriver (page 1, line 57-73) to ensure a flange (17) supporting arms (13 and 14) designed to hold a screw. While Warter teaches the use of notches (20) in the screwdriver itself by any suitable means.
Sternschuss teaches (Figures 4-7 it is old and well known to attach a strap designed to support something relative to something else by utilizing holes/slots in a flange (6) and a spherical/ball-shaped hook member (7) to connect the strap to the flange to ensure the strap (1) is secured tightly.
Based on the teachings of Warter and Sternschuss it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace the band/connecting screw of Boyden with a band and corresponding flange, having a slotted member and corresponding spherical member, as set forth in Sternschuss, as evidenced by Warter as to its suitability in hand tools, to achieve the predictable result of securely holding the screw starter on a screwdriver.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modified device of Craig, as applied to claim 1, in view of Warter and Sternschuss.
The modified device of Craig teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above the flange of the base of the claws includes a slot and a hook pin with a ball shaped end configured to prevent the band from loosening (claim 3).
Warter (Figures 1 and 2) it is known to utilize an elastic band 20 attached to a screwdriver (page 1, line 57-73) to ensure a flange (17) supporting arms (13 and 14) designed to hold a screw. While Warter teaches the use of notches (20) in the screwdriver itself by any suitable means.
Sternschuss teaches (Figures 4-7 it is old and well known to attach a strap designed to support something relative to something else by utilizing holes/slots in a flange (6) and a spherical/ball-shaped hook member (7) to connect the strap to the flange to ensure the strap (1) is secured tightly.
Based on the teachings of Warter and Sternschuss int would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace the band of Craig with a band and corresponding flange, having a slotted member and corresponding spherical member, as set forth in Sternschuss, and evidenced by Warter as to its suitability in hand tools, to achieve the predictable result of securely holding the screw starter on a screwdriver.
Claimed Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 6 are considered to read over the prior art of record because the prior art of record does not teach or suggest the claimed combination of the flange of a base the claws are attached to includes a slot and a hook pin with a ball shaped end configured to prevent the band from loosening (claim 3), and the band being made of an elastic material with a first end including a stop portion sized and shaped to prevent the first end from passing through a slot in a flange of the base that attaches the claws and the second end of the band including a plurality of holes configured to engage a hook pin (claim 4). The closes prior art is Warter and Stenschuss but neither teaches the band including a stop portion sized and shaped to prevent the first end from pass through a slot in a flange. Similar art such as Melius (U.S Publication No. 20090137166) but it suffers the same deficiency.
However, the claims cannot be considered "allowable" at this time due to the rejection(s) under U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office Action. Therefore, upon the claims being rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112 set forth in this Office Action, further consideration of this claim with respect to the prior art will be necessary.
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 EDWARD F LANDRUM whose telephone number is (571)272-5567. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Marivelisse Santiago-Cordero can be reached at 571-272-7839. 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.
/EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761