DETAILED ACTION
Receipt is acknowledged of Applicant’s Response, dated 17 June 2026, which papers have been made of record.
Claims 1-20 are currently presented for examination, of which claims 1-10 and 16-20 have been withdrawn from consideration.
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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The Brief Description of the Drawings section collectively groups multiple Figures at paragraphs [0011], [0014], [0018], [0019], [0024], [0027], and [0030]. Applicant has made a bona fide attempt to address this objection in the Response of 17 June 2026, however the examiner notes that groupings such as “Figs. 19A-19C” make it difficult to determine how many figures are present in the collected groups.
The examiner recommends further amending the Specification in accordance with the following:
[0011] FIGS. 3A, 3B, and 3C .
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 10-15 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.
Claim 10 recites “wherein in the insertion and removal configuration, the clamping foot is bent inward and does not fully extend through the opening in the sleeve” at lines 11-12. The claim does not appear to fairly define “inward” though the Specification appears to suggest that “inward” is toward a central axis 199. It appears that the structure of the fastener should be defined in terms of the central axis to clarify the bending direction, and that the inward direction should be clarified as being radially towards the central axis.
Claims 11-15 each depend from claim 10, and therefore are rejected for at least the reasons presented above with respect to claim 10.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 11, the prior art made of record does not explicitly disclose or fairly teach “wherein the distal clamping surface is included in a clamping foot of a collet body; wherein in the clamping configuration, the clamping food of the collet body fully extends through an opening in a sleeve; wherein in the insertion and removal configuration, the clamping foot is bent inward and does not fully extend through the opening in the sleeve; and wherein a body assembly in the fastener includes a pin that extends through an opening in a shaft and multiple axially extending slots in the sleeve” and further in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim. The examiner the method to provide a fastener which is configurable in an insertion and removal configuration and a separate clamping configuration, the fastener defining a grip length between a proximal clamping surface and a distal clamping surface, further defining an axial length, and including a collet body having a clamping foot and a sleeve including an opening, the fastener further including a pin. To the best of the examiner’s understanding, the shaft recited in claim 11 is part of the fastener. United States Patent Application Publication 2021/0062847 to McClure teaches a fastener translatable between a clamping configuration and a release configuration (compare Figures 13 and 14), but does not fairly teach that where the fastener comprises the pin 110, the axial length between a distal clamping surface and a distal end of the fastener remains constant during a clamping or adjusting step. United States Patent Application Publication 2021/0025424 to Brachet, previously relied upon in the rejection of claim 11, teaches a constant axial length between a distal clamping surface and a distal end of the fastener, but does not fairly teach the newly claimed collet body.
Response to Arguments
Claim Objections
Applicant’s arguments, see Response, filed 17 June 2026, with respect to objections of claims 13-15 have been fully considered and are persuasive.
The Objection of 17 March 2026 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Applicant’s arguments, see Response, filed 17 June 2026, with respect to rejections of claims 11-15 under 35 SUC 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Rejection of 17 March 2026 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Applicant’s arguments, see Response, filed 17 June 2026, with respect to rejections of claims 11-15 under 35 SUC 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Rejection of 17 March 2026 has been withdrawn.
Claims 11-14 were previously rejected as anticipated by Brachet.
Claims 11-13 and 15 were previously rejected as anticipated by McClure.
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 DARRELL C. FORD whose telephone number is (313)446-6515. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM to 5:15 PM, Monday to Friday.
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.
/DARRELL C FORD/Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Prosecution Insights