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 .
Status of Claims
This office action is in reply to the amendment filed on May 19, 2026. Claims 1, 10 and 19 have been amended. No additional claims have been added. No further claims have been cancelled. Claim interpretation previously made under 35 USC 112(f) is maintained. In accordance with the amendments to the claims, the previous 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections have been updated and are discussed in greater detail below. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been fully examined.
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, 2 and 10 are Finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Atoulikian et al. (2014/0277203).
In reference to claim 1, Atoulikian et al. disclose a system comprising a device (Figure 4) that applies torque to a target component (76) that is engaged with a base component (72), and the device also applies counter-torque to the base component while the target component is rotated with regard to the base (paragraphs 40-41), the device comprising:
a power source portion (i.e. portion 26, see paragraph 33) disposed at a proximal end (i.e. upper end of 20, Figure 1);
a tip engagement portion (i.e. formed from 66, 58 and 22) disposed at a distal end (i.e. lower end of 20, Figure 1) the tip engagement portion comprising:
a housing (i.e. under a first interpretation the housing is formed from 66 or under a second interpretation the housing is formed from 22 and 64);
a rotating shaft (48, Figure 11) that rotates around a longitudinal axis (i.e. longitudinal axis of 20) within the housing (Note; under the first interpretation of housing 66, shaft 48 rotates within 66 in Figure 11 and as described in paragraph 35; “A fixed coupling 46 joins output shaft 44 to an input shaft 48 of the torque limiter 32 such that shafts 44 and 48 rotate together.” Note; under the second interpretation of housing 22 and 64, shaft 48 rotates within at least portion 64 see Figures 4 and 11) to operably provide torque to an engagement tip tool (58) disposed at the distal end of the tip engagement portion (Figures 2 and 11), the engagement tip tool configured to selectably, fixedly engage the target component (76) to provide rotation to the target component (paragraphs 38 and 41); and
a counter-torque component (62) comprising a body (80) that is configured to selectably, fixedly engage with the base component (72) to operably apply counter-torque to the base component (paragraph 41).
In reference to claim 2, Atoulikian et al. disclose a torque limiter (32) operably disposed between and engaged with the power source portion and the tip engagement portion (Figures 2-4), the torque limiter providing a pre-selected torque limit and operably mitigating further application of torque upon reaching the pre-selected torque limit (paragraph 35).
In reference to claim 10, Atoulikian et al. disclose that the rotating shaft (48) of the tip engagement portion is selectably and operably engaged with a power output shaft (44) of the power source portion at a proximal end (i.e. lower end of 48 in Figure 11) of the engagement tip tool (Figures 4 and 11).
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 3, 4, 9 and 19 are Finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atoulikian et al. (2014/0277203) in view of Goldberg et al. (2023/0020680).
In reference to claim 3, Atoulikian et al. disclose that the power source portion and the tip engagement portion are selectably detachable from each other (see Figure 3 showing the power source portion and the tip engagement portion being detached and Figure 4 showing the power source portion and the tip engagement portion being attached).
Atoulikian et al. lack disclosing that;
the torque limiter comprising a selectably replaceable unit.
However, Goldberg et al. teach that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a torque limiter (82) as a selectably replaceable unit (see last sentence in paragraph 40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the torque limiter, of Atoulikian et al., with the known technique of providing the selectably replaceable torque limiter, as taught by Goldberg et al., and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile tool that can be readily adapted by the expedient replacing of torque limiters of different preset torques (paragraph 40).
In reference to claim 4, Atoulikian et al. disclose the claimed invention as previously mentioned above, but lack,
a plurality of torque limiters, respective torque limiters preset at a specified and different torque limit that operably mitigates further application of torque upon reaching the specified torque limit, and respective torque limiters selectably insertable between the power source portion and the tip engagement portion, thereby setting the specified torque limit for the device by selecting the corresponding torque limiter.
However, Goldberg et al. teach that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a plurality of replaceable torque limiters (82, 84, paragraph 40), respective torque limiters preset at a specified and different torque limit (paragraph 40) that operably mitigates further application of torque upon reaching the specified torque limit, and respective torque limiters selectably insertable (i.e. when combined with the tool of Atoulikian et al.) between the power source portion (i.e. 26 of Atoulikian et al.) and the tip engagement portion (i.e. housing 64…and a counter-torque engagement end lower end of 62, of Atoulikian et al.) thereby setting the specified torque limit for the device by selecting the corresponding torque limiter.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the torque limiter, of Atoulikian et al., with the known technique of providing the selectably replaceable torque limiter, as taught by Goldberg et al., and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile tool that can be readily adapted by the expedient replacing of torque limiters of different preset torques (paragraph 40).
In reference to claim 9, Atoulikian et al. disclose that the torque limiter comprises a sealed unit such that fluid leakage into the unit is mitigated, and that is configured to be cleaned on its exterior and reused; or an unsealed unit that is not configured to be cleaned and reused (Figure 2).
In reference to claim 19, Atoulikian et al. disclose a system comprising a device (Figure 4) that applies torque to a target component (76) that is engaged with a base component (72), and the device also applies counter-torque to the base component while the target component is rotated with regard to the base (paragraphs 40-41), the device comprising:
a body (20) comprising a proximal end (i.e. upper end of 20, Figure 1) and a distal end (i.e. lower end of 20, Figure 1);
a power source portion (i.e. portion 26, see paragraph 33) disposed at the proximal end (Figure 1);
a tip engagement portion (i.e. formed from 66, 58 and 22) disposed at the distal end (Figure 1) the tip engagement portion comprising:
a housing (i.e. under a first interpretation the housing is formed from 66 or under a second interpretation the housing is formed from 22 and 64);
a rotating shaft (48, Figure 11) that rotates and provide torque (see paragraphs 38 and 41) around a longitudinal axis (i.e. longitudinal axis of 20) within the housing (Note; under the first interpretation of housing 66, shaft 48 rotates within 66 in Figure 11 and as described in paragraph 35; “A fixed coupling 46 joins output shaft 44 to an input shaft 48 of the torque limiter 32 such that shafts 44 and 48 rotate together.” Note; under the second interpretation of housing 22 and 64, shaft 48 rotates within at least portion 64 see Figures 4 and 11);
an engaged engagement tip tool (58) disposed at the distal end of the tip engagement portion (Figures 2 and 11), the engagement tip tool configured to selectably, fixedly engage with the target component (76) to provide rotation to the target component (paragraphs 38 and 41); and
a counter-torque component (62) comprising a body (80) that is configured to selectably, fixedly engage with the base component (72) to operably apply counter-torque to the base component (paragraph 41);
a torque limiter (32) disposed between, and engaged with, the power source portion and the tip engagement portion (Figures 2 and 8-13), the torque limiter operable to provide a pre-selected torque limit (paragraph 35) and operably mitigate further application of torque by the rotating shaft upon reaching the pre-selected torque limit (paragraph 35).
Atoulikian et al. lack disclosing that;
the torque limiter comprising a selectably replaceable unit.
However, Goldberg et al. teach that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a torque limiter (82) as a selectably replaceable unit (see last sentence in paragraph 40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the torque limiter, of Atoulikian et al., with the known technique of providing the selectably replaceable torque limiter, as taught by Goldberg et al., and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile tool that can be readily adapted by the expedient replacing of torque limiters of different preset torques (paragraph 40).
Claims 11 and 12 are Finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atoulikian et al. (2014/0277203) in view of Abidin (2015/0148849).
In reference to claim 11, Atoulikian et al. disclose the claimed invention as previously mentioned above and further disclose different engagement tip tools (58) that can be “of any appropriate configuration” and for “other applications” (paragraph 38), but lack,
forming the tip engagement portion (i.e. the counter-torque portion) comprising a selectably replaceable body,
wherein a first selectably replaceable body comprises a first engagement tip tool configured to engage a first target component, and the first body comprises a first counter-torque component configured to engage a first target base component, and
wherein a second selectably replaceable body comprises a second engagement tip tool configured to engage a second target component, and the second body comprises a second counter-torque component configured to engage a second target base component.
However, Abidin teaches that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide selectably replaceable counter-torque tools (100, see paragraph 80 disclosing, “All or a portion of a device and/or system for counter-torque wrenches may be configured and arranged to be disposable, serviceable, interchangeable, and/or replaceable. These equivalents and alternatives along with obvious changes and modifications are intended to be included within the scope of the present disclosure.” (paragraph 80). Abidin also teaches of providing different sizes (paragraph 81).
Since, the tip engagement portion (22), of Atoulikian et al., includes the counter-torque component (80), and because Abidin teaches of providing selectably replaceable counter-torque portions, the combination as a whole provides;
forming the tip engagement portion (i.e. 22) as a selectably replaceable body (as taught by Abidin),
wherein a first selectably replaceable body (i.e. 22) comprises a first engagement tip tool (i.e. one of tools 58, see paragraph 38 of Atoulikian et al.) configured to engage a first target component, and the first body comprises a first counter-torque component (80) configured to engage a first target base component, and
wherein a second selectably replaceable body (i.e. another 22) comprises a second engagement tip tool (i.e. another one of tools 58, see paragraph 38 Atoulikian et al.) configured to engage a second target component, and the second body comprises a second counter-torque component (a second smaller or larger counter-torque component 80, because Abidin teaches of providing different sizes, paragraph 81) configured to engage a second target base component.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the tip engagement portion, of Atoulikian et al., with the known technique of providing the selectably replaceable tip engagement portion having the first and second replaceable bodies, as taught by Abidin, and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile tip engagement portion that can be configured and arranged to be disposable, serviceable, interchangeable, and/or replaceable (paragraph 89).
In reference to claim 12, Atoulikian et al. disclose a plurality of selectably replaceable engagement tip tools (58) that can be “of any appropriate configuration” and for “other applications” (paragraph 38), wherein a first selectably replaceable engagement tool tip (i.e. flat head 58) is configured to engage a first target component, and a second selectably replaceable engagement tool tip (i.e. a Philips head 58) is configured to engage a second target component, but lack,
a plurality of selectably replaceable counter-torque components, wherein a first selectably replaceable counter-torque component is configured to engage a first target base component, and a second selectably replaceable counter-torque component is configured to engage a second target base component.
However, Abidin teaches that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide selectably replaceable counter-torque tools (100, see paragraph 80 disclosing, “All or a portion of a device and/or system for counter-torque wrenches may be configured and arranged to be disposable, serviceable, interchangeable, and/or replaceable. These equivalents and alternatives along with obvious changes and modifications are intended to be included within the scope of the present disclosure.” (paragraph 80). Abidin also teaches of providing different sizes (paragraph 81).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the tip engagement portion/counter-tool portion, of Atoulikian et al., with the known technique of providing the selectably replaceable tip engagement portion/counter-tool portion of different sizes, as taught by Abidin, and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile tip engagement portion that can be configured and arranged to be disposable, serviceable, interchangeable, and/or replaceable (paragraph 89).
Claim 13, is Finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atoulikian et al. (2014/0277203) in view of Yim et al. (2018/0036046), Ng et al. (2016/0121467) and as further evidenced by Kress (4793226).
In reference to claim 13, Atoulikian et al. disclose the claimed invention as previously mentioned above and further disclose other coupling configurations that may be used connection with shaft (26, paragraph 33), and further includes a power output shaft (44) that provides rotational power from the power source portion (26) to the tip engagement portion (Figure 11), and a gearbox (see box enclosing gears 30 at a lower portion of 20 in Figure 11) comprising gears (34/36, Figure 8) that are configured to convert torque between the motor and the power output shaft (paragraph 34), but lack,
the power source portion comprising:
a rechargeable battery;
a motor receiving electrical power from the battery;
a controller that operably controls operation of the motor.
However, Yim et al. teach that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a power source portion (12, Figure 3) that can be formed as an electrical power source including a motor (not shown, paragraph 42) powered by a battery (paragraph 42) or as a manually power source portion (similar to portion 61 attached to 26 of Atoulikian et al.) thereby teaching that these two power sources are equivalent to each other.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the manual power source, of Atoulikian et al., with the known technique of providing the electrical power source including the motor powered by the battery, as taught by Yim et al., and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile device having a motorized power tool (see claim 5) thereby allowing a user to more easily operate/drive the tip tool during normal operation with less effort.
In addition, Ng et al. teach that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide an electric power source portion (Figure 1-3 and 8) comprising a battery (11, paragraph 118), a motor (20) receiving electrical power from the battery (paragraph 118), and a controller (40) that operably controls operation of the motor (paragraph 118).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the electrical power source, of Atoulikian et al., with the known technique of providing an electric power source including the controller, as taught by Ng et al., and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile device that “achieves the ability to impact drive a single fastener, multiple fasteners of the same type, or multiple fasters of different type accurately, predictably and efficiently” and that “allows for accurate drive control, as well as control of power output and usage” (paragraph 117).
And, as further evidenced by Kress, which teaches that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide rechargeable batteries (Column 1, Lines 5-45 and Column7, Lines 12-19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the battery, of modified Atoulikian et al., with the known technique of providing the rechargeable battery, as taught by Kress, and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile device having battery that that permits recharging (Column 1, Lines 5-18).
Claim 14, is Finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atoulikian et al. (2014/0277203) in view of Yim et al. (2018/0036046), Ng et al. (2016/0121467), as further evidenced by Kress (4793226) and further in view of Dobashi et al. (2019/0294138).
In reference to claim 14, Atoulikian et al. disclose the claimed invention as previously mentioned above, but lack,
an image sensor to collect image data of a target operation area and an illumination component to provide light to the target operation area.
In addition, Dobashi et al. teach that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a power tool with an image sensor (5) to collect image data of a target operation area (paragraph 38) and an illumination component (234) to provide light to the target operation area (paragraph 33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the tool, of Atoulikian et al., with the known technique of providing the image sensor and the illumination component, as taught by Dobashi et al., and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile device that captures an image of the work object during the work (paragraph 38) and that emits light toward the work object during the work (paragraph 33).
Claims 15-17 are Finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atoulikian et al. (2014/0277203) in view of Yim et al. (2018/0036046) and Ng et al. (2016/0121467).
In reference to claim 15, Atoulikian et al. disclose the claimed invention as previously mentioned above and further disclose other coupling configurations that may be used connection with shaft (26, paragraph 33), but lack,
the power source portion comprising: a motor receiving electrical power from an electrical power source; a controller that operably controls operation of the motor, the controller comprising: memory that stores data indicative of a pre-set torque limit; and a processor that identifies when an electrical current draw applied by the motor reaches a level indicative of the pre-set torque limit and shuts down the motor.
However, Yim et al. teach that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a power source portion (12, Figure 3) that can be formed as an electrical power source including a motor (not shown, paragraph 42) powered by a battery (paragraph 42) or as a manually power source portion (similar to portion 61 attached to 26 of Atoulikian et al.) thereby teaching that these two power sources are equivalent to each other.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the manual power source, of Atoulikian et al., with the known technique of providing the electrical power source including the motor powered by the battery, as taught by Yim et al., and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile device having a motorized power tool (see claim 5) thereby allowing a user to more easily operate/drive the tip tool during normal operation with less effort.
In addition, Ng et al. teach that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide an electric power source portion (Figure 1-3 and 8) comprising a controller (40, paragraph 9) that operably controls operation of the motor (paragraphs 18, 19 and 54), the controller comprising: memory (paragraph 170) that stores data indicative of a pre-set torque limit; and a processor (paragraph 169) that identifies when an electrical current draw applied by the motor reaches a level indicative of the pre-set torque limit and shuts down the motor (paragraphs 18, 19, 54, 124 and 172).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the electrical power source, of Atoulikian et al., with the known technique of providing an electric power source including the controller, the memory and the processor, as taught by Ng et al., and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile device that “achieves the ability to impact drive a single fastener, multiple fasteners of the same type, or multiple fasters of different type accurately, predictably and efficiently” and that “allows for accurate drive control, as well as control of power output and usage” (paragraph 117).
In reference to claim 16, Ng et al. disclose that the controller storing data (paragraphs 169-170), in the memory and/or externally to the device, indicative of one or more of: time of device use, torque applied during use (paragraph 18); torque limit during device use (paragraph 19), torque profiles while tightening (paragraph 19), and image data collected during use.
In reference to claim 17, Atoulikian et al. disclose the claimed invention as previously mentioned above and further disclose other coupling configurations that may be used connection with shaft (26, paragraph 33), but lack,
the power source portion comprising a motor; and
a controller that operably controls operation of the motor, wherein the controller reverses the motor upon deactivation of a forward activation of the motor, and wherein the reversal comprises merely enough to unbind the engagement tip tool from the target component.
However, Yim et al. teach that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a power source portion (12, Figure 3) that can be formed as an electrical power source including a motor (not shown, paragraph 42) powered by a battery (paragraph 42) or as a manually power source portion (similar to portion 61 attached to 26 of Atoulikian et al.) thereby teaching that these two power sources are equivalent to each other.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the manual power source, of Atoulikian et al., with the known technique of providing the electrical power source including the motor powered by the battery, as taught by Yim et al., and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile device having a motorized power tool (see claim 5) thereby allowing a user to more easily operate/drive the tip tool during normal operation with less effort.
In addition, Ng et al. teach that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide an electric power source portion (Figure 1-3 and 8) comprising a controller (40, paragraph 9) that operably controls operation of the motor (paragraphs 18, 19 and 54), wherein the controller reverses the motor upon deactivation of a forward activation of the motor (paragraph 54), and wherein the reversal comprises merely enough to unbind the engagement tip tool from the target component (paragraphs 54, 64, 67, 73, 76 and 124).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the electrical power source, of Atoulikian et al., with the known technique of providing an electric power source including the controller, as taught by Ng et al., and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile device that “achieves the ability to impact drive a single fastener, multiple fasteners of the same type, or multiple fasters of different type accurately, predictably and efficiently” and that “allows for accurate drive control, as well as control of power output and usage” (paragraph 117).
Claim 18, is Finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atoulikian et al. (2014/0277203) in view of King et al. (2019/0314964).
In reference to claim 18, Atoulikian et al. disclose the claimed invention as previously mentioned above, but lack,
a display that operably indicates to a user an amount of torque applied by the rotating shaft.
However, King et al. teach that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a similar tool (100) with a display (118) that operably indicates to a user an amount of torque applied by a rotating shaft (18, paragraph 22)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the tool, of Atoulikian et al., with the known technique of providing a tool with the display, as taught by King et al., and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile device that can display various information for the user to view and interpret, for example, text or graphics, or information entered into the user input interface (paragraph 22).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8 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 20 is allowed.
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance: The present invention pertains to a tool. It is the examiner's opinion that the art of record considered as a whole, alone or in combination, neither anticipates nor renders obvious of providing; a torque limiter comprising: an input component comprising an input coupler that operably engages with, and receives rotational power from, an output of the power source portion, and a plurality of noses that project radially outward from the input coupler; and an output component comprising a wall having a plurality of projections that project radially inward to operably engage with the noses to transfer rotational power from the input component to the output component (as in claim 5 and 20), together in combination with the rest of the limitations of the independent claims.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
The examiner notes that it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device, of Atoulikian et al., with the torque limiter comprising: an input component comprising an input coupler that operably engages with, and receives rotational power from, an output of the power source portion, and a plurality of noses that project radially outward from the input coupler; and an output component comprising a wall having a plurality of projections that project radially inward to operably engage with the noses to transfer rotational power from the input component to the output component, because such a modification would require a substantial reconstruction, redesign of the elements shown in the primary reference that would change the basic principle under which the primary reference was designed to operate (i.e. providing “Thus, the drive train of the combination extends from input of shaft 26 to output 28 and includes at least shafts 26, 38, 44, and 48, and gears 34, 36, 40, and 42, and coupling 46.”, see paragraph 38 and Figure 11) and would require improper hindsight reasoning.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-11, filed May 19, 2026, with respect to amended claims 1 and 19 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous interpretation of Atoulikian et al. has been changed in the rejection above in accordance with the new limitations in the claims.
Applicant contends that, “Atoulikian fails to disclose the tip engagement portion comprises a housing and a rotating shaft that rotates around a longitudinal axis within the housing.”
However, the examiner respectfully disagrees with this statement. In the rejection above, the tip engagement portion (i.e. formed from 66, 58 and 22) and includes housing (i.e. under a first interpretation the housing is formed from 66 or under a second interpretation the housing is formed from 22 and 64) and a rotating shaft (48, Figure 11) rotates around a longitudinal axis (i.e. longitudinal axis of 20) within the housing (Note; under the first interpretation of housing 66, shaft 48 rotates within 66 in Figure 11 and as described in paragraph 35; “A fixed coupling 46 joins output shaft 44 to an input shaft 48 of the torque limiter 32 such that shafts 44 and 48 rotate together.” Note; under the second interpretation of housing 22 and 64, shaft 48 rotates within at least portion 64 of 22, see Figures 4 and 11) thereby meeting the newly added structural limitations in the claims. Since, all of the structural limitations of the claims have ben met the examiner believes that the rejection is proper and thus maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.
Specifically, applicant further defined the tip engagement portion to include a housing and that the rotating shaft rotates within the housing.
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 ROBERT J SCRUGGS whose telephone number is (571)272-8682. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6-2.
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, David Posigian can be reached at 313-446-6546. 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.
/ROBERT J SCRUGGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights