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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 18-26 and 29 are finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Norton (2018/0304449) in view of Simons (4,187,892).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (BACK SFC)]Norton meets all of the limitations of claim 1, i.e., a driver for applying torque to a threaded fastener, said driver comprising:
a body 12 having first and second ends 14, 16 oppositely disposed, a longitudinal axis 18 extending lengthwise along said body between said first and second ends Fig. 1;
a plurality of blades 20 positioned at said first end 14 of said body, wherein each blade of said plurality of blades extends lengthwise along and projects away from said longitudinal axis Figs. 1-4, 20
has a helical twist about said longitudinal axis Figs. 3-4, each said blade defines a respective engagement surface 28 on a first side annotated Fig. 1 thereof oriented angularly with respect to said longitudinal axis and a respective back surface on a second side facing 28, annotated Fig. 1 thereof oppositely disposed from said first side and oriented parallel to said first side, and
comprises an outer circumferential surface defined by exterior surface of each blade extending between said engagement 28 surface and said back surface,
PNG
media_image3.png
447
292
media_image3.png
Greyscale
wherein each said engagement surface 28 adapted for engagement with said threaded fastener Figs. 13-15,
except for at least one said back surface comprising a plurality of teeth projecting transversely from said back surface, said teeth and extending along a length of said at least one said back surface, said length of said back surface extending from said outer circumferential surface inwardly towards said longitudinal axis in a direction transverse to said longitudinal axis.48
PNG
media_image4.png
282
248
media_image4.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (CL)]Simmons teaches a recess screw head and a driver 12 having a plurality of blades, each defining a first side and a back side driving face 46, wherein at least one said back surface driving face 46 comprising a plurality of teeth 50, 50a projecting transversely from said back surface, said teeth and extending along a length of said at least one said back surface Fig. 11, said length of said back surface extending from said outer circumferential surface inwardly towards the longitudinal axis defined by center of driver 12, annotated here in a direction transverse to said longitudinal axis.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to modify the driver of Norton with ribs as taught by Simmons to interlock with the screw head to reduce tendency for the driver to slip out of the recess of the screw head and to provide a temperate stick-fit between the driver and the screw.
Regarding claim 3, PA (prior art, Norton modified by Simmons) meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 1, wherein said at least one back surface comprises three said teeth Simmons discloses using one or more addition teeth intermediate 50 and 50a, for some instances, 09:20-23.
Regarding claim 4, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 1, wherein each said engagement surface has an orientation angle ranging from 15⁰ to 60⁰ relative to said longitudinal axis [0010] Norton.
Regarding claim 6, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 1, wherein each said back surface is oriented angularly with respect to said longitudinal axis Fig. 3, Norton.
Regarding claim 7, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 6, wherein each said back surface has an orientation angle ranging from 15⁰ to 60⁰ relative to said longitudinal axis [0010] Norton.
Regarding claim 9, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 1, wherein each said engagement surface comprises a flat surface Fig. 4 Norton.
Regarding claim 10, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 1, wherein each said engagement surface comprises a curved surface, wherein said curved surface is a convex surface or a concave surface Figs. 6, 7 Norton.
Regarding claim 12, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 1, wherein each said back surface comprises a curved surface, wherein said curved surface is a convex surface or a concave surface Figs. 6-7 Norton.
Regarding claim 15, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 1, comprising three of said blades or four of said blades Fig. 1 Norton.
PNG
media_image6.png
259
186
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 1, wherein each said blade comprises an end surface extending between said engagement surface and said back surface, wherein said end surface has [each said end surface defining a respective vertex, each said vertex meeting at an apex located on said longitudinal axis], however in the alternative and in order to expedite prosecution, PA fails to disclose a conical bottom end. Simmons further teaches for each of said blade to comprise an end surface extending between said surface, wherein each said end surface defining a respective vertex meeting at an apex conical terminal end located on said longitudinal axis. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to modify the driver of Norton with the conical end, similar in shape to the recess of the workpiece as taught by Simmons to act as a guide allowing precise mating or enhancing the fitting of the blades.
Regarding claim 18, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 1, further comprising a plurality of second blades 38 positioned at said second end of said body Fig. 1 Norton, each said second blade extending lengthwise along and projecting away from said longitudinal axis, each said second blade having a helical twist about said longitudinal axis, each said second blade defining a respective second engagement surface on a first side thereof and a respective second back surface on a second side thereof oppositely disposed from said first side of said second blade, each said second engagement surface adapted for engagement with said threaded fastener Figs. 1-4 Norton.
Regarding claim 19, PA meets the limitations, i.e., except for at least one said second back surface comprises a plurality of second teeth projecting transversely thereto. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to modify the second driver of Norton with ribs as taught by Simmons to interlock with the screw head to reduce tendency for the driver to slip out of the recess of the screw head and to provide a temperate stick-fit between the driver and the screw.
Regarding claim 20, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 19, wherein said second teeth extend along said at least one second back surface in a direction transverse to said longitudinal axis Fig. 11 Simmons.
Regarding claim 21, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 20, wherein said at least one second back surface comprises three said second teeth, i.e., embodiments with one or more teeth between 50 and 50a as disclosed by Simmons, 09:20-23.
Regarding claim 22, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 18, wherein said helical twist of each said second blade is in a direction mirroring said helical twist of said first blades Fig. 1 Norton.
Regarding claim 23, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 18, where each said second engagement surface is oriented angularly with respect to said longitudinal axis Fig. 1 Norton.
Regarding claim 24, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 18, wherein said body has an outer surface, a portion of said outer surface positioned between said first and second ends comprising a plurality of flat surfaces 46 Norton.
Regarding claim 25, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 24, further comprising a groove 48 extending circumferentially around said body, said groove positioned between said first and second ends Fig. 1 Norton.
PNG
media_image7.png
414
207
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 26, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the driver according to claim 18, wherein each said second blade 38 further comprises an end surface extending between said second engagement surface and said second back surface, each said end surface having a polygonal perimeter substantially rectangular, each said end surface being oriented angularly with respect to said longitudinal axis Fig. 1 Norton, except for each said end surface to define a respective vertex, each said vertex meeting at an apex located on said longitudinal axis. Simmons further teaches for each of said blade to comprise an end surface extending between said surface, wherein each said end surface defining a respective vertex meeting at an apex conical terminal end located on said longitudinal axis. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to modify the driver of Norton with the conical end, similar in shape to the recess of the workpiece as taught by Simmons to act as a guide allowing precise mating or enhancing the fitting of the blades.
CLAIM 29
Norton meets all of the limitations of claim 29, i.e., a driver for applying torque to a threaded fastener, said driver comprising:
a body 12 having first and second ends 14, 16 oppositely disposed, a longitudinal axis 18 extending lengthwise along said body between said first and second ends;
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (BACK SFC)]a plurality of blades 20 positioned at said first end of said body,
wherein each said blade of said plurality of blades extends lengthwise along and projects away from said longitudinal axis,
has a helical twist about said longitudinal axis Figs. 3-4,
defines a respective engagement surface 28 on a first side thereof oriented angularly with respect to said longitudinal axis and a respective back annotated Fig. 1 surface on a second side thereof oppositely disposed from said first side and oriented parallel to said first side, wherein each said engagement surface 28 is adapted for engagement with said threaded fastener,
comprises an outer circumference surface extending from said engagement surface to said back surface Figs. 1 and 2 and an end surface truncated blunt end extending between said engagement surface and said back surface, each said end surface having a polygonal perimeter rectangular, each said end surface being oriented angularly with respect to said longitudinal axis Fig. 3, except for each said end surface defining a respective vertex, extends from said outer circumferential surface to said respective vertex and for each said vertex meeting at an apex located on said longitudinal axis.
PNG
media_image4.png
282
248
media_image4.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (CL)]Simmons teaches a recess screw head and a driver 12 having a plurality of blades, each defining a first front surface and a back surface driving face 46, 46’, wherein each of said blade comprises an end surface extending between said surface, wherein each said end surface defining a respective vertex meeting at an apex conical terminal end located on said longitudinal axis.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to modify the driver of Norton with the conical end, similar in shape to the recess of the workpiece as taught by Simmons to act as a guide allowing precise mating or enhancing the fitting of the blades.
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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 7, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have found it obvious to modify the driver of Norton to add ribs as taught by Simmons to the back surface of the helical blade so that the ribs interlock with the screw head to reduce tendency for the driver to slip out of the recess of the screw head as suggested by the office action. Applicant supports these arguments by describing the intended use of references and argues that if the driver of Norton is modified it would not be compatible with the disclosed fastener. This is not found persuasive. The driver of Norton is modified by ribs as taught by Simmons to prevent slippage as taught by Simmons. The driver of Norton is modified for applications needing such slippage prevention, e.g., hard to access area or high torque. The ribbed blade of Norton would still be applicable for intended use.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, the teaching reference Simmons discloses providing projections to prevent slip out and to provide a temporary stick-fit between the driver and the recess. This modifications for applications needing such interlock, would not destroy the driver only enhances it for select applications.
In response to applicant's argument that the modification would render the tool inoperative, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HADI SHAKERI whose telephone number is (571)272-4495. The fax phone number for forwarding unofficial documents for discussion purposes only is (571) 273-4495. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F.
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, Brian Keller can be reached on 571 272 8548. The fax number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Hadi Shakeri/
November 15, 2025 Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723