Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/379,643

TOOLBOX HANDLE STRUCTURE OF COMBINATION SCREWDRIVER

Non-Final OA §103§112§DP
Filed
Oct 12, 2023
Examiner
SHAKERI, HADI
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Yih Cheng Factory Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
1119 granted / 1808 resolved
-8.1% vs TC avg
Strong +37% interview lift
Without
With
+37.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
67 currently pending
Career history
1875
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
46.0%
+6.0% vs TC avg
§102
26.2%
-13.8% vs TC avg
§112
19.7%
-20.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1808 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112 §DP
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 § 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. Claim 5 is 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 5 recites the limitation "tool bar" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu (11,148,277) in view of Sardo, Jr. (4,399,722) and Liu (2022/0305636)). PNG media_image1.png 406 532 media_image1.png Greyscale Hue meets all of the limitations of claim 1, i.e., a toolbox handle structure of a combination screwdriver, the toolbox handle structure comprising: a handle 1, comprising a chamber 11 and a tool slot 12, 14 communicating with each other Fig. 3, and comprising an opening 13 defined on one end thereof communicating with the chamber; PNG media_image2.png 257 573 media_image2.png Greyscale a receiving seat set, comprising a receiving tube 3, an inner sleeve 21 3 is movably arranged in the chamber Figs. 4 and 7, the inner sleeve 21 is inserted in the receiving tube 30 and comprises a containing slot 212 a pressing-cap assembly, comprising a cap 34, a pressing set 23-24, latch 231 wherein the cap 34 is combined on the opening 13, latch 231 3; wherein the pressing set is moved by an external force to make the latch 231 @35, except for a push spring elastically abutting against the receiving tube, a bead-holding recess and a hole defined on one side of the inner sleeve adjacent to the opening, a pressing spring and a bead, the pressing spring being disposed in the containing slot abutting against the pressing set, and the bead being disposed in the bead-holding recess and pushed by the pressing set to protrude from the hole. PNG media_image3.png 217 495 media_image3.png Greyscale Sardo, Jr teaches an adapter comprising a quick release adapter comprising a bead-holding recess 55 and a hole 52 defined on one side of an inner sleeve adapter body 10 adjacent to an opening 44, a pressing spring 47 and a bead 53, the pressing spring being disposed in the containing slot 42 abutting against the pressing set 46, 19, and the bead 52 being disposed in the bead-holding recess 53 and pushed by the pressing set to protrude from the hole engaging an outer element socket 12 similar to receiving tube. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to modify the pressing and retaining set of Hu, with the quick release mechanism as taught by Sardo, Jr. for positively securing the inner sleeve t the receiving tube and for ease of operation by providing a push button quick release for disengaging the inner sleeve from the receiving tube. The combination meets the claim, except for a push spring, the push spring elastically abutting against the receiving tube. PNG media_image4.png 298 462 media_image4.png Greyscale Liu teaches a screwdriver structure comprising a receiving tube 30 and a push spring 40, wherein the receiving tube storing, is released and pushed out by the push spring bits with a press button release member 39. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to further modify the modified tool of Hu and Sardo, Jr., with the push spring as taught by Liu for ease of operation by automatically pushing the bits out when the inner sleeve is released from the receiving tube by pressing the release button. PNG media_image5.png 274 572 media_image5.png Greyscale [AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (ANNULAR GROOVE)]Regarding claim 2, PA (prior art, Hu modified by Sardo, Jr. and Liu) meets the limitations, i.e., the toolbox handle structure according to claim 1, wherein a screw hole 142 is defined on a bottom of the chamber 13 of the handle, the inner sleeve 21 comprises a plurality of external threads 211 disposed on one end thereof, and the inner sleeve 21 is combined in the chamber through the external threads being screwed to the screw hole Fig. 3 Hu. PNG media_image7.png 191 462 media_image7.png Greyscale Regarding claim 3, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the toolbox handle structure according to claim 1, wherein the receiving tube 3 comprises a ring seat 33 and a plurality of elastic clips 32, the elastic clips configured to clamp a plurality of screwdriver bits A, Fig. 1 Hu, the ring seat comprises an annular groove annotated above, Hu Fig. 3 defined on a side thereof facing the tool slot, and one end of the push spring is located in the annular groove modified by Sardo, Jr. Fig. 17 partially shown here. Regarding claim 4, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the toolbox handle structure according to claim 1, wherein the receiving tube 3, Hu comprises a locking recess locking groove of 12 @52 modified by Sardo, Jr., Fig. 3 defined on an end thereof adjacent to the opening. PNG media_image8.png 244 583 media_image8.png Greyscale Regarding claim 5, PA meets the limitations, as best understood, i.e., the toolbox handle structure according to claim 1, wherein the inner sleeve 21 comprises an insertion hole 141, and the tool bar A is inserted in the insertion hole and protrudes from the tool slot 12, 14, Fig. 4 Hu. PNG media_image9.png 177 142 media_image9.png Greyscale Regarding claim 6, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the toolbox handle structure according to claim 1, wherein the pressing set comprises a T-shaped plate 13, 25, Fig. 2, Sardo Jr., and an I-shaped rod at least partially as shown here, one end of the I-shaped rod is connected to the T-shaped plate Fig. 3, and another end of the I-shaped rod abuts against the pressing spring 47. Regarding claim 7, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the PNG media_image10.png 210 478 media_image10.png Greyscale toolbox handle structure according to claim 6, wherein the T-shaped plate comprises a pressing plate button 13 modified by Sardo, Jr. and an extension rod 46, the pressing plate is exposed from the cap body 19 (similar to cap 34, Hu), a through hole 44 is defined on the cap, and the extension rod 46 is inserted in the through hole and abuts against the I- shaped rod 43, Fig. 3 Sardo, Jr. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-8 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of US Patent number 11,850,709. For double patenting to exist as between the rejected claims and the reference claims it must be determined that the rejected claims are not patentably distinct from the reference claims. In order to make this determination, it first must be determined whether there are any differences between the rejected claims and the reference claims and, if so, whether those differences render the claims patentably distinct. PNG media_image11.png 334 576 media_image11.png Greyscale In this case, for example the reference claim 1 recites for a toolbox handle of a combination screwdriver, the toolbox handle comprising a handle, comprising a barrel and a plate seat, wherein an interior of the barrel is separated into a chamber and an embedding slot by the plate seat; a receiving seat, movably disposed in the chamber and comprising an outer sleeve and a resisting base; an outer spring, elastically abutting the resisting base; a retractable assembly, inserted in the outer sleeve and comprising an inner spring, a positioning rod abutting the inner spring and an inner sleeve adapted to sheathe the positioning rod, wherein a positioning recess is disposed on the positioning rod, the inner sleeve comprising an opening disposed corresponding to the positioning recess, the positioning recess includes a first recess and a second recess connected to each other, and a positioning bump is disposed between the first recess and the second recess; a ball, disposed on the positioning recess and protruded from the opening to abut the receiving seat; and a pressing assembly, comprising a cap and a pressing plate, wherein the cap is disposed on one end of the handle to cover the chamber, and the pressing plate is movably combined with the cap to abut the positioning rod; wherein, the pressing plate is configured to push the positioning rod to compress the inner spring, the positioning rod is moved relative to the inner sleeve, and the ball falls into the positioning recess to be released from abutment to the receiving seat. It is clear that all of the elements of the instant application claim 1 are to be found in the reference claim 1. The instant application claim is anticipated by the reference claim 1. The difference between the instant application claim and the reference claim is that the reference claim recites an additional element, e.g., inner sleeve. Thus, the invention of the reference claim 1 is in effect a “species” of the generic invention recited in the instant application claim 1. It has been held that the generic invention is “anticipated” by the species. See In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Regarding the depending claims, the reference claims noted above recite for a toolbox handle meeting the pending claims, except for that which is old and within the knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art in view of prior art cited above, since combining prior art elements according to known methods yields predictable results. Regarding claim 8, the reference claims do not recite for a clip disclosed not claimed fastened in a groove on the extension rod 622 of the cap, however moveably securing the pressing plate 62 to the cap 61using a c-clip or an O-ring to allow the relative movement of the button or pressing plate relative to the cap in the axial direction yet prevent it from separation, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, requiring routine experimentations with predictable results. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 9 and 10 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 8 is 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, provided double patenting rejections are overcome. Conclusion Prior art made of record and not relied upon at this time, are considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Hsu, Chen and Able et al. are cited to show related inventions. 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/ December 10, 2025 Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 12, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600017
SPOUT SEPARATING TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594659
FLUID-POWERED TORQUE WRENCH WITH FLUID PUMP CONTROLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594795
TYRE SUPPORT DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12564918
TOOL BIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12552009
Tool
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+37.3%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1808 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month