Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/411,344

WRENCH TOOL

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 12, 2024
Examiner
THOMAS, DAVID B
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Lern Tim Tools Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
1093 granted / 1424 resolved
+6.8% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1453
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
31.6%
-8.4% vs TC avg
§102
39.5%
-0.5% vs TC avg
§112
19.3%
-20.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1424 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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(s) 1-3, 5, and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2007/0289426 A1 to (Chaconas). Regarding claim 1, noting Figs. 1-6, (Chaconas) discloses a wrench tool (bolt remover 10) including: a main body 12; a receiving hole (axial bore 22) formed from a first outer side 16 of the main body 12 in a first direction; and a plurality of teeth (ribs 28) each projecting from the main body 12 in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, projecting inward in the receiving hole 22, and extending in a longitudinal direction (along axis 14), the longitudinal direction and the second direction being contained in a same plane. Regarding claim 2, in (Chaconas), the main body 12 extends annularly around the first direction. Regarding claim 3, in (Chaconas), the main body 12 has a polygonal outer surface (outer wall 20) around the first direction (Figs. 1-5). Regarding claim 5, in (Chaconas), each of the plurality of teeth 28 is tapered in the first direction (Figs. 1-3). Regarding claim 11, in (Chaconas), the plurality of teeth 28 are equidistantly arranged around the first direction (Figs. 4 and 5). Regarding claim 12, in (Chaconas), the receiving hole 22 is disposed through the main body 12, and each of the plurality of teeth 28 extends in the first direction from the first outer side 16 of the main body to a second outer side 18 of the main body opposite to the first outer side 16 of the main body (Figs. 1-3). Regarding claim 13, in (Chaconas), each of the plurality of teeth 28 extends linearly in the longitudinal direction (Figs. 1-3 and 6). PNG media_image1.png 318 346 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 14, in (Chaconas), the main body and the plurality of teeth are integrally formed of one piece (Figs. 1-6). PNG media_image2.png 290 344 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 230 394 media_image3.png Greyscale Claim(s) 1-4, and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 11,267,107 B2 to (Shih). PNG media_image4.png 350 316 media_image4.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, (Shih) discloses a wrench tool including: a main body 10; a receiving hole formed from a first outer side of the main body in a first direction; and a plurality of teeth (engaging portions 141) each projecting from the main body 10 in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, projecting inward in the receiving hole, and extending in a longitudinal direction, the longitudinal direction and the second direction being contained in a same plane (Figs. 1-3). Regarding claim 2, in (Shih) the main body extends annularly around the first direction (Figs. 1-3). Regarding claim 3, in (Shih) the main body has a polygonal outer surface around the first direction (Col. 4, lines 14-18: “Referring to FIGS. 1 to 3, the present invention provides a ratchet socket which comprises a main body (10), and an outer periphery of the main body (10) has ratchet teeth (11) formed in an endless circular pattern to form the main body (10) with a polygonal cross section.”). Regarding claim 4, in (Shih) the receiving hole is polygonal (Col. 4, lines 30-35; “The main body (10) comprises a hexagonal inner periphery to form six internal angles (13) and six inner edges (14), and the internal angles (13) and the inner edges (14) are alternately arranged at positions corresponding PNG media_image5.png 418 404 media_image5.png Greyscale to the ratchet teeth (11) at the outer periphery of the main PNG media_image6.png 280 262 media_image6.png Greyscale body (10).”). Regarding claim 11, in (Shih) the plurality of teeth are equidistantly arranged around the first direction. Regarding claim 12, in (Shih) the receiving hole is disposed through the main body, and each of the plurality of teeth extends in the first direction from the first outer side of the main body to a second outer side of the main body opposite to the first outer side of the main body (Figs. 1 and 2). Regarding claim 13, in (Shih) the plurality of teeth extends linearly in the longitudinal direction. Regarding claim 14, in (Shih) the main body and the plurality of teeth are integrally formed of one piece. 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) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2007/0289426 A1 to (Chaconas), as applied to claim 1 above, as being obvious as suggested by US 2022/0184780 A1 to (KRUPEY). (Chaconas), as applied to claim 1 above, provides a wrench tool (bolt remover 10) according to claim 15, and states in paragraph [0046] that: “It should be understood that the bolt remover should be made from a material that is harder than the fastener material, e.g. 6140 or 4140 alloy steels for the bolt remover and 1035 alloy steel for the fastener.” Thus, although (Chaconas) fails to explicitly state or suggest that said material may be stainless steel, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to fabricate the wrench tool (bolt remover 10) of (Chaconas) from stainless steel, since it has been held to be within the general skill in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. See, e.g., In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (selection of a known plastic to make a container of a type made of plastics prior to the invention was held to be obvious) (KRUPEY) provides a backup tool having, inter alia, a socket 504 that is placed on a nut (or bolt). In paragraph [0074], (KRUPEY) teaches “The backup tools may be made of 4140 steel (very hard) or 316 stainless steel to accommodate the food and drug administration”, thus demonstrating that choosing 4140 steel or 316 stainless steel for the fabrication of the tool for the intended purpose(s) would have been obvious to a skilled artisan. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified (Chaconas), as applied to claim 1 above, by fabrication the wrench tool (bolt remover 10) of stainless steel as an alternative to 4140 alloy steels, as a matter of obvious design choice, as demonstrated by (KRUPEY). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6-10 and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if claims 6, 8, and 16 are rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: regarding claim 6, that each of the plurality of teeth includes two flat side surfaces extending from the main body and an arcuate ridge surface connected to and between the two flat side surfaces; regarding claim 8, that each of the plurality of teeth is tapered in the second direction; and, regarding claim 16, that each of the plurality of teeth has a width smaller than or equal to 0.25 times of a diametric dimension of the receiving hole, together in combination with the rest of the limitations in the independent and any intervening claim, have neither been disclosed nor suggested by the prior art of record. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as describing numerous wrench tools having features related to the present application. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David B. Thomas whose telephone number is (571) 272-4497. The examiner’s e-mail address is: dave.thomas@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 11:30-7:30. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, David Posigian can be reached on (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 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. /David B. Thomas/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723 /DBT/
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 12, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594797
MACHINE FOR MOUNTING AND DEMOUNTING A TYRE RELATIVE TO A CORRESPONDING VEHICLE WHEEL RIM AND METHOD FOR MOUNTING A TYRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594649
TOOL BIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589473
SOCKET
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583082
ENGAGING STRUCTURE FOR HAND TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576485
OPEN-ENDED WRENCH WITH POLYMER ADAPTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
77%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+21.3%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1424 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