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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitation where “the abrasive section has a minor diameter that is greater than a minor diameter of the primary threaded section” in claim 14 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-8, 10-12 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Falkenstein et al., US20170284447 (hereinafter, Falkenstein).
Regarding clam 1, Falkenstein discloses a structural fastener (see Abstract and Fig. 1) for use with building materials, comprising:
an upper head 12 with a top (see Fig. 1) and an underside having a plurality of cutters (90, see Fig. 10) circumferentially spaced (see Fig. 9) apart from each other with a cutout 70 therebetween, each cutter having an irregular polygonal cross sectional shape (see extended and irregular frustoconical shape of the cutout in Fig. 10); and
a lower shank 14 extending from the head 12 to a distal tip (20, see Fig. 5) and including threading 22 on at least a portion thereof.
Regarding claim 2, Falkenstein discloses the fastener of claim 1, wherein each cutter includes a lower four-sided section in a direction toward the shank and an upper four-sided section extending
from the lower four-sided section to the head top (see annotated Fig. 10 showing upper and lower section having four sided sections represented by rectangular box).
PNG
media_image1.png
434
466
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 10
Regarding claim 3, Falkenstein discloses the fastener of claim 1, wherein each cutout has an irregular polygonal cross-sectional shape (see rectangular/extended shape of the cutout 70 in Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 4, Falkenstein discloses the fastener of claim 3, wherein each cutout 70 has at least four sides (see Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 5, Falkenstein discloses the fastener of claim 4, wherein each cutout 70 has a pentagonal cross-sectional shape (see Figs. 1, 10 and 13).
Regarding claim 6, Falkenstein discloses the fastener of claim 1, wherein each cutout 70 is delimited by a flat top edge (see flat top of the head 12 in Figs. 1, 5 and 10) proximate the top of the head 12.
Regarding claim 7, Falkenstein discloses the fastener of claim 1, wherein a cylindrical portion (see tapered and/or conical section 16 in Fig. 5) of the shank transitions conically to the tip 20, and the conical section comprises double helical threading (see para. [0025] and claim 14).
Regarding claim 8, Falkenstein discloses the fastener of claim 1, wherein the shank includes a proximal unthreaded section (see 54 in Fig. 1), a distal threaded section 22 and an intermediate knurl 52 section between the unthreaded section and threaded section.
Regarding claim 10, Falkenstein discloses the fastener of claim 1, wherein each cutter 90 is delimited circumferentially by a leading edge (LE, as indicated in annotated Fig. 10) and a trailing edge (TE, as indicated in annotated Fig. 10); and the leading edge and trailing edge of each cutter converge toward each other in a direction from the shank toward the top of the head (see arrow and indicated in annotated Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 11, Falkenstein discloses the fastener of claim 1, wherein each cutter 90 includes a bottom section (see section below the top portion 182 in Fig. 10) and a top section 182.
Regarding claim 12, Falkenstein discloses the fastener of claim 11, as best understood, wherein each of the top section 182 and bottom section is quadrilateral (see boxes indicated top and bottom section in annotated Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 19, Falkenstein discloses a structural fastener (see Fig. 1) for use with building materials, comprising:
an upper head 12 with a top and an underside (see Figs 1 and 10);
a shank 14 extending downward from the upper head and having at least a portion with threading 22, wherein
the underside of the upper head defines a plurality of cutters 90, each cutter defined between a leading surface (see leading surface adjacent the leading edge (LE) in annotated Fig. 10) defining a leading forward edge (LE) and an opposite trailing surface defining a trailing forward edge (TE),
the respective leading forward edge and trailing forward edge converge toward one another in a direction from the top of the head toward the shank (see annotated Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 20, Falkenstein discloses the structural fastener of claim 19, wherein the cutters 90 are circumferentially spaced from one another via a cutout 70 with a polygonal cross section (see Fig. 10) having a flat top edge (see Fig. 10).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Falkenstein in view of Hughes US20110164944 (hereinafter, Hughes).
Regarding claim 9, Falkenstein teaches the fastener of claim 1, wherein each cutout 70 is defined between side walls (see 86, 88 in Fig. 10); each side wall defines a front edge (see Fig. 10) that delimits a side of a cutter 90.
Falkenstein fails to teach the side walls converge inwardly toward each other.
Hughes teaches a low energy wood screw (see Fig. 1) similar to the fastener of Falkenstein having cutout and side walls converge inwardly toward each other (see ribs 74 and adjacent side walls).
It is the examiner’s position that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the fastener of Falkenstein to have converging walls as taught by Hughes for effective and safe installation of the screw in to the work piece.
Further, changes in shape have been established to be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art in the absence of a persuasive evidence that the particular configuration was significant. The disclosure does not provide any evidence of the criticality of the shape of the walls. Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify walls to be converging toward each other as an obvious change in shape.
Regarding claim 13, Falkenstein teaches the fastener of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein a frustoconical section between a bottom edge of the cutters and the shank.
However, Hughes teaches similar fastener having a frustoconical section 64 between a bottom edge of the cutter 74 and the shank 50.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the fastener of Falkenstein to have frustoconical section as taught by Hughes so the fastener transitions smoothly between differently sized diameter as well as the frustoconical section facilitates smooth insertion of the fastener during installation (para. [0055]).
Claim(s) 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Falkenstein.
Regarding claim 14, Falkenstein teaches the fastener of claim 1, wherein the shank includes a primary threaded section 22 distal of an abrasive section 52, but fails to teach wherein the abrasive section has a minor diameter that is greater than a minor diameter of the primary threaded section.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have modified the minor diameter of the abrasive section to be greater as disclosed for greater strength of the fastener, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (iv) (a).
Regarding claim 15, Falkenstein teaches a structural fastener (see Fig. 1) for use with building materials, comprising:
an upper head 12 with a top (see Fig. 1) and an underside having a plurality of cutters 90 circumferentially spaced apart from each other with a cutout 70 therebetween, each cutter being dual sectional with an upper portion extending from a top to a bottom and a lower portion extending from a top to a bottom (see annotated Fig. 10 above showing upper and lower portion), wherein the bottom of the upper section and top of the lower section share a common edge (see two rectangular upper and lower portion sharing a common edge in annotated Fig. 10); and
a lower shank 14 extending from the head to a distal tip 20 and including threading 22 on at least a portion thereof.
However, Falkenstein fails to teach wherein the bottom of the lower portion is wider than the top of the lower portion in each cutter.
Falkenstein teaches the bottom of the lower portion is narrower than the top of the lower portion in each cutter.
It is the examiner’s position that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have modified the size of the bottom portion of the lower portion to be wider to aid the insertion of the fastener in order to maintain the strength of the fastener, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (iv) (a).
Regarding claim 16, Falkenstein teaches the structural fastener of claim 15, wherein the top of the upper portion (see upper rectangular portion in annotated Fig. 10 above) is coextensive with or wider than the bottom of the upper portion (see Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 17, Falkenstein teaches the structural fastener of claim 15, but fails to teach wherein the bottom of the lower portion is wider than the top of the upper portion.
It is the examiner’s position that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have modified the bottom of the lower portion to be wider than the top of the upper portion in order to maintain the strength of the fastener, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (iv) (a).
Regarding claim 18, Falkenstein teaches the structural fastener of claim 15, wherein each cutout 70 has an irregular polygonal cross-sectional shape (see Fig. 10).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIL K MAGAR whose telephone number is (571)272-8180. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at (571) 272-8322. 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.
/DIL K. MAGAR/Examiner, Art Unit 3675
/CHRISTINE M MILLS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights