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
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 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thompson (U.S Patent No. 1,413,243).
Regarding claim 1, Thompson teaches (Figures 1, 2, and 5) a wrench having a handle (10) and a socket wrench head (12). The socket wrench head (12) is arranged at one end of the handle and includes inside of it an inner cavity (12f) for mounting a nut and a bolt reservation hole (12e) in communication with the inner cavity. A strip-shaped clamp gap (14) at the second end of the handle (10). The strip-shaped clamp gap formed by left and right and clamping arms on opposing sides of the gap. The strip-shaped clamp gap is capable of clamping a washer as this is dependent on the size and orientation of the washer.
Regarding claim 7, the handle and the socket wrench are perpendicular to each other (Figure 2) in a corner shape.
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson in view of Hsieh (U.S Publication 20020178873).
Thompson teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above except a convex bulge being located on a clamping surface of one of the left and right arms.
Hsieh teaches (Figure 3) it is known to provide convex bulges on the clamping surfaces of the left and right arms (generally 24). Hsieh also teaches it is known to not have these bulges present (Figures 1 and 2).
Based on the teachings of Hsieh it would have been obvious to try adding convex bulges to the clamping surfaces of the left and right clamping arms of Thompson in an attempt to create better contact between the arms and anything being actuated by the arms.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson in view of Hillinger (U.S Patent No. 5,595,095).
Regarding claim 6, Thompson teaches the inner cavity (12f) has 6 sides. Therefore Thompson teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above except the inner cavity having 12 sides.
Hillinger teaches (Figures 1-3; Col. 8, lines 6-9) it is common for an inner cavity (36) of a ratchet head to be composed of 12 sides.
Because Thompson and Hillinger teach known equivalent structures when it comes to inner cavities of ratchet it heads it would have been obvious to substitute a 12 sided inner surface for the 6 sided inner surface to achieve the predictable result of being able to engage a bolt.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson in view of Gummow (U.S Publication No. 20140260819).
Thompson teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above, including that the wrench is manufactured of metal (see cross-section of Figure 5), but fails to teach the wrench being made specifically of stainless steel or plastic.
Gummow teaches (paragraph 22) that a known, suitable, type of material to manufacture a wrench is stainless steel.
It would have been obvious to have modified Thompson to incorporate the teachings of Gummow to make the wrench of stainless steel because Gummow has indicated this is a known and suitable material which would ensure the device functioned properly.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s arguments that Thompson teaches a notch shape instead of a strip shape, the two shapes are not mutually exclusive. The phrase “strip-shaped” itself is subjective and only requires “a long narrow area”. Examiner considers the spacing between the left and right clamping arms to meet the requirement of “long narrow area” as even a square shape can be considered both narrow with each side being considered “long”. Examiner would also like to turn applicant’s attention to the prior art cited with the previous action. For example, Figure 1 of Steele (see 64 vs 66), Figure 14 of Adamo (58), Figure 1 of Lin (adjustable strip shape between 121 and 122), Figure 1 of Kleffman (22 and 18), and Figure 1 of Vannote (O) each teach it is known to make a notch/opening at the end of the tool rectangular in shape. Modifying the shape of the notch of Thompson to read on a narrowing amendment would be within the level of ordinary skill.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rothe (U.S Patent No. 2,594,684), Micklich (US Publication No. 20040139827), Steele (U.S Patent No. 6,637,299), Ragner (U.S Patent No. 9,770,820), Adamo (U.S Patent No. 8,491,655), Lin (U.S Publication No. 20090282953), Hawkins (U.S Publication No. 20020194679), Oakey (U.S Patent No. 518,328), Kleffman (U.S Patent No. 930,973), Lantt (U.S Patent No. 361,704), Miller (U.S Patent No. 485,290), Tuttle (U.S Patent No. 1,567,877), Vannote (U.S Patent No. 642,391), and Gray (U.S Patent No. 184,775) teach elements of the current invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWARD F LANDRUM whose telephone number is (571)272-5567. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Marivelisse Santiago-Cordero can be reached at 571-272-7839. 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.
/EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
