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 as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because:
Reference characters "46" and "47" have both been used to designate the same slot.
Reference characters "46" and "48" have both been used to designate the same slot.
See specification objection below for further explanation.
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. 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.
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 saw, scraper, and fork, of claims 10, 16, and 20
Applicant may add these structures via a new Figure but the description of these new Figures in the specification must very clear that the fork, scraper, and saw shapes are known and are shown as examples. This will avoid any new matter issues since there is no disclosure explaining what these embodiments look like. Without this explanation, any fork, scraper, and saw Figure can be considered new matter.
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On page 5 line 30 and page 8 line 5, the at least one slot 26, first slot 47, and second slot 48 disclosures are unclear. There is a tool 4 that has the first slot 47 and the second slot 48. There is not a structure that is represented by the number 46 as slots 47 and 48 are not different parts of a sub-structure of the tool 4. For example, in Figure 5, first raised section 25 and second raised section 28 are different parts of the same raised section 24. In this case, there is a structure that represents 24 as a sub-structure of body 2. With regards to 47 and 48, tool 4 has a first slot 47 and a separate second slot 48. The tool 4 can be disclosed as having at least one slot and then further limited as the at least one slot is two slots. Here the at least one slot is 47 or 48 and, when further defined as two slots, 47 and 48. Use of the number 46 is not needed and should be deleted.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-20 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
With regards to claims 1, 11, and 17, the phrase “a top side” is unclear. The tool holder assembly is a handheld tool that is capable of being utilized in an infinite number of orientations including ones where the where the top side would be the bottom side. For example, side 20 in the orientation shown in Figure 6 would be the bottom side in this case. Without an orientation established, use of these term is indefinite. Terms that are true regardless of the orientation should be used (i.e. an outer side or first side). Claims 3, 12, and 17 have the same issue with the term “upper”. Claims 4, 13, and 17 have the same issue with the terms “upper” and “lower”. Claims 5, 14, and 18 have the same issue with the term “bottom”.
With regards to claims 1 and 6, it is unclear what structure defines the “at least one slot” that comprises the first slot and the second slot. As written, the tool shank has the at least one slot which comprises a first slot and the second slot. As written, there must be a structure on the shank that has the first and second slots but as discussed above, there does not appear to be a structure to represent 46. The shank has the first and second slots and there is not an additional structure to represent the at least one slot in addition to the first slot in claim 1. Claim 1 needs to have at least one slot or a first slot not both. If claim 1 is amended to use the “at least one slot” option, claim 6 will need to be amended to say the at least one slot is a first slot and a second slot. If claim 1 is amended to disclose the “a first slot option”, claim 1 and claim 6 needs to delete the “at least one slot” language. Claims 11 and 15 have the same issue. Claims 17 and 19 have the same issue.
With regards to claims 1 and 6, the both occurrence of the phrase “slidably engaged” is unclear. In order for the assembly to comprise the tool and main body, the raised sections must be inside the respective slots to form the assembly. Once the sections are in their slots, there is no sliding that takes place. The engagement is fixed. While during assembly, the sections may slide into the slots but this sliding does not take place while the assembly comprises the tool and the main body. The term “slidably” needs to be removed. Claims 11 and 15 have the same issue. Claims 17 and 19 have the same issue.
With regards to claim 1, the phrase “the cantilever being detachably connected to the main body” is unclear. It is unclear what structure allows for the cantilever to be detachably connected to the main body without the cam lock (see claim 2) and the cover.
With regards to claim 2, the phrases “cantilever being operably connected to the cam lock” and “cam lock capable of detachably connecting the shank to the main body” are unclear. First as written, the cam lock connects to the cantilever and separately connects the shank to the main body. As written, there are two different connection functions being performed which is not supported. Second, the claim later discloses the cam lever and the cam lobe. As written, the lever and lobe do not play a role in the connection between the cantilever and the cam lock or the connection between the cam lock and the shank which is not supported. The “cam lever” and the “cam lobe” are claimed and the claim needs to acknowledge that these are the structures that perform the connecting of the cantilever (shank) to the main body because this is the only way it is supported. Claim 11 has the same issue. Claim 17 has the same issue.
With regards to claim 7, the “folding handle” disclosure is unclear. The handle is introduced as a function of the clevis joint and is not positively claimed. It is unclear if the handle is supposed to be positively claimed or not. Claim 15 has the same issue. Claim 19 has the same issue.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the cam lever". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The cam lever is introduced in claim 2 and claim 9 depends from claims 1, 6, and 7. Claim 9 should depend from claim 2 or a claim that depends from claim 2.
With regards to claim 10, what structure allows for the tool head to be considered a saw, fork, or scraper? Claim 16 has the same issue. Claim 20 has the same issue.
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 6-10 are rejected, as best understood, under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Zhang (2024/0017432). See Examiner added reference labels in the Figure below.
With regards to claim 1, Zhang discloses the same invention including a tool holder assembly (Figs. 1-3) having a main body (22), a tool (3), the main body (2) having a top side (Fig. 2), a proximal end (Fig. 2), a distal end (Fig. 2), and at least one raised section (23), the at least one raised section extending longitudinally outward from the proximal end towards the distal end (23), the at least one raised section (23) comprising a first raised section (231), the first raised section being positioned offset from the top side by a predefined length (Figs. 1 and 2), the tool (3) having a shank (31, 32) and a head (Fig. 1), the shank further having a cantilever (C) and at least one slot (31), a first slot of the at least one slot (31) being disposed adjacent to the cantilever (Fig. 1), the first slot being slidably engaged with the first raised section (31, 231, Fig. 1), the cantilever being detachably connected to the main body (the entire tool 3 is detachably connected to the main body 22).
With regards to claims 6-10, Zhang discloses the at least one raised section has a second raised section (2R), the at least one slot has a second slot (2S), the second raised section being parallel with the first raise section (231, 2R, Fig. 1), the second slot being slidably engaged with the second raised section (2S, 2R), a clevis joint being terminally connected to the proximal end of the main body (26), the clevis joint positioned opposite of the at least one raised section (Fig. 2), the clevis joint capable of being pivotally connected to a folding handle (Fig. 7), a cover being detachably mounted to the main body (21), a stud being terminally connected to the main body (Fig. 9) and being positioned opposite the cam lever (25), and the head of the tool is a knife (3).
PNG
media_image1.png
734
578
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 11-16 and 17-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Zhang has a cam lock with a lever 221 and lobe 222 but fails to disclose the cantilever being operably connected to the cam lever and cam lobe of the cam lock.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON DANIEL PRONE whose telephone number is (571)272-4513. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday: 7:00 am-3:00 pm.
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, Boyer D Ashley can be reached on (571)272-4502. 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.
10 March 2026
/Jason Daniel Prone/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724