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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (Claims 1-16) in the reply filed on 2/24/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 17-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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 1-16 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "first-jig-surface" in line 7. It is not clear whether it refers to the previously recited “a first jig-surface” in line 4 or a new limitation. For examination purpose, it is interpreted as being same as the previously recited limitation.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “workpiece” in line 6. It is not clear whether it refers to the previously recited “a workpiece” in Claim 1 or a new limitation. For examination purpose, it is interpreted as being same as the previously recited limitation.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “workpiece” in line 10. It is not clear whether it refers to the previously recited “a workpiece” in Claim 1 or a new limitation. For examination purpose, it is interpreted as being same as the previously recited limitation.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "first-jig-surface" in line 7. It is not clear whether it refers to the previously recited “a first jig-surface” in line 4 or a new limitation. For examination purpose, it is interpreted as being same as the previously recited limitation.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “workpiece” in line 6. It is not clear whether it refers to the previously recited “a workpiece” in Claim 10 or a new limitation. For examination purpose, it is interpreted as being same as the previously recited limitation.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “workpiece” in line 10. It is not clear whether it refers to the previously recited “a workpiece” in Claim 10 or a new limitation. For examination purpose, it is interpreted as being same as the previously recited limitation.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6, 10-11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng et al. (CN110449637) of which its corresponding attached English translation is cited in view of Dods et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2007/0140800).
Regarding Claim 1, Deng teaches a jig (Fig. 1) for forming a hole in a workpiece, wherein the workpiece comprises a workpiece-surface having a workpiece-surface contour and wherein the jig comprises:
a body (Fig. 1, 1) comprising:
a first jig-surface (Fig. 1, bottom surface of the positioning base 1) that comprises a first jig-surface contour, wherein the first jig-surface contour is complementary to the workpiece-surface contour of the workpiece-surface ([0025]: The bottom of the positioning base 1 is an irregular surface, which matches the shape of the outer surface of the radar antenna radome.); and
a second jig-surface (Fig. 1, upper surface of the positioning base 1) that is planar and that is opposite to the first jig-surface (Fig. 1, bottom surface of the positioning base 1); and
a through hole (Fig. 1, a drill sleeve hole through which a drill sleeve 2 is inserted) that extend through the body (Fig. 1, 1) between the first jig-surface (Fig. 1, bottom surface of the positioning base 1) and the second jig-surface (Fig. 1, upper surface of the positioning base 1) for forming the hole in the workpiece, wherein the through hole comprises a through-hole axis (Fig. 1, an axis through a center of the drill sleeve hole) that is perpendicular to the second jig-surface (Fig. 1, upper surface of the positioning base 1) and that is non-perpendicular to the first jig-surface (Fig. 1, bottom surface of the positioning base 1) such that the hole formed in the workpiece has a hole axis that is non-perpendicular to the workpiece-surface (Since the through hole in the positioning base 1 is not perpendicular to the bottom surface of the positioning base 1, the hole axis in the workpiece would not be perpendicular to the workpiece-surface as the workpiece-surface matches the shape of the bottom surface.).
Deng does not explicitly teach a jig for forming multiple holes.
Dods et al. teaches a jig (Fig. 1, 100) for forming multiple holes (Fig. 1, 130).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to increase an overall size of the jig of Deng and provide it with additional through holes as taught by Dods in order to form a pattern of holes in the workpiece with a high precision using a single jig as suggested in Dods [0025].
Regarding Claim 2, Deng/Dods teach the jig of Claim 1, wherein the through holes (Dods Fig. 1, 130) are spaced apart from each other and aligned along a longitudinal axis (Dods Fig. 1, vertical direction) of the body (Deng Fig. 1, 1 modified by Dobs).
Regarding Claim 3, Deng/Dods teach the jig of Claim 1, further comprising a first set of bushings (Deng Fig. 1, 2) that are located within the through holes (Dods Fig. 1, holes through which bushings 130 are inserted) (Deng [0025]: The drill sleeve 2 is placed in the drill sleeve hole of the positioning base).
Regarding Claim 5, Deng/Dods teach the jig of Claim 1, further comprising:
a centering hole (Dods Fig. 2, 138) that extends through the body between the first jig-surface and the second jig-surface (Dods [0031]: index holes 138 which may extend from top surface 104 to contact surface 116); and
a centering pin (Dods Fig. 3, 140) that extends through the centering hole (Dods Fig. 2, 138) for aligning the through holes with the workpiece ([0031]: Index holes 138 may be formed to receive an alignment pin 140. Alignment pins 140 may be temporarily inserted into an index hole drilled in structure 120.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a centering hole in the jig of Deng and an index hole in the workpiece of Deng and insert a pin into the centering hole and the index hole as taught by Dods in order to locate holes to be drilled in desired positions as suggested in Dods [0031].
Regarding Claim 6, Deng/Dods teach the jig of Claim 5, wherein:
the through holes (Dods Fig. 1, holes through which bushings 130 are inserted) are spaced apart from each other and aligned along a longitudinal axis (Dobs Fig. 1, vertical direction) of the body (Deng Fig. 1, 1 modified by Dods), but, do not explicitly teach the centering hole is located between through holes along the longitudinal axis of the body.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to position the centering hole at any desired position particularly near the through holes including between the through holes since placing the centering hole closer to the through holes would improve positional accuracy of holes to be drilled.
Regarding Claim 10, Deng teaches a jig for a reaming hole in a workpiece, wherein the workpiece is annular (Examiner notes that the claim language such as “a jig for a reaming hole in a workpiece, wherein the workpiece is annular” is a statement of intended use. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In this case, the structure of Deng's jig is capable of performing the intended use. (see MPEP 2114)) and comprises a workpiece-surface having a workpiece-surface contour and wherein the jig comprises:
a body (Fig. 1, 1) comprising:
a first jig-surface (Fig. 1, bottom surface of the positioning base 1) that comprises a first jig-surface contour, wherein the first jig-surface contour is complementary to the workpiece-surface contour of the workpiece-surface ([0025]: The bottom of the positioning base 1 is an irregular surface, which matches the shape of the outer surface of the radar antenna radome.); and
a second jig-surface (Fig. 1, upper surface of the positioning base 1) that is planar and that is opposite to the first jig-surface (Fig. 1, bottom surface of the positioning base 1);
a first through hole (Fig. 1, a drill sleeve hole through which a drill sleeve 2 is inserted) that extend through the body (Fig. 1, 1) between the first jig-surface (Fig. 1, bottom surface of the positioning base 1) and the second jig-surface (Fig. 1, upper surface of the positioning base 1) for reaming a first hole in the workpiece,
wherein:
the first through hole comprises a fist through-hole axis (Fig. 1, an axis through a center of the drill sleeve hole) that is perpendicular to the second jig-surface (Fig. 1, upper surface of the positioning base 1) and that is non-perpendicular to the first jig-surface (Fig. 1, bottom surface of the positioning base 1) such that the first through-hole axis and a first hole axis of the first hole are coincident or parallel to each other (The first through-hole and the first hole axis would be coincident since the drill bit would form the first hole along the first through-hole axis.).
Deng does not explicitly teach a second through hole that extends through the body between the first jig-surface and the second jig-surface for reaming a second hole in the workpiece.
Dods et al. teaches a jig (Fig. 1, 100) for forming multiple holes (Fig. 1, 130).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to increase an overall size of the jig of Deng and provide it with additional through holes including a second through hole as taught by Dods in order to form a pattern of holes in the workpiece with a high precision using a single jig as suggested in Dods [0025]. The resulting additional through holes in the jig of Deng would be parallel to the first through hole in the jig of Deng as the additional through holes would be formed in the jig in the same manner as the first through hole.
Regarding Claim 11, Deng/Dods teach the jig of Claim 10, wherein the first through hole (Dods Fig. 1, 130) and the second through hole (Dods Fig. 1, 130 adjacent to the first through hole) are spaced apart from each other and aligned along a longitudinal axis (Dods Fig. 1, vertical direction) of the body (Deng Fig. 1, 1 modified by Dods).
Regarding Claim 13, Deng/Dobs teach the jig of Claim 10, further comprising:
a centering hole (Dods Fig. 2, 138) that extends through the body between the first jig-surface and the second jig-surface (Dods [0031]: index holes 138 which may extend from top surface 104 to contact surface 116); and
a centering pin (Dods Fig. 3, 140) that extends through the centering hole (Dods Fig. 2, 138) for aligning the through holes with the workpiece ([0031]: Index holes 138 may be formed to receive an alignment pin 140. Alignment pins 140 may be temporarily inserted into an index hole drilled in structure 120.),
wherein:
the first through hole (Dods Fig. 1, 130) and the second through hole (Dods Fig. 1, 130 adjacent to the first through hole) are spaced apart from each other and aligned along a longitudinal axis (Dods Fig. 1, vertical direction) of the body (Deng Fig. 1, 1 modified by Dobs), but, do not explicitly teach the centering hole is located between the first through hole and the second through hole along the longitudinal axis of the body.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a centering hole at any desired position particularly near the through holes including between the through holes in the jig and a corresponding index hole in the workpiece of Deng and insert a pin into the centering hole and the index hole since placing the centering hole closer to the through holes would improve positional accuracy of holes to be drilled as suggested in Dods [0031].
Claim(s) 4 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng et al. (CN110449637) of which its corresponding attached English translation is cited in view of Dods et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2007/0140800), as applied Claims 1 and 10, and further in view of Valentine et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0297203).
Regarding Claim 4, Deng/Dods teach the jig of Claim 3, but do not explicitly teach further comprising a second set of the bushings that are interchangeable with the first set of the bushings,
wherein the bushings of the first set and the bushings of the second set have different diameters.
Valentine teaches that bushings (Fig. 1D, 120) with different sized drill cavities can be operably coupled the jig ([0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide more than one set of the bushings, each having a different hole diameter in order to drill holes of different sizes using the same jig by simply changing the bushing as suggested in Valentine [0050].
Regarding Claim 12, Deng/Dods teach the jig of Claim 10, further comprising:
a first set of bushings (Deng Fig. 1, 2) (It would be obvious that the holes added to the jig of Deng as taught by Dods would receive the same bushings.);
wherein:
the bushings (Deng Fig. 1, 2) of the first set are located within each one of the first through hole (Deng Fig. 1, a drill sleeve hole through which a drill sleeve 2 is inserted) and the second through hole (Deng [0025]: The drill sleeve 2 is placed in the drill sleeve hole of the positioning base).
Deng/Dods do not explicitly teach the second set of the bushings are interchangeable with the first set of the bushings; and the bushings of the first set and the bushings of the second set have different diameters.
Valentine teaches that bushings (Fig. 1D, 120) with different sized drill cavities can be operably coupled the jig ([0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide more than one set of the bushings, each having a different hole diameter in order to drill holes of different sizes using the same jig by simply changing the bushing as suggested in Valentine [0050].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-9 and 14-16 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUN S YOO whose telephone number is (571)270-7141. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM.
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, SUNIL SINGH can be reached at (571) 272-3460. 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.
/JUN S YOO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726 5/22/2026
Prosecution Insights