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 § 102/103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 9-16 are finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Khristyuchenko et al. (10,144,117) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Khristyuchenko et al.
PNG
media_image1.png
587
452
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Khristyuchenko et al. discloses all of the limitations of claim 9, i.e., a clamping tool comprising:
a first jaw 114 comprising a first jaw face 110, fig. 1;
a first component 116 coupled to the first jaw, the first component comprising:
a first neck section 132 coupled to the first jaw 114;
a first grip section 112 extending from the first neck section; and
a first plurality of teeth defined by gear 132, Fig. 2 extending from the first neck section;
a second jaw 120 pivotally @108 coupled to the first jaw 114 and rotating with respect to the first jaw about a first rotational axis defined by pivot 108, the second jaw comprising:
a second jaw face 110, the second jaw face positioned on an opposing side of a longitudinal axis from the first jaw face Fig. 1;
a second component 122 comprising:
a second neck section 130 pivotally @126 coupled to the second jaw 120;
a second grip section 118 extending from the second neck section; and
PNG
media_image2.png
322
387
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a second plurality of teeth defined by gear 130 extending from the second neck section Fig. 2, wherein the second jaw 120 pivotally rotates with respect to the second component 122 about a second rotational axis defined by pivot pin 126 , wherein the second plurality of teeth @130 comprise an outer surface, and wherein the outer surface is non- concentric with respect to the second rotational axis @126 Fig. 6 disclosing for the lower teeth to be farther from the pivot 126; and
a biasing element 124 coupled to the second component 118 and the second jaw 120 such that the second jaw and the second component move together Fig. 1;
wherein, when the first jaw face 110 and second jaw face 110, Fig. 1 are spaced apart, the first plurality of teeth are disengaged from the second plurality of teeth Figs. 9 and 6; and
wherein, when the second grip section 118 is rotated toward the longitudinal axis and the first jaw face 110 and the second jaw face 110 engage a workpiece, the first plurality of teeth engage the second plurality of teeth as a torque is applied to the workpiece engaged position, Figs. 8 and 4, anticipating the claim.
However, in order to expedite the prosecution, Khristyuchenko meets the claim, except for explicitly disclosing wherein the second plurality of teeth @130 comprise an outer surface, and wherein the outer surface is non-concentric with respect to the second rotational axis @126
Khristyuchenko discloses that the mechanical advantage of the mechanism 128,
may be adjusted by distance "a" and distance "b", i.e., mechanical advantage of
mechanism 128 may be decreased when da is greater than db and mechanical
advantage will be more when da is less than db, 06:5-25. It would have been obvious to
one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to adjust
the radius of the gear relative to the pivot slot to be larger or smaller than the distance
from pivot to the outer surface, in adjusting the mechanical advantage of the torque
mechanism in adapting the tool for a specific application, since it has been held that
where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the
optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ
233. It is also noted that setting the radius amounts to a size modification. It would have
been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the
invention, to modify the invention with regards to dimension or desired size by a setting
a radius larger/smaller than the pivot, e.g., in adapting the tool for a particular
application, since such 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. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
In Gardnerv. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984),
cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where
the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative
dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions
would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not
patentably distinct from the prior art device.
PNG
media_image3.png
307
379
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
314
413
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, PA (prior art, Khristyuchenko alone or as modified) meets the limitations, i.e., the clamping tool of claim 9, wherein, when the second grip section is rotated away from the longitudinal axis, the biasing element moves the second component away from the longitudinal axis such that the first plurality of teeth disengage from the second plurality of teeth rotating the grip from Fig. 8 to Fig. 6.
Regarding claim 11, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the clamping tool of claim 9, further comprising a pin slot fulcrum 902 defining a pin going through both second jaw and second handle, Figs. 1, 2, 8 and 9 extending through a slot 904 of the second component Fig. 9 and an aperture of the second jaw similar to Fig. 6 coupling the second component to the second jaw.
PNG
media_image7.png
237
373
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the clamping tool of claim 11, wherein the second component 118 is slidable and pivotally rotatable with respect to the second jaw 120, via slot fulcrum 904, Fig. 9.
Regarding claim 13, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the clamping tool of claim 9, wherein the biasing element 124 applies a biasing force moving the second jaw 120 into engagement with a constraining surface annotated above for claim 8 of the second component 118 such that second component and the second jaw move together like a rigid component forcing the handle from Fig. 7 to Fig. 5.
Regarding claim 14, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the clamping tool of claim 13, wherein, when a grip force is applied to the second grip section 118 and the grip force is greater than the biasing force, the second component 118 moves relative to the second jaw 120 such that the second plurality of teeth engage the first plurality of teeth Fig. 8, gear engaged state.
Regarding claim 15, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the clamping tool of claim 9, wherein the second component 118 and the second grip 122 section form a single, integral component Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 16, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the clamping tool of claim 9, wherein the second rotational axis is not collinear with the first rotational axis offset rotational axes defined by pivot pins at 108 and 126, Fig. 1.
Claims 17-20 are finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khristyuchenko et al. (10,144,117).
[AltContent: textbox (120)][AltContent: arrow]Khristyuchenko et al. meets all of the limitations of claim 17, i.e., a pliers comprising:
a first jaw 114 comprising a first interface portion 110;
a first component 116 coupled to the first jaw 114, the first component comprising:
a first neck section 132 coupled to the first jaw;
a first grip section 112 extending from the first neck section 132; and
a first plurality of teeth defined by gear 132 extending from the first neck section away from the first jaw;
a second jaw 120, 128 pivotally coupled to the first jaw @108 and rotatable with respect to the first jaw about a first rotational axis, defined by 108 the second jaw comprising:
a second interface portion 110, the second interface portion facing toward the first interface portion Fig. 1;
a second component 122 comprising:
a second neck section 130 pivotally coupled to the second jaw @126;
a second grip section 118 extending from the second neck section 130;
PNG
media_image10.png
269
297
media_image10.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (CONSTRAINING SFC)]a constraining surface defined by stop pin annotated here, partial Fig. 9 facing toward the second grip section similar to instant application, Fig. 7 (please note that limitations from specification are not read into the claims); and
a second plurality of teeth defined by gear 130 extending from the second neck section 130, wherein the second jaw 120 pivotally rotates with respect to the second component 118 about a second rotational axis 126/902 ;
a pin 902 extending through an aperture formed in 130 @904 defined in the second component 122 and an elongated slot 904 120, the pin 902 coupling the second component 122 to the second jaw 120; and
a spring 124 coupled to the second component 118 and the second jaw 120;
wherein the spring 124 applies a biasing force pushing the second jaw 120 into engagement with the constraining surface stop pin of the second component 118 to resist movement of the second component 118 relative to the second jaw 120, meeting the claim, except for the elongated slot to be formed in the second component and for the aperture to be formed in the second jaw, i.e., a vice versa arrangement.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to form the elongated slot in the second component and to form the aperture in the neck 128 of the second jaw, as an alternative means of achieving the same results, since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167.
Regarding claim 18, PA (prior art, modified Khristyuchenko et al.) meets the limitations, i.e., the pliers of claim 17, wherein, when a grip force that is greater than the biasing force is applied to the second grip section 122, the second component 118 moves relative to the second jaw 120 such that the second plurality of teeth 130 engage the first plurality of teeth 1132, Figs. 7, 8.
Regarding claim 19, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the pliers of claim 18, wherein, when the second grip section 122 is released, the grip force is less than the biasing force and the biasing force pushes the second plurality of teeth 130 such that the second plurality of teeth disengage from the first plurality of teeth 132, Figs. 5, 6.
Regarding claim 20, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the pliers of claim 17, further comprising a pin sliding pivot 902 extending through a slot 904 of the second component 118 and an aperture similar to Fig. 5 of the second jaw 120 coupling the second component 118 to the second jaw 120, wherein the second component is slidable and pivotally rotatable with respect to the second jaw through slot 904.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: art of record considered as a whole, alone or in combination, neither anticipates nor renders obvious a pliers comprising first elongated aperture formed in the second component, wherein the second plurality of teeth comprise an outer surface positioned along a curve, and wherein the curve defines a radius that is centered on a point that is not positioned within the first elongate aperture, together in combination with the rest of the limitations as recited in claim 1.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 1, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
PNG
media_image12.png
301
222
media_image12.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image13.png
371
414
media_image13.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 9, Applicant argues that Khristyuchenko et al. does not identically disclose a clamping tool "wherein the second plurality of teeth comprise an outer surface, and wherein the outer surface is non-concentric with respect to the second rotational axis. Examiner, respectfully disagrees. Firstly, in Fig. 26, PA (prior art, Khristyuchenko) clearly discloses a non-concentric arrangement of teeth relative to the pivot. Secondly, PA with reference to Fig. 1 partially shown here discloses in column 6, lines 5-21, that the mechanism 128 increases or decreases the mechanical advantages on the jaws, by configuring and arranging the distances a and b. modifying db, e.g., as shown in Fig. 26 to be non-concentric to either increase or decrease the mechanical advantage is considered well within routine experimentations with predictable results.
With regards to claim 17, Applicant argues that independent claim 17, as amended, recites pliers with "a pin extending through an elongated slot defined in the second component and an aperture of the second jaw, the pin coupling the second component to the second jaw." Applicant asserts that Khristyuchenko et al. does not identically disclose pliers with "a pin extending through an elongated slot defined in the second component and an aperture of the second jaw, the pin coupling the second component to the second jaw," as set forth by claim 17. Examienr respectfully disagrees. The embodiment of Figs. 1 and 2 discloses a fixed hole pivot, however the embodiments of Figs. 9, 10 and the embodiment of Figs. 29 and 30, disclose an elongated slot for the moving pivot, e.g., 904 of Figs. 9 and 10. The slot is formed in the neck portion 28 of the second jaw 120 and the aperture is formed in the neck portion 130 of the second component 122. The difference is the reversal of parts. Modifying the invention with regards to the location of the slot, i.e., forming it in the second component and forming the aperture in the second jaw, is considered among routine experimentations with predictable results well within the KSR parameters, in view of reversal of parts, indicated above and further in view of location of parts, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikes, 86 USPQ 70.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HADI SHAKERI whose telephone number is (571)272-4495. The fax phone number for forwarding unofficial documents for discussion purposes only is (571) 273-4495. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F.
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, Brian Keller can be reached on 571 272 8548. The fax 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.
/Hadi Shakeri/
August 7, 2026 Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights