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 . 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 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/27/2023 has been considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 8-16 and 20-22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 02/24/2026. Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 02/24/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that grouping overlap in scope. This is not found persuasive because as noted in the requirement for restriction, the dependencies as laid on in the restriction require different structural components, that are also provided for with different search strategies in different areas. Although the base claim from which many depend (the linking claim in this restriction) are similar, the dependent claims themselves broaden the overall structure required for search and consideration. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 1-8 and 17-19 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.
***
Claims 2-8 dependent from claim *** rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, are rejected as being dependent from a rejected parent claim.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-8 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Harrison (US 6,009,582).
Regarding claim 1, Harrison teaches a hand tool (12) comprising: a first handle portion (20) comprising a first end portion and a second end portion; a second handle portion (22) comprising a first end portion and a second end portion (Figure 1); a first tool element a second tool element (13)(Figure 7; Col. 7, Lines 4-45); wherein the first end portion of the first handle portion is rotatably coupled to the first end portion of the second handle portion at a first pivot axis (70; See Figures 7 and 8); wherein the second end portion of the first handle portion is rotatably coupled to the first tool element at a second pivot axis (26); wherein the second end portion of the second handle portion is rotatably coupled to the second tool element at a third pivot axis (42); and wherein the first tool element is rotatably coupled to the second tool element at a fourth pivot axis (30); wherein the hand tool is movable from a closed configuration to an open configuration (Figures 7-9).
Regarding claim 3, Harrison teaches the hand tool of claim 1, wherein when the hand tool is in the closed configuration, the first tool element extends substantially parallel to the first handle portion and the second tool element extends substantially parallel to the second handle portion (Figures 7 and 9; Not the placement of Tools 13 in the open position of Figure 7 and again in the closed position in Figure 9 although there is no reference character).
Regarding claim 4, Harrison teaches the hand tool of claim 1, wherein when the hand tool is in the open configuration, the first tool element extends substantially perpendicular to the first handle portion and the second tool element extends substantially perpendicular to the second handle portion (See Figures 10-13 noting the tool may pivot around the entire axis and be in an open configuration and also substantially perpendicular depending on the desired use of the tool (See Figure 19 specifically noting a plurality of open positions for multiple tools).
Regarding claim 5, Harrison teaches the hand tool of claim 1, wherein the first handle portion comprises a recess, and the recess receives a portion of the first tool element when the hand tool is in the closed configuration (Figure 1; Figures 8 and 9 showing side views and 10-11 showing a top view).
Regarding claim 6, Harrison teaches the hand tool of claim 5, wherein when the hand tool is in the closed configuration, a portion of the first tool element (13) is disposed between the first handle portion and the second handle portion (See Figure 4 noting the outer sides of the handles 54 and 56 and the tool portions therebetween).
Regarding claim 7, Harrison teaches the hand tool of claim 1, wherein the first handle portion and the second handle portion are spaced rotationally apart by a first angle when the hand tool is in the closed configuration, the first handle portion and the second handle portion are spaced rotationally apart by a second angle when the hand tool is in the open configuration, and the first angle is greater than the second angle (Figure 4 noting the opening of the handle portions and Figure 7 noting the smaller angle of rotation wherein the handle portions are touching near pivot axis 30, 46).
Regarding claim 17, Harrison teaches a hand tool comprising:
first and second handle portions (20, 22) rotatably coupled to each other at a first pivot axis (70; See Figures 7 and 8);
a first tool (13) element rotatably coupled to the first handle portion at a second pivot axis (26); a second tool element (13) rotatably coupled to the second handle portion at a third pivot axis (42)
wherein the first and second tool elements are rotatably coupled to each other at a fourth pivot axis (30); and wherein the hand tool is configured to transition from a storage position to a use position by rotating the first and second handle portions relative to each other about the first pivot axis (Figures 7-9), rotating the first tool element relative to the first handle portion about the second pivot axis, rotating the second tool element relative to the second handle portion about the third pivot axis, and rotating the first and second tool elements relative to each other about the fourth pivot axis (Figures 7-9).
Regarding claim 18, Harrison teaches the hand tool of claim 17, wherein when the hand tool is in the storage position, the first tool element extends substantially parallel to the first handle portion and the second tool element extends substantially parallel to the second handle portion, and wherein when the hand tool is in the use position, the first tool element extends substantially perpendicular to the first handle portion and the second tool element extends substantially perpendicular to the second handle portion.
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.
Claims 2 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harrison (US 6,009,582) in view of Burdis (US 2,989,100).
Regarding claims 2 and 19 Harrison teaches all of the elements of the current invention and wherein the first tool element and the second tool element are capable of being a plurality of different tools and wherein those tools are replaceable and removable (Figures; Col, 7, Lines 28-45) but does not appear to provide portions of an axe.
Burdis teaches it is known in the art of collapsable cutting hand tools to provide an axe cutting head that is pivotable within a handle element (Figures 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the device of Harrison to incorporate the teachings of Burdis to provide hand tool with axe portions. In doing so, a variety of tools to be used as desired by the user.
Related Prior Art
Below is an analysis of the relevance of references cited but not used
- "892 cited references A L-M on pages 1-2 and A-D on Page 3 establish the state of the art with a variety of handheld cutting tools and handheld collapsable tools.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD D CROSBY JR whose telephone number is (571)272-8034. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00.
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 Ashley can be reached at (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 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.
/RICHARD D CROSBY JR/ 05/14/2026Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights