Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/498,742

MACHINING TOOL FOR BOX-END WRENCH AND METHOD OF MACHINING BOX-END WRENCH BY USING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Oct 31, 2023
Examiner
COZART, JERMIE E
Art Unit
3799
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
754 granted / 904 resolved
+13.4% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+3.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
927
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
31.5%
-8.5% vs TC avg
§102
31.7%
-8.3% vs TC avg
§112
30.5%
-9.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 904 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. 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 Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. 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. Claim 4 is 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 4 recites the limitation "said support members" in lines 1-2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 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(s) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu et al. (TW I802233 B) in view of Kakutani et al. (EP 1477255 A1). Regarding claim 1, Lu discloses machining tool (10; Fig. 2) comprising a fixed pillar (20); a cutting tool unit (30) including a finishing cutting tool (40) provided with a first teeth portion around an outer surface thereof, a rough cutting tool (50) provided with a second teeth portion around an outer surface thereof, and a punching tool (60) provided with a third teeth portion around an outer surface thereof; and a support member (80; Fig. 3) passing through the punching tool (60), the rough cutting tool (50), and the finishing cutting tool (40) in sequence and detachably mounted to the fixed pillar (20), the support member (80; Fig. 3) enabling the finishing cutting tool (40), the rough cutting tool (50), and the punching tool (60) to be sequentially connected with the fixed pillar (20) in a direction away from the fixed pillar (20). Lu discloses wherein the diameter of the finishing cutting tool (40) is slightly greater than a diameter of the rough cutting tool (50), and the diameter of the rough cutting tool (50) is slightly greater than a diameter of the punching tool (60). Note that “for a box-end wrench” is a recitation of the intended use, and 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. Regarding claim 2, Lu discloses wherein the fixed pillar (30) and the finishing cutting tool (40) are separated from each other by a spacer (70) so as to form a tool retreating area therebetween; the support member (80) passes through the spacer (70). Regarding claim 3, Lu discloses wherein the finishing cutting tool (40) and the rough cutting tool (50) are separated from each other by a spacer (70) so as to form a chip discharging area therebetween; the rough cutting tool (50) and the punching tool (60) are separated from each other by another spacer (70) so as to form another chip discharging area therebetween; the support member (80; Fig. 3) passes through the spacers (70). Regarding claim 4, Lu discloses two support members (80, 84; Fig. 3) wherein one support member (80) having a threaded end portion (82). The fixed pillar (20) at least threaded hole threaded with the threaded end portion (82) of the support member (80). Regarding claim 5, Lu discloses machining a wrench (90; Fig. 6) by using the machining tool (10) comprising steps of a) providing a wrench blank (90), the wrench blank (90) including a machining end provided with a top concavity (not labeled, Fig. 1), a bottom concavity (not labeled, Fig. 1) corresponding to the top concavity, and a partition (94) located between the top concavity and the bottom concavity; b) enabling the machining tool (10) to feed (see Fig. 6) from the top concavity to the bottom concavity to enable the punching tool (60) to punch the partition (94), such that a through hole with the same tooth profile as the punching tool (60) is formed at the machining end; c) enabling the machining tool 910) to feed continuously to enable the rough cutting tool (50) to rough machine a periphery wall of the through hole; d) enabling the machining tool (10) to feed continuously to enable the finishing cutting tool (40) to finish machine the periphery wall of the through hole. Note that “for a box-end wrench” is a recitation of the intended use, and 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. Regarding claim 6, Lu discloses wherein in step b) and step d), the fixed pillar (20) is clamped by a fixture (i.e., punch press); in step e), the fixture releases the fixed pillar to allow the fixed pillar to pass through the through hole, such that the machining tool is separated from the wrench blank. Lu, however, does not disclose the following: an outer diameter of the fixed pillar being slightly smaller than a diameter of the finishing cutting tool; each of the two support members having a threaded end portion; the fixed pillar having two threaded holes threaded with the threaded end portions of the support members; enabling the machining tool to feed continuously to enable the fixed pillar to pass through the through hole, such that the machining tool is separated from the wrench blank; or in step e), the fixture releases the fixed pillar to allow the fixed pillar to pass through the through hole, such that the machining tool is separated from the wrench blank. It is conventional and well known to provide threads on the end of an additional support member and provide threads in the corresponding hole into which the additional support member is to be attached. Kakutani discloses a machining tool (Fig. 1b) comprising a fixed pillar (11) having an outer diameter slightly smaller than a diameter of the finishing tool (36). The fixed pillar (11) of Kakutani has a small diameter therefore enabling the machining tool to feed continuously to enable the fixed pillar (11) to pass through a through hole of a workpiece. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the outer diameter of the fixed pillar of Lu being slightly smaller than a diameter of the finishing cutting tool, to provide one of the additional support members of Lu with a threaded end portion, to provide the fixed pillar of Lu with an additional threaded hole to allow threading with the threaded end portions of the support members, to enable the machining tool of Lu to feed continuously to enable the fixed pillar to pass through the through hole of the wrench, such that the machining tool of Lu is separated from the wrench blank, and the fixture of Lu release the fixed pillar to allow the fixed pillar of Lu to pass through the through hole, such that the machining tool is separated from the wrench blank, in light of the teachings of Kakutani, in order to provide a small diameter grip portion that is not subjected to a tensile load and does not break during machining of the workpiece . Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references listed on the attached PTO-892 are cited to show broaching tools. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERMIE E COZART whose telephone number is (571)272-4528. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 7:00pm. 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. /JERMIE E COZART/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799 January 23, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 31, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599995
DEVICE OR TOOL FOR GRIPPING A LINER TO REMOVE SAME FROM AND INSTALL SAME IN THE SHELL OF A MILL, METHOD FOR INSTALLING A LINER AND METHOD FOR REMOVING A LINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594608
CUTTING TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589854
ANTI-CRIPPLING ELEMENT STIFFENER AND ASSOCIATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582777
A method of manufacturing a sub-assembly of a medicament delivery device
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576489
PLUG TOOL AND RELATED METHOD OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+3.2%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 904 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month