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 under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “deformable section comprises one of a bellow and an accordion section” as recited in claims 4 and 11 and the screwdriving unit being “made of a single elastomeric molded piece” as recited in claim 13 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.
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 1-14 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.
Regarding claims 1 and 7, it is unclear to examiner what the metes and bounds of the recitation “non-rotatable part” are. If you rotate the entire screwdriver, does the part which is considered to be "non-rotatable" not rotate with the rest of the screwdriver? Are there no conditions under which the part of the screw driver which the flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment is attached is capable of rotating? For the sake of compact prosecution and for use in this action, examiner is interpreting "non-rotatable part" to be --part--.
Regarding claims 1 and 7, the recitation of “exerted” and “deforms” are active method steps, and therefore it is unclear whether infringement occurs when one creates an apparatus with a deformable section which is capable of deforming when an upward force is exerted or whether infringement occurs when the an upward force is exerted on the deformable section and the deformable section actually deforms. See MPEP 2173.05(p)-II. For the sake of compact prosecution and for use in this action, examiner is interpreting “a deformable section such that an upward force exerted on said flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment deforms” to be --a deformable section configured such that an upward force exerted on said flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment deforms--.
Regarding claims 2 and 9, the term “fast-attachment” is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term “fast-attachment” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear to examiner what constitutes an attachment as being fast. For the sake of compact prosecution and for use in this action, examiner is interpreting “fast-attachment” to be --attachment--.
Regarding claims 3 and 10, the term “thinner sidewalls” is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term “thinner” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear to examiner what constitutes a sidewall as being thinner as there is no other structure which the sidewall is being compared to. For the sake of compact prosecution and for use in this action, examiner is interpreting “thinner sidewalls” to be --sidewalls--.
Regarding claim 7, the recitations of “a screwdriver” and “said screwdriver” are unclear. Is this screwdriver different than the "screwdriving unit" or are they the same? For the sake of compact prosecution and for use in this action, examiner is interpreting "attachment for a screwdriver comprising" to be --attachment comprising--, "a non-rotatable part of said screwdriver" to be --a part of said screwdriver unit--, and "a bit of said screwdriver" to be --a bit of said screwdriver unit-- respectively.
Regarding claim 14, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “said screwdriving unit” in the claim. It is also unclear to examiner if the screwdriving unit is different or the same as the screwdriver recited earlier in claim 14. For the sake of compact prosecution and for use in this action, examiner is interpreting “said screwdriving unit” to be --said screwdriver--.
Regarding claim 14, the term “slow rotation” is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term “slow” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear to examiner what constitutes a rotation as being slow. For the sake of compact prosecution and for use in this action, examiner is interpreting “slow rotation” to be --rotation--.
Regarding claim 14, the recitation of “performing said screwdriving operation” is unclear. Examiner finds that the preamble of claim 14 is “A method of performing a screwdriving operation comprising” which means that every step claimed after this is a part of the screwdriving operation. Therefore, claiming “performing said screwdriving operation” creates a logic loop where a part of the method is performing the method, which makes the claim indefinite. For the sake of compact prosecution and for use in this action, examiner is interpreting “performing said screwdriving operation” to be --driving said fastener into said desired screwdriving location--.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Peters et al. (US9943946), hereinafter Peters.
Regarding claim 1, Peters discloses a flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment (Fig. 28 element 330, excluding element 50) for a screwdriver (Fig. 8 element 2, 11:6-9) comprising:
a clip section (see annotated Fig. 28 below) operable to secure a first end (see annotated Fig. 28’ below) of said flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment to a part of said screwdriver (Fig. 28, where the clip section is capable of securing the first end of said flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment to a part of said screwdriver);
a deformable section (see annotated Fig. 28 below) configured such that an upward force exerted on said flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment deforms said deformable section first (Fig. 29, where the deformable section having the smallest cross-sectional area in the direction shown in Fig. 29 means that the deformable section is capable of deforming first);
a second end (see annotated Fig. 28' below) having a fastener head guiding zone (Fig. 28, where the space which element 50 occupies corresponds to a fastener head guiding zone);
a channel connecting said first end to said second end (Fig. 28, where the internal space defined by element 330 corresponds to a channel which connects said first end to said second end),
wherein first end of said flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment is made of flexible material (15:22-24, where "rubber" corresponds to a flexible material) and is operable to surround a bit of said screwdriver while a vacuum is communicated in said channel (Fig. 28, where element 300 corresponds to a bit and where the first end is capable of surrounding the bit while a vacuum is communicated in said channel).
PNG
media_image1.png
401
315
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
343
579
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Peters discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further discloses said clip section comprises an attachment clip (See annotated Fig. 28 above, where the attachment clip is a subset of the clip section which encompasses the entirety of the clip section).
Regarding claim 3, Peters discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further discloses said deformable section comprises a section with sidewalls (see annotated Fig. 29 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
387
311
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Peters discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further discloses made of a single elastomeric molded piece (Fig. 28 shows the flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment being a single piece and 15:22-24, where "rubber" corresponds to elastomeric). Regarding the flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment being molded, in accordance to MPEP2112, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight. Please note that even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product, i.e. a flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment which is a single piece, does not depend on its method of production, i.e. a molding process.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shaff (US2570164).
Regarding claim 14, Shaff discloses a method of performing a screwdriving operation comprising:
providing a vacuum to a vacuum fastener gripping attachment (4:75-5:4, where the suction provided corresponds to a vacuum and Fig. 1 element 80 corresponds to a vacuum fastener gripping attachment);
initiating a rotation of a screwdriver’s bit (5:14-18 and 1:40-43, where Fig. 1 element 14 corresponds to a screwdriver’s bit);
applying said vacuum to a fastener’s head, such that said fastener’s head is inserted in said vacuum fastener gripping attachment (4:75-5:9, where “the head end of the screw” corresponds to a fastener’s head);
positioning said screwdriver over a desired screwdriving location (4:75-5:11, where “proper position” corresponds to a desired screwdriving location);
driving said fastener into said desired screwdriving location (5:10-18, where driving the tool spindle will also drive the bit);
removing said screwdriver’s bit from said fastener’s head (5:21-24, where examiner finds that during normal operation, once the torque limit is reached and the spindle stops rotating, the screwdriver’s bit would be removed from said fastener’s head (see MPEP 2112.02-I)); and
stopping said vacuum (5:21-24, where examiner finds that during normal operation, once the torque limit is reached and the spindle stops rotating, the screwdriver’s bit would be removed from said fastener’s head and then the vacuum would be stopped (see MPEP 2112.02-I)).
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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peters et al. (US9943946), hereinafter Peters, in view of Morifuji (US3298410).
Regarding claim 4, Peters discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, but fails to disclose said deformable section comprises one of a bellow and an accordion section.
Morifuji is also concerned with a gripping attachment for a screwdriver and teaches said deformable section comprises one of a bellow and an accordion section (Fig. 5 element 30 corresponds to a deformable section which is a bellow). Pursuant MPEP 2144.04-IV-B, it 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 to modify the flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment of Peters with regards to a desired shape (in this case, the deformable section having a bellow shape) in adapting the flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment for a particular application, since such modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art. Examiner notes that Applicant’s specification does not provide criticality for the deformable section comprising a bellow or an accordion section as paragraph 0136-0137 of Applicant’s specification states that the deformable section can have thinner sidewalls, bellows, or an accordion section and that these are all equivalent structures.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peters et al. (US9943946), hereinafter Peters, in view of Shelton (US0797078).
Regarding claim 5, Peters discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, but fails to disclose said fastener guiding zone is shaped to reciprocate a type of standard fastener head.
Shelton is also concerned with a gripping attachment for a screwdriver and teaches said fastener guiding zone (Fig. 2 element 17) is shaped to reciprocate a type of standard fastener head (Fig. 8, last full sentence in the first column on page 1, where "continuous spiral screw-thread 18" corresponds to a shape of the fastener guiding zone which is shaped to reciprocate a type of standard fastener head (Fig. 3 element 14)). It 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 to modify the flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment of Peters to make the fastener guiding zone be shaped to reciprocate a type of standard fastener head, as taught by Shelton, because Shelton teaches that using a fastener guiding zone which is shaped to reciprocate a type of standard fastener head allows the fastener to be "firmly wedged in position" (last full sentence starting on the first column and ending on the second column of the first page).
Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaff (US2570164) in view of Peters et al. (US9943946), hereinafter Peters, and as evidenced by Swinderman (US9416810).
Regarding claim 7, Shaff discloses a screwdriving unit (all elements shown in Fig. 1) comprising:
a housing (Fig. 1 element 10) comprising:
a vacuum source (Fig. 1 element 32);
a motor (Fig. 1 element 11, 1:34-2:4);
a spindle (Fig. 1 element 12) operable to receive a screwdriver bit (Fig. 1, 2:38-49); and
a vacuum communication channel (Fig. 1 element 79) operably connected to said vacuum source and bordering said motor and said spindle (Fig. 1, 3:46-4:23); and
a flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment (Fig. 1 element 80) comprising:
a clip section (Fig. 1 element 87) operable to secure a first end (Fig. 1, the general end associated with element 87) of said flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment to a part of said screwdriver unit (Fig. 1, where the clip section is capable of securing the first end of said flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment to a part of said screwdriver unit);
a deformable section (Fig. 1 element 86) configured such that an upward force exerted on said flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment deforms said deformable section first (Figs. 1 and 2 shows the deformable section deforming first);
a second end (Fig. 1, the general end associated with the portion of element 81 which contacts the screw shown) having a fastener head guiding zone (see annotated Fig. 1 below);
a channel (Fig. 1, the empty space within and defined by element 80) connecting said first end to said second end (Fig. 1),
wherein first end of said flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment is operable to surround a bit of said screwdriver while a vacuum is communicated in said channel (Fig. 1, where element 14 corresponds to a bit and where the first end is capable of surrounding the bit while a vacuum is communicated in said channel).
wherein said flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment is attached to said housing (Fig. 1, where the flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment is attached to said housing through various other elements) and said vacuum communication channel is operably connected to said first end of said flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment (Fig. 1, 4:15-20 and 4:73-5:20).
Shaff fails to disclose the first end of said flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment is made of flexible material.
Peters is also concerned with a screwdriver unit and a fastener gripping attachment for the screwdriver unit and teaches the first end of said flexible vacuum fastener gripping attachment (see annotated Fig. 28’ above) is made of flexible material (15:22-24, where "rubber" corresponds to a flexible material). It 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 to modify the screwdriving unit of Shaff to make the first end be made of flexible material, as taught by Peters, because it is known in the art that making the end which is meant to grip the fastener head out of a flexible material allows for the fastener head guiding zone to increase the holding force applied to the fastener head and improve alignment. This is evidenced by Swinderman which states that using flexible material allows for the fastener head guiding zone to "stretch slightly when the joining elements are inserted and the tension in the elastomeric material facilitates retaining and aligning the joining elements" (3:3-11).
PNG
media_image4.png
367
204
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Shaff, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 7, as described above, and further discloses said casing further comprises a compressed gas intake (Shaff, Fig. 1 element 33) and a gas exhaust (Shaff, Fig. 1 element 47, 2:33-37), and said vacuum source is a venturi vacuum device operably connected to said compressed gas intake and said gas exhaust (Shaff, 3:66-4:6).
Regarding claim 9, Shaff, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 7, as described above, and further discloses said clip section comprises an attachment clip (Shaff, Fig. 1 element 87, where the attachment clip is a subset of the clip section which encompasses the entirety of the clip section).
Regarding claim 10, Shaff, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 7, as described above, and further discloses said deformable section comprises a section with sidewalls (Shaff, Fig. 1, where the outer ends of the deformable section correspond to sidewalls).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaff (US2570164) in view of Peters et al. (US9943946), hereinafter Peters, as evidenced by Swinderman (US9416810), and in further view of Morifuji (US3298410).
Regarding claim 11, Shaff, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 7, as described above, but fails to disclose said deformable section comprises one of a bellow and an accordion section.
Morifuji is also concerned with a gripping attachment for a screwdriver unit and teaches said deformable section comprises one of a bellow and an accordion section (Fig. 5 element 30 corresponds to a deformable section which is a bellow). Pursuant of MPEP 2144.06-II, it has been held obvious to substitute equivalents for the same purpose. Shaff, as modified, discloses the invention except that the deformable section comprises a coil spring instead of a bellow or an accordion section. Morifuji shows that a deformable section comprising a bellow is an equivalent structure known in the art (Figs. 2 and 5 and 3:9-13, where Morifuji explicitly describes the equivalency of these two structures). Therefore, because these two deformable section types were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to substitute a deformable section comprises a coil spring for a deformable section comprising a bellow.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaff (US2570164) in view of Peters et al. (US9943946), hereinafter Peters, as evidenced by Swinderman (US9416810), and in further view of Shelton (US0797078).
Regarding claim 12, Shaff, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 7, as described above, but fails to disclose said fastener guiding zone is shaped to reciprocate a type of standard fastener head.
Shelton is also concerned with a screwdriving unit and teaches said fastener guiding zone (Fig. 2 element 17) is shaped to reciprocate a type of standard fastener head (Fig. 8, last full sentence in the first column on page 1, where "continuous spiral screw-thread 18" corresponds to a shape of the fastener guiding zone which is shaped to reciprocate a type of standard fastener head (Fig. 3 element 14)). It 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 to modify the screwdriving unit of Shaff, as modified, to make the fastener guiding zone be shaped to reciprocate a type of standard fastener head, as taught by Shelton, because Shelton teaches that using a fastener guiding zone which is shaped to reciprocate a type of standard fastener head allows the fastener to be "firmly wedged in position" (last full sentence starting on the first column and ending on the second column of the first page).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if the drawing objection is overcome and if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: regarding claim 13, the closest art of record, Shaff (US2570164), fails to disclose, suggest, or make obvious in combination with the additional elements or each respective claim the screwdriving unit is “made of a single elastomeric molded piece”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CALEB A HOLIZNA whose telephone number is (571)272-5659. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-4:30.
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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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.
/C.A.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/MONICA S CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights