Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 15, 2026
Application No. 18/537,430

HAND TOOL SYSTEM

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Dec 12, 2023
Priority
Jun 14, 2021 — provisional 63/210,178 +1 more
Examiner
GUADALUPE, YARITZA
Art Unit
2855
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Stanley Black & Decker Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allowance Rate
956 granted / 1161 resolved
+14.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
1173
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
39.9%
-0.1% vs TC avg
§102
46.2%
+6.2% vs TC avg
§112
6.7%
-33.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1161 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
DETAILED ACTION In response to the Amendment filed May 20, 2026 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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Drawings The drawings filed December 12, 2023 are accepted. Abstract The Abstract filed December 12, 2023 is accepted. Specification The specification filed December 26, 2024 has been entered. 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. Claims 1 – 3, 5 - 8, 10, 13 - 15 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Scarborough et al. (US 5,433,011). With respect to claim 1, Scarborough et al. discloses a hand tool system (Figure 2), comprising a first-hand tool part (160); a second hand tool part (10, 20) configured to be releasably connected together with the first hand tool part (Figure 2) to form a combination hand tool (See Figure 4); wherein the first hand tool part (160) comprises an electronic hand tool (Column 5, line 53) having a main body (30) and a first connection part (60), and the second hand tool part (10, 20) comprises a main body (30) and a second connection part (70), wherein the first connection part (60) and the second connection part (70) are configured to be releasably connected together in a state of compression (Columns 3 and 4, lines 43 – 68 and 1 - 16); and wherein at least one of the first connection part (60) or the second connection part (70) comprises a compression member configured to releasably apply compression to the second connection part or the first connection part to releasably connect the first connection part and the second connection part together. PNG media_image1.png 296 650 media_image1.png Greyscale Referring to claim 2, Scarborough et al. sets forth a hand tool system wherein the compression member comprises a clamp member (80). In regards to claim 3, Scarborough et al. teaches a hand tool system wherein at least one of the first hand tool part (160) or the second hand tool part (10, 20) comprises a hand tool that is operational without connection to the other hand tool part (See Figure 4). PNG media_image2.png 592 806 media_image2.png Greyscale With respect to claim 5, Scarborough et al. shows a hand tool system wherein the first hand tool part (160) has a first-hand tool functionality (i.e. level) and the second hand tool part (10, 20) has a second hand tool functionality (i.e. plumb). Referring to claim 6, Scarborough et al. discloses a hand tool system wherein the first hand tool functionality (i.e. level is perfectly horizontal) is different to the second hand tool functionality (i.e. plumb is perfectly vertical). In regards to claim 7, Scarborough et al. sets forth a hand tool system (Figure 1) wherein the first hand tool functionality (i.e. level) is the same as the second hand tool functionality (i.e. level). Regarding to claim 8, Scarborough et al. sets forth a hand tool system wherein the first hand tool part (160) comprises a level (40, 50). In regards to claim 10, Scarborough et al. teaches a hand tool system wherein the first connection part (60) and the second connection part (70) are configured to be releasably connected together in a state of tension (Columns 3 and 4, lines 43 – 68 and 1 - 16). With respect to claim 13, Scarborough et al. shows a hand tool system comprising a third hand tool part (20) configured to be releasably connected to at least one of the first hand tool part (160) or the second hand tool (10) part to form another combination hand tool (See Figures 5 – 10). Regarding claim 14, Scarborough et al. shows a hand tool system, comprising a first-hand tool part (160); a second hand tool part (10, 20) configured to be releasably connected together with the first hand tool part (160) to form a combination hand tool (See Figures 1, 4 and 8, for example); wherein the first hand tool part (160) comprises a main body (30) and a first connection part (60), and the second hand tool part (10, 20) comprises a main body (30) and a second connection part (70), wherein the first connection part (60) and the second connection part (70) are configured to be releasably connected together (See Figure 2); wherein the first hand tool part (160) has a first-hand tool functionality (i.e. level) and the second hand tool part (10, 20) has a second hand tool functionality (i.e. plumb). With regards to claim 15, Scarborough et al. discloses a hand tool system wherein the first hand tool functionality (i.e. level) is different to the second hand tool functionality (i.e. plumb) as shown in figures 8 and 10. Referring to claim 22, Scarborough et al. sets forth a hand tool system, comprising a first-hand tool part (160); a second hand tool part (10) configured to be releasably connected together with the first hand tool part to form a combination hand tool (Figure 2), wherein the first hand tool part (160) comprises a main body (30) and a first connection part (60), and the second hand tool part (10) comprises a main body (30) and a second connection part (70), the first connection part (60) and the second connection part (70) are configured to be releasably connected together in a state of compression (Columns 3 and 4, lines 43 – 68 and 1 - 16), and at least one of the first connection part (60) or the second connection part (70) comprises a compression member (120a, 120b, 130a, 130b) configured to releasably apply compression to the second connection part or the first connection part to releasably connect the first connection part and the second connection part together (Column 4, lines 6 – 16); and a third hand tool part (20) configured to be releasably connected to at least one of the first hand tool part (160) or the second hand tool part (10) to form another combination hand tool (See Figures 2 and 4 – 10). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4, 11 – 12 and 17 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. Claim 18 - 21 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Claims 4 and 11 – 12 are allowable because the prior art fails to teach or suggest a hand tool system wherein the second hand tool part comprises a part that is not operational without connection to the other hand tool part and wherein the first connection part comprises a first electrical connector and the second connection part comprises a second electrical connector; wherein the first electrical connector and the second electrical connector are configured to form an electrical connection between the first hand tool part and the second hand tool part when the first hand tool part and the second hand tool part are connected together in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims. Claim 17 are allowable because the prior art fails to teach or suggest a hand tool system wherein the first connection part comprises a first electrical connector and the second connection part comprises a second electrical connector; wherein the first electrical connector and the second electrical connector are configured to form an electrical connection between the first hand tool part and the second hand tool part when the first hand tool part and the second hand tool part are connected together in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims. Claims 18 - 20 are allowable because the prior art fails to teach or suggest a hand tool system comprising a hand tool system, comprising a first-hand tool part; wherein the first hand tool part comprises a first electrical connector and the second hand tool part comprises a second electrical connector; wherein the first electrical connector and the second electrical connector are configured to form an electrical connection between the first hand tool part and the second hand tool part when the first hand tool part and the second hand tool part are connected together in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims. Claim 21 is allowable because the prior art fails to teach or suggest a hand tool system comprising a hand tool system, comprising a first connection part comprises a first electrical connector and the second connection part comprises a second electrical connector, and the first electrical connector and the second electrical connector are configured to form an electrical connection between the first hand tool part and the second hand tool part when the first hand tool part and the second hand tool part are connected together in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 – 8, 10 – 15 and 17 - 22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references are considered relevant but fail to teach the combination as claimed: Cosentino (US 6,560,885) discloses a modular level comprising a pair of levels which combine to function as one level. The levels also may be separated so that each level may be individually used as a level. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YARITZA GUADALUPE-MCCALL whose telephone number is (571)272-2244. The examiner can normally be reached Mon -Thu, 8:00am - 6:00pm. 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, Laura E Martin can be reached at 571-272-2160. 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. YARITZA GUADALUPE-MCCALL Primary Examiner Art Unit 2855 June 22, 2026 /YARITZA GUADALUPE-MCCALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 12, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
May 20, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 25, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12704365
REINFORCEMENT STRIP FOR ROLL-OVER RESISTANT MEASURING TAPE
3y 1m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12704367
Micrometer With Pressure Sensor
2y 11m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12693094
ADJUSTABLE ARCHERY BOW SIGHT
2y 11m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12692843
AN APPARATUS FOR DETERMINING ORIENTATION OF A SEGMENT OF A WIND TURBINE BLADE AND A METHOD THEREOF
3y 0m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12687380
PRECISION CUTTING GUIDE SYSTEM
3y 9m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+14.8%)
2y 1m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1161 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month