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 .
This Office Action is in response to the reply filed on November 18, 2025 wherein claim(s) 1, 5, 24 were amended. The Examiner notes amendments in claims are directed to overcome their rejections under 35 USC § 102 / 35 USC § 103. Therefore, claims 1-24 are pending and will be examined.
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) 1-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maruzzo et al. (U. S. Patent Application Publication US20170341218A1) hereinafter MARUZZO, in view of Nielson (U. S. Patent US8628155B1) hereinafter NIELSON.
Regarding claim 1, MARUZZO teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B below) a tool organization system 10, 20 comprising:
a tool positioner 20 formed of a first tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 and a second tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 that are structured to be spaced M14B-01 from one another a tool-span M14B-02 apart and oriented toward one another in use to cooperate to support a hand tool M14B-03 in a predetermined position on a hand tool storage surface 10; and
each of the first tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 and the second tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 having:
a base part M5A-01 with a storage surface connector 14; and
a top part M18B-01 defining a tool receptacle M18B-02.
MARUZZO further teaches surface connector 14 comprises a screw.
MARUZZO fails to teach surface connector 14 comprises an adhesive layer.
However, NIELSON teaches (see FIG. 1, FIG. 2, FIG. 2B, FIG. 6, FIG. 10 below) a drawer organizer 20, wherein retaining members 24 comprise an adhesive layer 40 (page 9, lines 64-67, “… adhesive member …”) for securement purposes.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified surface connector 14 in the tool organization system 10 of MARUZZO with retaining members 24 as taught in the drawer organizer 20 of NIELSON for securement purposes.
PNG
media_image1.png
681
853
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
604
904
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
687
887
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
556
805
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
565
473
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
535
558
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
558
543
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
692
865
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
499
874
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
821
898
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
558
753
media_image11.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image12.png
612
596
media_image12.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image13.png
584
682
media_image13.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image14.png
691
467
media_image14.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image15.png
460
615
media_image15.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image16.png
645
828
media_image16.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image17.png
495
738
media_image17.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image18.png
383
549
media_image18.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image19.png
665
790
media_image19.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image20.png
790
870
media_image20.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. The combination of MARUZZO (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) and NIELSON (see FIG. 1, FIG. 2, FIG. 2B, FIG. 6, FIG. 10 above) further teaches tool organization system 10, 20 in which each storage surface connector 14 comprises a pressure sensitive adhesive (page 9, lines 64-67, “… adhesive member …”).
Regarding claim 3, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. The combination of MARUZZO (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) and NIELSON (see FIG. 1, FIG. 2, FIG. 2B, FIG. 6, FIG. 10 above) further teaches tool organization system 10, 20 in which each storage surface connector 14 comprises a reversibly reusable adhesive (page 9, lines 64-67, “… adhesive member …”).
Regarding claim 4, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 3 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO fails to teach (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which the reversibly reusable adhesive comprises a polyurethane gel adhesive.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the reversibly reusable adhesive with a polyurethane gel adhesive in the storage surface connector 14 of MARUZZO, and NIELSON to meet design requirements. It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 5, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 2 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. The combination of MARUZZO (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) and NIELSON (see FIG. 1, FIG. 2, FIG. 2B, FIG. 6, FIG. 10 above) further teaches tool organization system 10, 20 in which each storage surface connector 14 comprises a peel-and-stick adhesive with the adhesive layer and a removable cover layer.
Regarding claim 6, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which at least one of the tool receptacles M18B-02 are defined between cooperating inner guide wall surfaces 52 of the top part M18B-01.
Regarding claim 7, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 6 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which the cooperating inner guide wall surfaces 52 comprise a pair of opposed wall surfaces 52 that are spaced from one another and define a tool-end-receiving channel M18B-03 with one or more tool-receiving open lateral ends 52a.
Regarding claim 8, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 7 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which the pair of opposed wall surfaces 52 are connected by a bridge wall M18B-04 that defines a tool-enclosing closed lateral end of the tool receptacle M18B-02.
Regarding claim 9, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 6 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which the cooperating inner guide wall surfaces 52 are connected adjacent to one another.
Regarding claim 10, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 9 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which the cooperating inner guide wall surfaces 52 are oriented to define a closed lateral corner opposite to an open lateral tool-end-receiving corner.
Regarding claim 11, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 6 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which the cooperating inner guide wall surfaces 52 are tapered to have decreasing distance from one another with decreasing distance from the base part M5A-01.
Regarding claim 12, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 6 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which:
both tool receptacles M18B-02 are defined by cooperating inner guide wall surfaces 52; and
the cooperating inner guide wall surfaces 52 of the first tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 are separated to define an average separation distance M14B-04 that is smaller than an average separation distance M14B-05 defined between cooperating inner guide wall surfaces 52 of the second tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30.
Regarding claim 13, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 6 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which the cooperating inner guide wall surfaces 52 are shaped to hold the tool-end M14B-06 by gravity.
Regarding claim 14, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 6 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which the cooperating inner guide wall surfaces 52 are angled to define an oblique tool-end entry axis of the tool receptacle M18B-02.
Regarding claim 15, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which the first tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 comprises a ratchet drive tang receiver 26.
Regarding claim 16, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which outer lateral sides of the first tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 and the second tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 are structured to nest (FIG 6A) laterally with outer lateral sides of adjacent first tool-end holders 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 and second tool-end holders 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30.
Regarding claim 17, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 further comprising a plurality (FIG 1, FIG 2) of tool positioners 20.
Regarding claim 18, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 17 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) a kit (FIG 1, FIG 2) comprising the plurality of tool positioners 20.
Regarding claim 19, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 17 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which the plurality of tool positioners 20 are distributed about a hand tool storage surface 10, with the first tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 and second tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 of each tool positioner 20 separated from one another and facing one another to define a tool-receiving zone (FIG 1, FIG 2) therebetween.
Regarding claim 20, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 19 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which the plurality of tool positioners 20 each support a respective unique tool (FIG 1) between the first tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 and the second tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 of the respective tool positioner 20.
Regarding claim 21, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 20 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which the unique tools (FIG 1) comprise hand tools (FIG 1).
Regarding claim 22, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 21 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which the unique tools (FIG 1) comprise one or more of:
a ratcheting socket wrench (ratchet);
a socket adapter;
a screwdriver;
a set of pliers; or
a wrench.
Regarding claim 23, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 19 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. MARUZZO further teaches (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) tool organization system 10, 20 in which the hand tool storage surface 10 is a base of a drawer in a tool box or tool cabinet (page 21, para. [0005], lines 2-3, “… lies flat…”).
Regarding claim 24, MARUZZO, and NIELSON (as applied to claim 1 above) teaches all the limitations of the claim. The combination of MARUZZO (see FIG 1, FIG 2, FIG 5A, FIG 5B, FIG 6A, FIG 6C, FIG 6D, FIG 7A, FIG 7B, FIG 9A, FIG 9B, FIG 14A, FIG 14B, FIG 18A, FIG 18B above) and NIELSON (see FIG. 1, FIG. 2, FIG. 2B, FIG. 6, FIG. 10 above) further teaches [albeit with different phraseology] a method comprising:
connecting the first tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 and the second tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 of the tool organization system 10, 20 in spaced relationship on a storage surface 10 by an adhesive layer (page 9, lines 64-67, “… adhesive member …”) on each of the first tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 and the second tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30; and
mounting a hand tool M14B-03 to or on the tool positioner 20, with a first tool-end M14B-06 of the hand tool M14B-03 received in the first tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30 and a second tool-end M14B-06 of the hand tool M14B-03 received in the second tool-end holder 20, 23, 24, 26, 28, 30.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments / amendments regarding rejections under 35 USC § 102 / 35 USC § 103 filed on November 18, 2025 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejections does not rely on exactly all references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the Applicant’s arguments.
With respect to the art rejections, in accordance with MPEP 2111.01, during examination, the claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow. In re American Academy of Science Tech Center, 367 F.3d 1359, 70 USPQ2D 1827, 1834 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Hurley (U. S. Patent Application Publication US20220176543A1): teaches an “organizer” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention.
Wacker (U. S. Patent US11213942B1 ): teaches an “organizer” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention.
Hurley (U. S. Patent US11103989B2): teaches an “organizing device” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention.
Tesoroni (U. S. Patent US10625411B2): teaches an “apparatus” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention.
Kao (German Patent DE102016105944B4): teaches a “tool holder” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCOS JAVIER RODRIGUEZ MOLINA whose telephone number is (571) 272-8947. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:30 AM to 5:30 PM.
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, ANTHONY D. STASHICK can be reached on (571) 272-4561. 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 ttps://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.
/M.J.R.M./
/Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735