Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/614,021

Tool Device for a Hand-Held Power Tool

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Mar 22, 2024
Examiner
GATES, ERIC ANDREW
Art Unit
3722
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Robert Bosch GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
849 granted / 1081 resolved
+8.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
1115
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
39.2%
-0.8% vs TC avg
§102
34.6%
-5.4% vs TC avg
§112
20.2%
-19.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1081 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . DETAILED ACTION Priority Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Species IV-a, claims 20-36 in the reply filed on 21 October 2025 is acknowledged. 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 24-27 and 35-36 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. Claim 24 recites that the tool receptacle device comprises a support flange and an operating region configured to act on a workpiece. It is unclear how the tool receptacle device, which is disclosed as part of the hand-held power tool, can include these elements that are disclosed as part of the tool device. For the purposes of examination, it has been assumed that the claim should recite “The power tool system of claim 21, wherein the tool device further comprises …”. Claim 35 recites the limitation "the drive edge" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 25-27 depend from claim 24 and claim 36 depends from claim 35. 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 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 20-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Klabunde et al. (DE 20 2013 006 901 U1, child patent publication US 2016/0184956 A1 used for convenience). Regarding claim 20, Klabunde et al. discloses a power tool system (figure 14 and paragraph [0118]) comprising: a tool device 8 comprising: a connector device 8a defining a clearance 8e, the connector device comprising a plurality of clamping wings (inner portion of tool device 8 including portion 8f that surrounds tool encoding device 8e, see figure 14) extending radially inwardly at least substantially along an orthogonal plane 8c to a tool rotation axis 8b (at least the inner portion of the clamping wing is orthogonal to the axis); and at least one hand-held power tool 22 comprising: an output shaft 22a defining an output axis 2; and a tool receptacle device 1 configured to be moved in rotation about the output axis and configured to receive the tool device such that the output axis of the output shaft and the tool rotation axis of the tool device substantially coincide (see figure 14), the tool receptacle device comprising: a clamping device 4 that is movable relative to the output shaft between a first position (figure 3b), in which the connector device is configured to axially pass at least partially around the clamping device to be installed on or removed from the tool receptacle device, and a second position (figure 3a), in which the clamping device clamps at least one of the clamping wings of the plurality of clamping wings so as to retain the tool device on the tool receptacle device. Regarding claim 21, Klabunde et al. discloses wherein the clamping device 4 includes a first hook jaw 4a and a second hook jaw 4b, each of the first and second hook jaws configured to engage a respective one of the plurality of clamping wings 8f in the second position and to enable the clearance to at least partially pass axially beyond the first and second hook jaws in the first position (as seen in figures 3a and 3b). Regarding claim 22, Klabunde et al. discloses wherein the first and second hook jaws 4a/4b are mounted about a rotation axis 4d (axis that runs through the pivot point) of the clamping device 4 so as to be rotatable from the first position to the second position. Regarding claim 23, Klabunde et al. discloses wherein the rotation axis 4d is substantially orthogonal to the output axis 2. Regarding claim 24, Klabunde et al. discloses wherein the tool device 8 further comprises: a support flange (upper portion of tool device 8 in figure 14 that surrounds encoding device 8e) that includes the connector device 8a; and an operating region 8f/8k/8j radially surrounding the support flange (see figures 14 and 18) and configured to act on a workpiece, the operating region projecting from the support flange in an axial direction toward the tool receptacle device. Regarding claim 25, Klabunde et al. discloses wherein the tool receptacle device 1 further comprises a bearing face (angled face at the bottom of tool receiving device 1, see figures 2 and 14), and, in the second position, the bearing face engages a contact face (angled face on tool driving area region 8f, see figures 14) of the operating region 8f/8k/8j. Regarding claim 26, Klabunde et al. discloses wherein the bearing face is spaced apart radially from the first and second hook jaws 4a/4b in the second position (as seen in figure 3a). Regarding claim 27, Klabunde et al. discloses wherein, in the second position, the operating region 8f/8k/8j is clamped between the bearing face and a support face of the support flange (as seen in figure 3a, at least portion 8f is clamped between these elements). Regarding claim 28, Klabunde et al. discloses wherein the tool receptacle device 1 further comprises an entrainment device 9 having at least one torque transmission region 9a arranged at a distance from the output axis 2 and configured to transmit a driving force to the tool device 8. Regarding claim 29, Klabunde et al. discloses wherein at least one clamping wing of the plurality of clamping wings has a torque receiving region 8h, and the at least one torque transmission region 9a engages the torque receiving region in the second position so as to transmit the driving force of the tool receptacle device 1 to the tool device 8 via the torque receiving region. Regarding claim 30, Klabunde et al. discloses wherein the torque receiving region 8h includes a drive face 8i engaged by the torque transmission region 9a. Regarding claim 31, Klabunde et al. discloses wherein the drive face 8i is angled by up to 50 degrees relative to a plane defined by an axial direction of the tool rotation axis 8b and that extends in a radial direction and intersects the drive face (equivalent to 90 degrees minus angle α, which is disclosed as being between 60 and 90 degrees, such that the calculated angle is between 0 and 30 degrees; see paragraph [0064] and figure 10). Regarding claim 32, Klabunde et al. discloses wherein the entrainment device 9 is shaped at least partially complementary to the clearance 8e (as “partially complementary” only requires that a single surface, such as any flat surface on the claimed elements, be of a similar shape, these elements are seen to meet this limitation). Regarding claim 33, Klabunde et al. discloses wherein each clamping wing of the plurality of clamping wings includes a first delimitation edge (inner portion of defined clamping wing surrounding tool encoding device 8e, see figure 14) that lies on a first delimitation circle (circle defining tool encoding device 8e, see figure 14) defined around the tool rotation axis 8b and that at least partially defines a radial extent of the clearance 8e. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 34 is 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. Claims 35-36 a would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC ANDREW GATES whose telephone number is (571)272-5498. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 9-6, Alt Fr 9-5. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sunil Singh, can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /ERIC A. GATES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722 13 January 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 22, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 15, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599972
Chuck with Slip Protection
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594610
Four-Hole Core Drilling Machine
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589460
PIPE THREADING MECHANISMS AND SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589443
HOLE CUTTER WITH MULTIPLE FULCRUMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583038
DEVICE FOR AXIAL DISPLACEMENT OF A HOLE SAW FOR A HAND-HELD DRILL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
78%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+14.1%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1081 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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