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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on November 24, 2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 21, 22, 27 – 36, 38, and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Griffet (French Patent Publication Number FR 2881486 A1).
As to claim 21, Griffet teaches a nut restrainer (figure 1, element 1 being the ‘nut restrainer’; machine translation, page 3, eighth paragraph) comprising: a fixed outer portion having a plurality of deformable protrusions configured to resist torque (figure 1, element 2 being the ‘fixed outer portion’ and elements 8 – 11 being the ‘plurality of deformable protrusions’; machine translation, page 3, eight paragraph – page 4, third paragraph); a mobile central portion being configured to engage the plurality of deformable protrusions (figure 1, element 5 being the ‘mobile central portion’; machine translation, page 3, eighth paragraph); and the mobile central portion including a cavity configured to accept insertion of a nut and prevent the nut from rotating relative to the mobile central portion (figures 1 and 3, elements 5 and 6; machine translation, page 4, fifth paragraph and page 5, second paragraph). Examiner recognizes that the mobile central portion is sized to allow the nut a given degree of rotation (figures 1 and 3, elements 5 and 6; machine translation, page 5, fifth paragraph). However, because the mobile central portion prevents the nut from entire rotation, the mobile central portion at least prevents some degree of rotation of the nut relative to the mobile central portion. Griffet further teaches that the nut restrainer is configured to accept insertion of the nut (figure 1, elements 1 and 6; machine translation, page 3, eighth paragraph) and thereafter the nut restrainer, which includes the fixed outer portion, is further configured to be affixed to one side of a substrate plate having two sides, over a bolt hole arranged in the substrate plate, and the bolt hole having a radial tolerance (figure 1, element 1); and wherein the nut restrainer is further configured to allow for subsequent installation of a bolt having a shank and a tip, from another one of the two sides of the substrate plate opposite a side to which the nut retainer is affixed (figures 1 and 2, element 18; machine translation, page 5, fifth paragraph).
As to claim 22, Griffet further teaches that the plurality of deformable protrusions are configured to contact the mobile central portion (figures 1 and 5, elements 8 – 11 and 5); and wherein the plurality of deformable protrusions are not in contact with the substrate plate (figure 1, elements 8 – 11).
As to claim 27, Griffet teaches that the fixed outer portion is configured to be attachable to the substrate plate (figure 1, element 2); and wherein the fixed outer portion is configured to confine the mobile central portion against the substrate plate once the fixed outer portion has been attached thereto (figure 1, elements 2 and 5).
As to claim 28, Griffet teaches that the nut restrainer is configured to limit relative rotation of the mobile central portion and the fixed outer portion (figures 1 and 4, elements 2 and 5); and wherein the plurality of deformable protrusions are configured to engage portion of the mobile central portion (figures 1 – 3, elements 26 being the ‘portion of the mobile central portion’ and elements 8 – 11; machine translation, page 2, first paragraph and page 3, second paragraph).
As to claim 29, Griffet teaches that the mobile central portion is structured and configured with a hole configured to allow the tip of the bolt to pass through the hole (page 5, fifth paragraph).
As to claim 30, Griffet teaches that the mobile central portion is configured to allow deformation of the plurality of deformable protrusions in response to lateral movement of the mobile central portion (figure 1, elements 8 – 11; machine translation, page 4, third paragraph).
As to claim 31, Griffet teaches that the cavity is configured to accept insertion of a washer in addition to the nut (figure 1, elements 5 and 6); and wherein the plurality of deformable protrusions are configured to engage portions of the mobile central portion (figures 1 – 3, elements 26 being the ‘portion of the mobile central portion’ and elements 8 – 11; machine translation, page 2, first paragraph and page 3, second paragraph).
As to claim 32, Griffet teaches that the fixed outer portion is configured to be attached to the substrate plate by welding (figure 1, element 2).
As to claim 33, Griffet teaches that the nut restrainer is configured to allow the nut inserted therein to directly contact the substrate plate (figure 1, element 6). This can be found because the nut restrainer of Griffet may be used with a nut which extends into the central opening of the fixed outer portion (figure 2, element 18), allowing the nut to come into direct contact with the substrate plate.
As to claim 34, Griffet teaches a nut restrainer (figure 1, element 1 being the ‘nut restrainer’; machine translation, page 3, eighth paragraph) comprising: a fixed outer portion having a plurality of deformable protrusions configured to resist torque (figure 1, element 2 being the ‘fixed outer portion’ and elements 8 – 11 being the ‘plurality of deformable protrusions’; machine translation, page 3, eight paragraph – page 4, third paragraph); a mobile central portion being configured to engage the plurality of deformable protrusions (figure 1, element 5 being the ‘mobile central portion’; machine translation, page 3, eighth paragraph); and the mobile central portion including a cavity configured to accept insertion of a nut and prevent the nut from rotating relative to the mobile central portion (figures 1 and 3, elements 5 and 6; machine translation, page 4, fifth paragraph and page 5, second paragraph). Examiner recognizes that the mobile central portion is sized to allow the nut a given degree of rotation (figures 1 and 3, elements 5 and 6; machine translation, page 5, fifth paragraph). However, because the mobile central portion prevents the nut from entire rotation, the mobile central portion at least prevents some degree of rotation of the nut relative to the mobile central portion. Griffet further teaches that the nut restrainer is configured to accept insertion of the nut (figure 1, elements 1 and 6; machine translation, page 3, eighth paragraph) and thereafter the nut restrainer is further configured to be affixed to one side of a substrate plate having two sides, over a bolt hole arranged in the substrate plate, and the bolt hole having a radial tolerance (figure 1, element 1); and wherein the nut restrainer is further configured to allow for subsequent installation of a bolt having a shank and a tip, from another one of the two sides of the substrate plate opposite a side to which the nut retainer is affixed (figures 1 and 2, element 18; machine translation, page 5, fifth paragraph), wherein the nut restrainer is configured so that no part of the nut restrainer extends past a surface of the substrate plate when attached thereto (figure 1, element 1).
As to claim 35, Griffet teaches that the nut restrainer is configured to allow the shank of the bolt to directly contact an inner surface of the bolt hole in the substrate plate (figure 1, element 1).
As to claim 36, Griffet teaches that the mobile central portion and the fixed outer portion are distinct portions of material (figures 1 – 3, elements 2 and 5).
As to claim 38, Griffet teaches a nut restrainer (figure 1, element 1 being the ‘nut restrainer’; machine translation, page 3, eighth paragraph) comprising: a fixed outer portion having a plurality of deformable protrusions configured to resist torque (figure 1, element 2 being the ‘fixed outer portion’ and elements 8 – 11 being the ‘plurality of deformable protrusions’; machine translation, page 3, eight paragraph – page 4, third paragraph); a mobile central portion being configured to engage the plurality of deformable protrusions (figure 1, element 5 being the ‘mobile central portion’; machine translation, page 3, eighth paragraph); and the mobile central portion including a cavity configured to accept insertion of a nut and prevent the nut from rotating relative to the mobile central portion (figures 1 and 3, elements 5 and 6; machine translation, page 4, fifth paragraph and page 5, second paragraph). Examiner recognizes that the mobile central portion is sized to allow the nut a given degree of rotation (figures 1 and 3, elements 5 and 6; machine translation, page 5, fifth paragraph). However, because the mobile central portion prevents the nut from entire rotation, the mobile central portion at least prevents some degree of rotation of the nut relative to the mobile central portion. Griffet further teaches that the nut restrainer is configured to accept insertion of the nut (figure 1, elements 1 and 6; machine translation, page 3, eighth paragraph) and thereafter the nut restrainer, which includes the fixed outer portion, is further configured to be affixed to a first side of a substrate plate over a bolt hole arranged in the substrate plate (figure 1, element 1); and wherein the nut restrainer is further configured to allow for subsequent installation of a bolt form a second side of the substrate plate opposite a side to which the nut retainer is affixed (figures 1 and 2, element 18; machine translation, page 5, fifth paragraph).
As to claim 39, wherein the plurality of deformable protrusions are configured to contact the mobile central portion (figures 1 and 5, elements 8 – 11 and 5).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 21, 22, 27 – 36, 38, and 39 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER BESLER whose telephone number is (571)270-5331. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:30 am - 7:30 pm (EST).
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER J. BESLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726