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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 09/08/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-6 and 8-17 are pending in the application.
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.
Claim 17 is 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 17 is rejected since it is in an improper dependent form for depending on a cancelled claim. Presumably claim 17 should be depending from claim 3.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4-5, 8-11, 13-14, and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Quicke (US 20210031337 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 4, 8, and 17, Quicke discloses a hydraulic torque wrench (1 fig. 1), comprising: a head (10) having an input (30) for pressurised hydraulic fluid ([0066-0069, 0081, 0094], fig. 1), a rotatable connector (150/ drive plate 140 figs. 1 and 7-8) for connecting to an item (nut N/bolt B) to be rotated by the hydraulic torque wrench, and a drive mechanism (150/16 [0094]) driven by hydraulic fluid introduced at the input and tending to rotate the rotatable connection; and
a reaction arm (21) mounted on the head through a mounting which selectively allows rotational motion of the reaction arm relative to the head about an axis (14 allows adjustment and 21/22 adjusted via 28), the reaction arm arranged to react against a surface when the drive mechanism rotates the rotatable connection (figs. 1-6); in which the mounting comprises:
a splined connection (16/21c [0074]), comprising complementary splines (16/16a) on the head and the reaction arm, which permits linear motion of the reaction arm (21 [0071]) relative to the head along the axis from a first position where the splines of the splined connection interengage so as to prevent relative rotation of the reaction arm and the head, and a second position where the splines of the splined connection do not interengage and allow relative rotation of the head and the reaction arm ([0070-0094], figs. 1-9); and
a rotational/linear travel limiter (14a/spring 14e), which limits relative rotational motion of the reaction arm and the head (spring 14e locks rotation in place and 21/22 are also adjusted via 28 by loosen and tightening 28) and prevents linear motion of the reaction arm relative to the head past the second position (cap 14 screwed on via 17b) and at least one biassing member (14e) which acts to bias the reaction arm into the first position in which the rotational travel limiter limits the travel to a range. ([0070-0094], figs. 4-9) and a rigid elongate member (18/18g) attached to the head (10), with a step (14b) on the reaction arm engaging a stop (14a) on the rigid elongate member to stop the linear motion past the second position ([0070-0094], figs. 4-9).
Regarding claims 5, Quicke discloses the mounting has at least one biassing member (14e) which acts to bias the reaction arm into the first position (figs. 4-5).
Regarding claims 9-11 and 13, Quicke discloses the range is at most 270, 180 or 90 degrees or in which the range is 90 or 180 degrees, in which the ends of range represent desired positions of the reaction arm relative to the head and at least one indicium showing a desired relative rotational location of the reaction arm relative to the head.
Regarding claims 14 and 16, Quicke discloses a retaining mechanism, which selectively fixes the head and the reaction arm relative to each other when in the first position in which the splines on the head are provided on a cylindrical boss extending from a base on the head outwards, in which the rigid elongate member is attached to the head at or adjacent to the base.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 and 6 are allowed.
Claims 1, 12 and 15 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.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Reasons for Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art of record fails to teach or render obvious a hydraulic torque wrench comprising all the structural and functional limitations and further comprising, amongst other limitations/features, a head unit with a reaction arm that adjust by moving linearly from a first fastened position to a second unfastened position to rotationally adjust the reaction arm relative to the head unit with a linear travel limiter with at least one bolt having a stud and a head, with the stud of each bolt being fixed relative to one of the head and the reaction arm and working in an aperture in the other of the head and the reaction arm, with the head being too large to fit through the aperture so as to limit the linear travel and the linear travel limiter prevents linear motion of the reaction arm relative to the head past the second position and at least one biassing member to bias the reaction arms into the first position.. Though Quicke (US 20210031337 A1) teaches a reaction arm on a torque wrench, it would not be obvious to modify torque wrench reaction arm with having the head being too large to fit through a aperture so as to limit the linear travel and the linear travel limiter prevents linear motion of the reaction arm relative to the head past the second position and at least one biassing member to bias the reaction arms into the first position and one of ordinary skill would recognize that modifying the bolt would not be possible without having to also modify the head member to function with as a travel limiter. Having the efficiency and ease of connecting the head and reaction arm in any number of positions provides an effective reaction brace arm while using the hydraulic tool.
While various features of the claimed subject matter are found individually in the prior art, a skilled artisan would have to include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure to combine or modify the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed subject matter, and thus obviousness would not be proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). There is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine or modify the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention, and thus obviousness would not be proper. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., structural features of the travel limiter) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Examiner contends the splines themselves could be considered a “travel limiter” and any portion of the torque wrench could also be a travel limiter. Examiner suggest adding the structural features of the travel limiter as recited in claim 2 or 3.
However, with respect to claim 2 and the claimed features of the travel limiter are fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection of claim 2 and 6 has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
Additional prior art considered pertinent: US 20200164493 A1 – splined connected reaction arm with travel limited and see form 892.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT LONG whose telephone number is (571)270-3864. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-5pm, 8-9pm (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, SHELLEY SELF can be reached at (571) 272-4524. 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.
/ROBERT F LONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights