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
Benefit of earlier filing date of 01/13/2022 of provisional application No. 63/299,295 is acknowledged as required by 35 U.S.C. 119.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because item number 172 must point to the motor. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-8 and 9-18 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 1 recites the limitation “the reciprocating member” in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this examination this limitation is interpreted to be --a reciprocating member--.
Claims 2-8 are rejected due to dependency on rejected claim 1.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the reciprocating member” in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this examination this limitation is interpreted to be --a reciprocating member--.
Claims 10-18 are rejected due to dependency on rejected claim 9.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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)(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 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Ceroll et al. (US 11344961 B2) hereinafter Ceroll.
Regarding claim 19, Ceroll teaches a pipe fitting tool configured to loosen a first pipe element with respect to a second pipe element (this is intended use of the tool. Tool of Ceroll has two sections 200 and 100; a second pipe element can be gripped by 200 and rotation of 100 can loosed the first pipe section), the pipe fitting tool comprising: a fixed jaw including first and second teeth sections (232, 232); and a movable jaw including third and fourth teeth sections (234, 234), wherein the first teeth section and the second teeth section have teeth angled in a first direction corresponding to a rotational direction of the second pipe element, and wherein the third teeth section has teeth angled in a second direction opposing the rotational direction of the second pipe element.
PNG
media_image1.png
556
553
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-8, 9-14 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishikawa (US 4885963 A) in view of Belik (US 7748297 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Nishikawa teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. below) a pipe fitting tool configured to loosen a first pipe element with respect to a second pipe element, the pipe fitting tool comprising: a motor (motor 3); a holdback assembly configured to clamp and hold the second pipe element (52), the holdback assembly including a fixed jaw (53), a movable jaw (55), and a plurality of teeth sections (teeth 55a and 55b) (col. 3, lines 58-62: “ the teeth 55a of the upper jaw 55 and the teeth 55b provided on the body of the pipe wrench 53”); and a drive assembly configured to clamp and rotate the first pipe element (51) with respect to the second pipe element in response to a first linear motion of a reciprocating member (rotational motion of threaded rod 15 moves it linearly relative to tubular member 13; therefore threaded rod 15 is indeed a type of reciprocating member; clockwise rotation of threaded rod 15, moves the threaded rod 15 in a fist direction (first linear motion) and grips the first pipe and rotates the first pipe relative to the second pipe by motor 3 and gears 6), and release the first pipe element in response to a second linear motion of the reciprocating member (counter-clockwise rotation of threaded rod 15 moves the threaded rod 15 in a second direction (second linear motion) and releases the first pipe), the second linear motion being in a direction opposite the first linear motion, wherein at least one of the plurality of teeth sections is
PNG
media_image2.png
1291
1220
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Belik teaches a pipe gripping tool with pivotal teeth sections (318) for “intensifying the gripping force on inserts 318 and causing them to further engage or dig into the cylindrical member 314” (col. 13, lines 65-67; Figs. 20A-20B).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to make at least one of the plurality of teeth sections of Nishikawa pivotal. Doing so would intensify gripping force of the holdback assembly as set forth in Belik.
Regarding claims 3-4, Nishikawa teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the holdback assembly includes a two teeth sections and wherein the drive assembly includes a second pair of jaws (12, 12). Nishikawa does not teach the claimed orientation of the first and second teeth.
Figs. 20A-20B of Belik shows four pivotal teeth sections for “intensifying the gripping force on inserts 318 and causing them to further engage or dig into the cylindrical member 314” (col. 13, lines 65-67; Figs. 20A-20B); the plurality of teeth sections includes a first teeth section having teeth angled in a first direction corresponding to a rotational direction of the second pipe element, and wherein the plurality of teeth sections includes a second teeth section having teeth angled in a second direction opposing the rotational direction of the second pipe element (see orientation of teeth 1 and 2 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
286
496
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to make pipe holder of Nishikawa with four teeth section with claimed orientation between first and second teeth to intensify gripping force of the holdback assembly.
Regarding claim 5, Nishikawa teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the holdback assembly is adjustably positioned relative to the drive assembly (by up and down adjustability of shaft 11).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Nishikawa teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the holdback assembly includes a screw, and wherein a spacing between the fixed jaw and the moveable jaw is decreased in response to movement of the screw to clamp and hold the second pipe element (rotational motion of threaded rod 15 moves it linearly relative to tubular member 13; therefore threaded rod 15 is indeed a type of reciprocating member; clockwise rotation of threaded rod 15, moves the threaded rod 15 in a fist direction (first linear motion) and grips the first pipe and rotates the first pipe relative to the second pipe by motor 3 and gears 6).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Nishikawa teaches the screw is configured such that applying
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply certain torque to the screw based on certain pipe gripping force required for operation on the pipe.
Regarding claim 9, Nishikawa teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) a pipe fitting tool configured to loosen a first pipe element with respect to a second pipe element, the pipe fitting tool comprising: a motor (motor 3); a holdback assembly configured to clamp and hold the second pipe element (52), the holdback assembly including a fixed jaw (53), a movable jaw (55), and a plurality of teeth sections (teeth 55a and 55b) (col. 3, lines 58-62: “ the teeth 55a of the upper jaw 55 and the teeth 55b provided on the body of the pipe wrench 53”); and a drive assembly configured to clamp and rotate the first pipe element (51) with respect to the second pipe element in response to a first linear motion of a reciprocating member (rotational motion of threaded rod 15 moves it linearly relative to tubular member 13; therefore threaded rod 15 is indeed a type of reciprocating member; clockwise rotation of threaded rod 15, moves the threaded rod 15 in a fist direction (first linear motion) and grips the first pipe and rotates the first pipe relative to the second pipe by motor 3 and gears 6), and release the first pipe element in response to a second linear motion of the reciprocating member (counter-clockwise rotation of threaded rod 15 moves the threaded rod 15 in a second direction (second linear motion) and releases the first pipe), the second linear motion being in a direction opposite the first linear motion. Nishikawa does not teach the claimed orientation of the first and second teeth.
Figs. 20A-20B of Belik shows four pivotal teeth sections for “intensifying the gripping force on inserts 318 and causing them to further engage or dig into the cylindrical member 314” (col. 13, lines 65-67; Figs. 20A-20B); the plurality of teeth sections includes a first teeth section having teeth angled in a first direction corresponding to a rotational direction of the second pipe element, and wherein the plurality of teeth sections includes a second teeth section having teeth angled in a second direction opposing the rotational direction of the second pipe element (see orientation of teeth 1 and 2 in annotated Fig. 20B above).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to make pipe holder of Nishikawa with four teeth section with claimed orientation between first and second teeth to intensify gripping force of the holdback assembly.
Regarding claim 10, Nishikawa teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the first teeth section (55a) is fixed to the movable jaw.
Regarding claim 11, Nishikawa teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the second teeth section (55b) is coupled to the fixed jaw.
Regarding claim 12, Nishikawa teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the second teeth section (55b) is
Belik teaches a pipe gripping tool with pivotal teeth sections (318) for “intensifying the gripping force on inserts 318 and causing them to further engage or dig into the cylindrical member 314” (col. 13, lines 65-67; Figs. 20A-20B).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to make at least one of the plurality of teeth sections of Nishikawa pivotal. Doing so would intensify gripping force of the holdback assembly as set forth in Belik.
Regarding claims 13-14, pipe tool of Nishikawa has only two teeth sections for the holdback assembly.
Figs. 20A-20B of Belik shows four pivotal teeth sections for “intensifying the gripping force on inserts 318 and causing them to further engage or dig into the cylindrical member 314” (col. 13, lines 65-67; Figs. 20A-20B) (see 1, 2, 3, 4 in annotated Fig. 20B above).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to make pipe holder of Nishikawa with four teeth section with claimed orientation between first, second, third and fourth teeth to intensify gripping force of the holdback assembly.
Claims 2 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishikawa in view of Belik and further in view of Ceroll.
Regarding claims 2 and 18, Nishikawa teaches a housing (casing body 1) containing the motor (motor 3). However Nishikawa does not show the power source.
Ceroll teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. below) a pipe tool having a holdback assembly and a drive assembly; a housing (motor housing 130) containing the motor (motor 135) and a battery (125) removably coupled to the housing (col. 8, lines 48-59: “the battery 125 may be removably received in the internal cavity 122 formed in the battery housing 120”), wherein the battery is configured to provide power to the motor (col. 8, lines 63-64: “A supply of power from the battery 125 to the motor 135”).
PNG
media_image4.png
726
1128
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to make pipe tool of Nishikawa battery operated for easier portability and freedom of movement.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ceroll in view of Belik.
Regarding claim 20, teeth sections of Ceroll are fixed and not pivotal.
Belik teaches a pipe gripping tool with pivotal teeth sections (318) for “intensifying the gripping force on inserts 318 and causing them to further engage or dig into the cylindrical member 314” (col. 13, lines 65-67; Figs. 20A-20B).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to make at least one of the plurality of teeth sections of Ceroll pivotal. Doing so would intensify gripping force of the holdback assembly as set forth in Belik.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 15 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.
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Nishikawa teaches (reproduced and annotated Figs. above) the drive assembly includes a screw (15) rotatably driven (rotational motion of threaded rod 15 moves it linearly relative to tubular member 13; therefore threaded rod 15 is indeed a type of reciprocating member; clockwise rotation of threaded rod 15, moves the threaded rod 15 in a fist direction (first linear motion) and grips the first pipe and rotates the first pipe relative to the second pipe by motor 3 and gears 6). In device of Nishikawa the screw (15) is rotated by handle 16 and is not connected to the motor 3 which also rotates the second pipe.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Mascarenas (US 20170113333 A1) teaches a pipe wrench with a housing (18) containing the motor (62) and a battery (70) removably coupled to the housing, wherein the battery is configured to provide power to the motor.
Boyer (US 2528814 A) teaches a pipe wrench with four pivotal teeth sections.
PNG
media_image5.png
629
453
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Milwaukee M18 Fuel Compact Cordless Pipe Threader
Found at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qyKI_dZGKY&t=34s
PNG
media_image6.png
1106
1306
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHDI H NEJAD whose telephone number is (571)270-0464. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-4pm 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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
MAHDI H. NEJAD
Examiner
Art Unit 3723
/MAHDI H NEJAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights