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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-6 and newly added claims 21-33, in the reply filed on May 26, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“collet assembly operable to grip and swage the fastener” in claims 5 and 21 [corresponding structure is shown in figure 3B; paragraph 0033].
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-6 and 27-33 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.
With regards to claim 1, there appears to be insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the helically-geared outer surface of the pull shaft” found in line 9. Clarification and/or correction is required.
With regards to claim 3, the claim states “each roller has distal outer teeth operable to engage a distal ring gear and proximal outer gear teeth operable to engage a proximal ring gear”, it is unclear if the distal ring gear and the proximal ring gear are encompassed within the “at least one ring gear” set forth in claim 2 (from which claim 3 depends) or if the distal and proximal ring gears are separate from the at least one ring gear of claim 2. Clarification and/or correction is required.
With regards to claims 6 and 27-29, claim 6 states “capture one or more of sensor data” and claim 27 states “to capture one or more input values related to…sensor data” , it is unclear how the motor controller is able to capture sensor data if the tool lacks any structure that is able to provide such data, i.e. the tool lacks a sensor, therefore it is unclear how the controller is to obtain sensor data.
With regards to claim 22, the claim states “transmit the torque from the electric motor to the ring gear” it is unclear if the limitation “the ring gear” is intending to further define the at least one ring gear previously recited in the claim to be a single ring gear or if the limitation is intending to refer to the at least one ring gear. Clarification and/or correction is required. For examination purposes the limitation is being interpreted as referring to the at least one ring gear.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 21-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson et al (US 2023/0030692) in view of Yong (KR 10-2022-0142655; cited by Applicant).
In reference to claim 1, Johnson et al discloses a fastener installation tool (10) for installing a fastener, comprising
an anvil member (50) having an opening extending along a central axis,
a working head extending in the opening along the central axis [see figure 2],
a pull shaft (18, 24) movable along the central axis for connection to the working had,
an electric motor (26) [see paragraph 0035; figure 4], and
a gear transmission assembly (178) operably connected to the electric motor (26) to advance the pull shaft to translate the pull shaft along the central axis, the gear transmission assembly including a collar (182) distributed around the pull shaft (18, 24), the collar (182) having a helically geared inner surface to engage a helically geared outer surface of the pull shaft to translate the pull shaft and the working head along the central axis [see figure 2; paragraph 0044].
Johnson et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed except for wherein the gear transmission assembly includes a plurality of rollers that engage with the pull shaft.
However, Yong teaches of a fastener installation tool having a motor (14), gear transmission assembly (16, 20) that engages with a pull shaft (34) to advance the pull shaft along a central axis, wherein the pull shaft has an helically geared outer surface that engages with a plurality of rollers (18) that each have a helically geared outer surface (32) [see figures 1-2 & 4; abstract].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the helically geared collar of Johnson et al with the plurality of helically geared rollers, as taught by Yong, in order to obtain the predictable results of converting rotational motion to linear motion to translate the pull shaft along the central axis.
In reference to claim 2, modified Johnson et al further discloses the gear transmission assembly includes at least one ring gear (78) encompassing the pull shaft and operable to transmit rotation from the electric motor to the plurality of rollers.
In reference to claim 3, Yong further teaches each roller (18) has a distal outer gear teeth operable to engage a distal ring gear (26) and proximal outer gear teeth operable to engage a proximal ring gear (28), nad the helically geared outer surface of each roller is located between the distal outer gear teeth and the proximal outer gear teeth, as seen in figure 6.
In reference to claim 4, Johnson et al further discloses the gear transmission assembly includes an intermediate gear (74) operable to engage the at least one ring gear (78) to transmit rotation from the electric motor (26) to the at least one ring gear, as seen in figure 4.
In reference to claim 5, Johnson et al further discloses the working head comprises a collet assembly (1170) operable to grip and swage the fastener [see paragraph 0045].
In reference to claim 6, Johnson et al further discloses a motor controller (300) to control the electric motor, the motor controller including one or more processors (305) [see paragraph 0053] and a non-transitory memory (325) coupled to the one or more processors [see paragraph 0054], the non-transitory memory including a set of instructions of computer executable program code, which when executed by the one or more processors, causes the motor controller to capture one or more of sensor data, detect a change in magnitude of electric current at the electric motor (26), calculate, based on the detection, a required number of rotations of the electric motor to translate the pull shaft a predetermined travel distance, and control the electric motor to rotate the calculated number of rotations to complete swaging of the fastener [see paragraph 0057].
In reference to claim 21, Johnson et al discloses a fastener installation tool (10) for installing a fastener, comprising
an electric motor (26) operable for rotation to general torque [see paragraph 0035],
an anvil (50) defining an axis [see paragraph 0034],
a collet assembly (1170) movable along the axis and operable to swage the fastener [see paragraph 0045], and
a gear transmission assembly (178) operably connected to receive the torque from the electric motor (26) and advance the collet assembly along the axis, the gear transmission assembly including a pull shaft (18, 24) operably connected to the collet assembly, and a collar (182) distributed around the pull shaft (18, 24) to rotatably engage the pull shaft and advance the pull shaft and the collet assembly along the axis [see figure 2; paragraph 0044].
Johnson et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed except for wherein the gear transmission assembly includes a plurality of rollers that engage with the pull shaft.
However, Yong teaches of a fastener installation tool having a motor (14), gear transmission assembly (16, 20) that engages with a pull shaft (34) to advance the pull shaft along a central axis, wherein the pull shaft has an helically geared outer surface that engages with a plurality of rollers (18) that each have a helically geared outer surface (32) [see figures 1-2 & 4; abstract].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the helically geared collar of Johnson et al with the plurality of helically geared rollers, as taught by Yong, in order to obtain the predictable results of converting rotational motion to linear motion to translate the pull shaft along the central axis.
In reference to claim 22, Johnson et al further discloses the gear transmission assembly further includes at least one ring gear (78) and an intermediate gear (74) operable to engage and transmit the torque from the electric motor (26) to the at least one ring gear (78).
In reference to claim 23, modified Johnson et al further discloses the at least one ring gear is operable to transmits the torque from the intermediate gear to the plurality of rollers [see figure 4; paragraph 0044].
In reference to claim 24, modified Johnson et al further discloses the rotary movement of the intermediate gear (74) causes rotation of the ring gear (78) at a same rotational speed of the intermediate gear.
In reference to claim 25, Yong further teaches an axis of each roller (18) in the plurality of rollers extends generally parallel to an axis of the pull shaft [see figure 6].
In reference to claim 26, Johnson et al further discloses a motor controller (300) operable to control the electric motor (26) [see paragraph 0057].
In reference to claim 27, Johnson et al further discloses the motor controller (300) includes a non-transitory memory (325) coupled to one or more processors (305) [see paragraph 0054], the non-transitory memory includes a set of instructions of computer-executable program code, which when executed by the one or more processors, causes the motor controller to capture one or more input values related to characteristics of the fastener installation tool and sensor data [see paragraph 0057].
In reference to claim 28, wherein the set of instructions of computer executable program code, when executed by the one or more processors, causes the motor controller to conduct analysis of the input values and the capture sensor data [see paragraph 0057].
In reference to claim 29, the set of instructions of computer executable program code, when executed by the one or more processors, causes the motor controller to control the electric motor based on the sensor analysis [see paragraph 0057].
In reference to claim 30, the sensor data comprises position of the pull shaft, rotation of the electric motor, and electric current to the electric motor [see paragraph 0052].
In reference to claim 31, the set of instructions of computer executable program code, when executed by the one or more processors, causes the motor controller to detect a change in magnitude of electric current at the electric motor.
In reference to claim 32, the set of instructions of computer executable program code, when executed by the one or more processors, causes the motor controller to calculate, based on the detection, a required number of rotations of the electric motor to advance the pull shaft a predetermined travel distance [see paragraph 0057].
In reference to claim 33, the set of instructions of computer executable program code, when executed by the one or more processors, causes the motor controller to cause the electric motor to rotate the calculated number of rotations to complete swaging of the fastener [see paragraph 0057].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Debra Sullivan whose telephone number is (571)272-1904. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4:30pm 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, Chris Templeton can be reached on (571) 270-1477. 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.
/Debra M Sullivan/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights