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 .
This Office Action is in response to amendments and remarks filed April 13, 2026. Claim 1-5 and 7-21 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 16-20 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.
Applicant’s arguments, see amendments and arguments, filed April 13, 2026, with respect to claims 1, 15 and 21 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of the claims and their corresponding dependents has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burger (US 20090099445) in view of Horndler et al. (US 20070232897), Grimm et al. (US 20050215888) and Yang et al. (US 20150182293).
Re claim 16: Burger teaches a system comprising: an apparatus (see means plus function interpretation above) (fig. 1, 2 and 4, paragraphs 74 and 75) for determining an angular orientation between a rotationally symmetric working end (120) of a first part of a tool (104/102 of 104/102/116) and a tool tracker (114) carried by a second part of the tool (116 of 104/102/116) (see fig. 1), wherein the first tool part (104/102 of 104/102/116) is configured to be fixed to the second tool part (116 of 104/102/116) in one of multiple angular orientations (fig. 1, paragraph 34), wherein the first tool part (104/102 of 104/102/116) is detachably attached to the second tool part (116 of 104/102/116, 110 is a clamp, paragraph 34), and comprises a reference structure (110/118/154) (see fig. 1), wherein the reference structure (110/118/154) is traceable and has a predefined angular relation to the working end (120) (see fig. 1 and paragraph 39, 40 and 43), the apparatus is configured to: receiving first position data indicative of one or more positions of the tool tracker (114) (paragraph 45 and 46, step 403 and 404, fig. 4); receiving second position data indicative of positions of the reference structure (paragraph 46, step 408, see fig. 1 and 4); and determining, based on the received first and second position data and the predefined angular relation between the reference structure (110/118/154) and the working end (120), the angular orientation of the working end (120) relative to the tool tracker (114) (see fig. 1 and 4, paragraph 47, claim 13), but does not specifically teach a tracked pointer and receiving second position data indicative of pointer positions while the pointer is tracing the reference structure and a non-rotationally symmetric working end and wherein the first tool part is detachably attached to the second tool part via a screw connection. Horndler teaches a reference structure (16/26) is traceable by a tracked pointer (14/15/24/25) and has a predefined positional relation to a working end (8/7) (paragraph 35-37, claim 1, 2 and 3, fig. 1-3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use a tracked pointer to trace the reference surface of Burger similar to Horndler in order to determine position/orientation of a tool over several locations on a reference structure providing for more accurate position/orientation measurements of the tool. Burger as modified by Horndler does not specifically teach a non-rotationally symmetric working end and wherein the first tool part is detachably attached to the second tool part via a screw connection. Grimm teaches a non-rotationally symmetric working end (26) (fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have the working end be a non-rotationally symmetric end similar to Grimm with the device of Burger as modified by Horndler in order to determine orientation of a non-symmetric tool providing for a more versatile deign. Burger as modified by Horndler and Grimm does not specifically teach wherein the first tool part is detachably attached to the second tool part via a screw connection. Yang teaches wherein a first tool part is detachably attached to a second tool part via a screw connection (fig. 3, paragraph 64, removably attached via screws 215). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have screws allow for detachability of the first tool from the second tool similar to Yang with the detachable elements of Burger as modified by Horndler and Grimm in order to have a secure attachment while still being able to be removed and attached to other tools providing a versatile design.
Re claim 17: Burger as modified by Horndler, Grimm and Yang teaches the system, wherein the reference structure (Horndler, 16, 110/118/154) comprises a planar surface (Horndler, paragraph 32, truncated pyramid has a planar surface).
Re claim 18: Burger as modified by Horndler, Grimm and Yang teaches the system, further comprising the tool (Burger, 104/102/116), wherein the reference structure (Burger, 118/110/154, Horndler, 16/26) is different from a wrench flat (these structures are not a wrench flat, Burger, 118/110/154, Horndler, 16/26) and has a predefined angular relation to the working end (Burger, 120, Grimm, 26, Burger, see fig. 1 and paragraph 39, 40 and 43, Grimm, 320 has an angular orientation to 26).
Re claim 19: Burger as modified by Horndler, Grimm and Tang teaches the system, wherein the reference structure is a planar surface (Horndler, fig. 2, the structure in 2B has a planar surface with a walls around where the pointer fits and is moved, paragraph 36).
Re claim 20: Burger as modified by Horndler, Grimm and Yang teaches the system, further comprising a tracking system configured to track at least one of the tool tracker and the pointer (Burger, paragraph 41-48, fig. 4, Horndler, fig. 1-3, Grimm, fig. 1 and abstract).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5, 7-15 and 21 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In regards to claim 1, the prior art of record individually or in combination fails to teach a method for determining an angular orientation between a non-rotationally symmetric working end of a first part of a tool and a tool tracker carried by a second part of the tool, wherein the first tool part is configured to be fixed to the second tool part in one of multiple angular orientations and comprises a reference structure, wherein the reference structure is traceable by a tracked pointer and has a predefined angular relation to the working end, the method as claimed comprising: more specifically in combination with receiving first position data indicative of one or more positions of the tool tracker, wherein the first position data are indicative of at least one position of the tool tracker while the pointer is tracing the reference structure; receiving second position data indicative of pointer positions while the pointer is tracing the reference structure; and determining, based on the received first and second position data and the predefined angular relation between the reference structure and the working end, the angular orientation of the working end relative to the tool tracker.
Claims 2-5 and 7-14 are allowed because of their dependency on claim 1.
In regards to claim 15, the prior art of record individually or in combination fails to teach a computer program product stored on non-transitory computer readable medium and comprising instructions that, when executed on at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to carry out a method for determining an angular orientation between a non-rotationally symmetric working end of a first part of a tool and a tool tracker carried by a second part of the tool, wherein the first tool part is configured to be fixed to the second tool part in one of multiple angular orientations and comprises a reference structure, wherein the reference structure is traceable by a tracked pointer and has a predefined angular relation to the working end, the method as claimed comprising: more specifically in combination with receiving first position data indicative of one or more positions of the tool tracker, wherein the first position data are indicative of at least one position of the tool tracker while the pointer is tracing the reference structure; receiving second position data indicative of pointer positions while the pointer is tracing the reference structure; and determining, based on the received first and second position data and the predefined angular relation between the reference structure and the working end, the angular orientation of the working end relative to the tool tracker.
In regards to claim 21, the prior art of record individually or in combination fails to teach a system as claimed comprising an apparatus for determining an angular orientation between a non-rotationally symmetric working end of a first part of a tool and a tool tracker carried by a second part of the tool, wherein the first tool part is configured to be fixed to the second tool part in one of multiple angular orientations, and comprises more specifically in combination with a reference structure, wherein the reference structure comprises a planar surface defined by a wrench flat configured to be engaged by a wrench to attach the first tool part to the second tool part, and wherein the reference structure is traceable by a tracked pointer and has a predefined angular relation to the working end, the apparatus being configured to: receive first position data indicative of one or more positions of the tool tracker; receive second position data indicative of pointer positions while the pointer is tracing the reference structure; and determine, based on the received first and second position data and the predefined angular relation between the reference structure and the working end, the angular orientation of the working end relative to the tool tracker.
Conclusion
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 JENNIFER D BENNETT whose telephone number is (571)270-3419. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM EST M-F.
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, Georgia Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/JENNIFER D BENNETT/Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights