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 .
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 11, 12, 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Augimeri (US 2023/0067592).
Regarding claim 1, Augimeri discloses a fastener 10 Fig. 1a comprising: a head 12; a shank 16 connected to and extending from the head, the shank including: a first portion 18, a second portion (18b of Annotated Fig. 1a, below) connected to extending and tapered away from the first portion, a third portion 20 connected to and extending from the second portion, and a tip 14 connected to and extending from the third portion and at an end of the shank opposite the head; a first helical thread formation 22 extending outwardly from the tapered second and third portions of the shank Fig. 2a, the first helical thread formation having a first thread portion (240 of Annotated Fig. 1a, below) and a second thread portion (250 of Annotated Fig. 1a, below), the first thread portion of the first helical thread formation extending from the second portion of the shank, the first thread portion of the first helical thread formation extending from the third portion of the shank, the second thread portion of the first helical thread formation extending from the third portion of the shank, the second thread portion of the first helical thread formation defining grooves 28; and a second helical thread formation 24 extending outwardly from the third portion of the shank.
PNG
media_image1.png
842
790
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Augimeri discloses wherein the first thread portion 240 of the first helical thread formation does not define any grooves.
Regarding claim 3, Augimeri discloses wherein the second thread portion 250 of the first helical thread formation defines grooves 28.
Regarding claim 4, Augimeri discloses wherein only part of the second thread portion 250 of the first helical thread formation defines grooves 28.
Regarding claim 5, Augimeri discloses wherein the part of the second thread portion 250 of the first helical thread formation that is adjacent to the tip 14 defines the grooves 28.
Regarding claim 11, Augimeri discloses wherein the first portion 18 of the shank 16 has a greater outer diameter than the third portion 20 of the shank.
Regarding claim 12, Augimeri discloses wherein the second portion 18b of the shank is tapered from the first portion 18 of the shank to the third portion 20 of the shank.
Regarding claim 15, Augimeri discloses wherein the first portion 18 of the shank 16 has a greater outer diameter than the third portion 20 of the shank.
Regarding claim 16, Augimeri discloses wherein the second portion 18b of the shank 16 is tapered from the first portion 18 of the shank to the third portion 20 of the shank.
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) 6-10, 13, 14, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Augimeri.
Regarding claims 6-10 and 13, Augimeri discloses the invention as claimed above but fails to explicitly disclose the various arrangements of the second helical thread wherein the second helical thread formation does not extend from the second portion of the shank. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japiske, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 14, Augimeri discloses wherein a part of the second thread portion 250 of the first helical thread formation that is adjacent to the tip 14 defines the grooves 28 in the second thread portion of the first helical thread.
Regarding claims 17 and 18, Augimeri discloses wherein the first helical thread formation 22 has a thread angle but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the thread angle of a portion of the first helical thread formation is approximately 40 or 60 degrees. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since it has been held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In re Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19 and 20 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: In view of a review of the prior art by the Examiner; the prior art of record neither teaches nor suggests all of the claimed subject matter of claims 19 and 20 including where first helical thread formation includes a trailing surface having a first section extending from a root towards a crest, a second section connected to and extending from the first section towards the crest, and a third section connected to and extending from the second section towards the crest and where the first section extends from the root towards the crest at an approximate 110 degree angle relative to the outer surface of the shank, the second section extends towards the crest at an approximate 160 degree angle relative to the outer surface of the shank, and the third section extends towards the crest at an approximate 135 degree angle relative to the outer surface of the shank. There is no motivation to modify the prior art references, absent the applicant’s own disclosure, in the manner required by the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/3/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the Augimeri reference fails to teach a thread formation extending from the second portion. This is not persuasive, since the Augimeri reference also discloses thread formation 38 Fig. 2a extending from a second portion.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 EUGENE G BYRD whose telephone number is (571)270-1824. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30pm.
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, Kristina Fulton can be reached at 5712727376. 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.
/EUGENE G BYRD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights