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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: in the second line, for is misspelled as “fore.”. Appropriate correction is required.
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, 2, 6, and 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 7,334,506 B2 to (Hui).
Regarding claim 1, (Hui) discloses a socket 1, comprising: a head part 10; a body 1 with a first socket hole 11; and an inner sleeve 2 positioned within said first socket hole; wherein said inner sleeve is detachable from said first socket hole; wherein said head part 10 is configured to dock with an internal angle head nut or bolt to rotate said internal angle head nut or bolt; and wherein said inner sleeve 2 is configured to dock with an outer angle head nut or bolt head (not shown) to rotate said outer angle head nut or bolt(Col. 1, lines 53-60; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 2, in (Hui), said first socket hole 11 and said inner sleeve 2 have an identical shape of a hexagon, a pentagon, or a triangle.
PNG
media_image1.png
324
242
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, in (Hui) each corner of said first socket hole 11 is an inverted inner circular corner, and each corner of said inner sleeve is an inverted outer circular corner corresponding to each said inverted inner circular corner of said first socket hole (not discussed or labeled but evident in Fig. 2)(see annotated Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 9, in (Hui) said head part 10 has an outer shape configured to dock and match with an internal angel head nut or bolt, and said outer shape is a hexagon, a pentagon, or a triangle (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10, in (Hui) according to claim 9, said head part 10 further comprises a first section with a first size and a second section with a second size, said first section is configured for an internal angel head nut or bolt with said first size, and said second section is configure for an internal angel head nut or bolt with said second size (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 11, in (Hui) according to claim 10, said second section is smaller than said first section, and said socket is stackable (Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
322
438
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, in (Hui) according to claim 10, said first section is smaller than said body 1, and said socket is stackable (Fig. 1).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (Hui), as applied to claim 1 above, in view of US 7,841,261 B2 to (Milligan et al.).
(Hui), as applied to claim 1 above, provides a socket according to claim 5, and teaches that the sleeve (inner lining 2) “may be detachably formed, inserted, embedded or secured in the inner hole 11 as recessed in the socket 1. The inner lining 2 may also be fixedly secured, coated, deposited, or formed in situ on an inner surface of the inner hole 11 within the socket 1, not limited in the present invention.” (Col. 2, lines 19-25); but does not explicitly state “an adhesive selected from structural glue, AB glue, and quick-drying glue.”
(Milligan et al.) provides a socket 11 having, inter alia: … a body (aluminum blank 1 with fastener end 3) with a first socket hole 7; and an inner sleeve (insert 13) positioned within said first socket hole 7; and teaches “hexagonal insert 13 inserted into the socket configuration 7 and held in place by a glue coating 15 since hex socket has transverse edges, hexagonal insert 13 cannot rotate, so that be glue or adhesive need not be extremely strong and would be required to prevent axial movement of steel alloy hexagonal insert 13, as well as to hold it fast against any possible minimal rotational movement.” (Col. 3, lines 44-52)(see also, Col. 4, lines 5-9: “The glue or
adhesive 15 for drive end insert 17 can preferably be the same glue or adhesive as used to secure socket insert 13 in place. An appropriate adhesive was Loctite 331 Speed Bonder with a Loctite 7387 activator. Other adhesives including epoxies should all function well.”).
Therefore, since both (Hui) and (Milligan et al.) are in the same field, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified (Hui) by providing a known adhesive such as structural glue, AB glue, and quick-drying glue, as taught by (Milligan et al.), and having the predictable result of securing the inner sleeve in place.
Claim(s) 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (Hui), as applied to claim 1 above, in combination with US 11,931,867 B2 to (Chang et al.).
(Hui), as applied to claim 1 above, provides a socket according to claim 12, but does not provide an outer sleeve sleeved over the body 1.
(Chang et al.) provides a socket that includes a socket main body 20 which has a head portion and a body portion connected to the head portion. The body portion has a polygonal hole for being coupled with a head portion of a bolt or a nut, so that the wrench is adapted for screwing on or off the bolt or nut through the socket main body. (see Abstract) (Chiang et al.) teaches “…a pipe (i.e. an outer sleeve) made of composite material is sleeved onto the external peripheral surface of the body portion. The pipe is freely detachable,…” (Abstract)
(Chiang et al.) further provides that the body 20 further includes an outer step (shoulder surface 28)(Col. 2, lines 53-58) for positioning said outer sleeve (pipe 30)(Col. 3, lines 5-8).
Therefore, since both (Hui) and (Chang et al.) are in the same field, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified (Hui) by providing an outer sleeve sleeved over said body, wherein said outer sleeve is detachable from said body, and further to reduce the diameter of the body such that a shoulder is formed between the body nearest the head portion and the fastener receiving portion of the body, as taught by (Chang et al.).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (Hui) in combination with (Chang et al.) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of US 2024/0025022 A1 to (ӦHLUND et al.) or US 8,590,431 B2 to (Cook).
(Hui) in combination with (Chang et al.) provides a socket according to claim 15, and noting that (Hui) discloses that “The inner lining 2 may be made of plastic, rubber, composite or elastomer materials, but not limited in the present invention.” (Col. 2, lines 26-28).
(ӦHLUND et al.) teaches, inter alia, that “sleeve is made may be a polymer, for example a thermoplastic polymer where examples include POM, or in some cases a thermosetting polymer such as epoxy, possibly reinforced (e.g. glass reinforced)”(para. [0023]. And, (Cook) teaches, inter alia, that “the insert 200 is fabricated from high density plastic, UHMW polyethylene, VHMW polyethylene, polyethylene, polyoxymethylene, or mylar… it should be understood that other materials and other forming processes can be used to fabricate the insert 200.” (para. [0034]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified (Hui) in combination with (Chang et al.) by providing sleeves that are made of a known material, such as polyoxymethylene (POM) or other high density plastics or polymers, as demonstrated by (ӦHLUND et al.) or (Cook), as being merely an obvious substitution/selection of known materials that are suitable for the intended use thereof. See, e.g., Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) and In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 7 and 8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if claims 3 and 7 are 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: regarding claim 3, that the inner sleeve has an inner extension edge pressing against said inner step; and, regarding claim 7, that the head part has a second socket hole configured to dock and match with a nut or bolt head, and said second socket hole is a hexagon, a pentagon, or a triangle, together in combination with the rest of the limitations in claim 1, have neither been disclosed nor suggested by the prior art of record considered as a whole, alone, or in combination.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as describing a number of sockets having a sleeve and sleeves for sockets.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David B. Thomas whose telephone number is (571) 272-4497. The examiner’s e-mail address is: dave.thomas@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 11:30-7:30.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, David Posigian can be reached on (. 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.
/David B. Thomas/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/DBT/
Prosecution Insights