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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on August 8, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter (i.e. the “trunk”). See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: Provide description including a numeral pertaining to the “trunk” as claimed in claims 10 and 17. In order to expedite prosecution, the examiner has interpreted the “trunk” as being similar to the “pawl body” as similarly claimed in claim 1 and as shown in Figure 1 with numeral 38.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Currently, no claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Krivec (5174176).
In reference to claims 1, 3, 10 and 11, Krivec discloses a driving tool (10, Figure 1) comprising:
a body (11) extending along a longitudinal/medial axis (i.e. a horizontal axis extending along the length of 11 in Figure 1);
a workpiece engagement surface (i.e. formed as an inner surface of a socket that is attached at 28) coupled to the body (Column 2, Lines 65-68);
a ratchet mechanism (25) supported by the body and coupled to the workpiece engagement surface, the ratchet mechanism comprising:
a gear (25) coupled to the workpiece engagement surface, the gear comprising a plurality of gear teeth (29); and
a pawl (30) comprising:
a base (formed from 35 and 36, Figure 3);
a pawl body/trunk (31) connected/coupled to the base (Figure 3);
a first arm (41) comprising at least one first pawl tooth (42), the first arm extending in a first direction (i.e. a clockwise direction) from the pawl body (Figure 3); and
a second arm (40) comprising at least one second pawl tooth (42), the second arm extending in a second direction from the pawl body;
wherein the first direction is different than the second direction (i.e. a counterclockwise direction), and wherein the at least one first pawl tooth and the at least one second pawl tooth are pointed/sloped inward toward the longitudinal/medial axis (Figure 3).
In reference to claim 2, Krivec discloses that the first arm and the second arm are asymmetric (Note, the definition of the term “asymmetric” is defined according to www.merriam-webster.com as being; “halves that are not the same”) about the longitudinal axis, because first arm (41) is engaged with gear (25 see Figure 3), whereas second arm (40) is spaced from gear (25 see Figure 3). Thus, the arms/halves are not the same about the longitudinal axis thereby meeting the definition above and thus the limitation of the claim.
In reference to claim 4, Krivec discloses that the first arm further comprises a narrowed portion (46) positioned between the at least one first pawl tooth and the pawl body (Figure 3).
In reference to claim 5, Krivec discloses that the pawl body has a first width (see figure below) and the narrowed portion has a second width (see figure below), and wherein the second width is less than the first width (see figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
450
727
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 6, Krivec discloses that the pawl has a maximum width defined between a first lateral-most surface of the first arm and a second lateral-most surface of the second arm (see figure below).
[AltContent: textbox (Maximum width)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image2.png
392
442
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 7, Krivec discloses that the base has a first width (see figure below) and wherein the body has a second width (see figure below).
[AltContent: textbox (Second width of Body)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (First width of Base)]
PNG
media_image2.png
392
442
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 8, Krivec discloses that the first width is greater than the second width (see figure above).
In reference to claims 9 and 14, Krivec discloses that the base, the pawl body, the at least one first pawl tooth, and the at least one second pawl tooth are all formed from a single integral piece of metal material (see Abstract and Column 3, Lines 28-32).
In reference to claim 12, Krivec discloses that the first arm comprises a first spring joint (38) positioned between the first plurality of pawl teeth and the trunk (Figure 3), and wherein the second arm comprises a second spring joint (37) positioned between the second plurality of pawl teeth and the trunk (Figure 3).
In reference to claim 13, Krivec discloses that the first spring joint and the second spring joint each have a first width (see figure below), wherein the trunk has a second width(see figure below), and wherein the first width is less than the second width (see figure below).
PNG
media_image3.png
304
528
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 15, Krivec discloses that the trunk (31) of the pawl extends (i.e. along the diameter of 31) along the medial axis (Figure 3) and wherein the first arm and the second arm each extend away from the medial axis at an angle (see figure below).
[AltContent: arc][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Respective angles)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arc][AltContent: textbox (Medial/longitudinal axis)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector]
PNG
media_image2.png
392
442
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kuo et al. (6431030).
In reference to claim 17, Kuo et al. disclose a ratcheting driving tool (Figure 3) comprising:
a body (20) extending along a medial axis (i.e. axis extending along the length of 20 in Figure 3);
a workpiece engagement surface coupled to the body (i.e. formed as an inner surface of the another connecting member/socket that is attached at 31);
a ratchet mechanism (30) supported by the body and coupled to the workpiece engagement surface, the ratchet mechanism comprising:
a gear mechanism (30) coupled to the workpiece engagement surface (at least through the connection of parts therebetween), the gear comprising a plurality of gear teeth (not labeled but formed along the outer surface of 30, Figure 3); and
a pawl (40) comprising:
a trunk (formed from upper 43 and lower 43, Figure 3) comprising a first end (see figure below) and a second end (see figure below);
a base (41) coupled to the first end of the trunk (Figure 3);
a first arm (upper 42) comprising a plurality of first pawl teeth (421), the first arm extending from the second end of the trunk (see figure below); and
a second arm (lower 42) comprising a plurality of second pawl teeth (421), the second arm extending from the second end of the trunk (see figure below);
wherein a medial surface (indicated by a dot in the figure below) of the first arm is spaced from a medial surface of the second arm (see figure below).
PNG
media_image4.png
494
719
media_image4.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 18, Kuo et al. disclose that the base has a first width (see figure below) and wherein the trunk has a second width (see figure below), and wherein the first width is greater than the second width (see figure below).
[AltContent: textbox (Second width)][AltContent: textbox (First width)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image5.png
223
213
media_image5.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 19, Kuo et al. disclose that the first arm comprises a first narrowed portion (see figure below) positioned between the first plurality of pawl teeth and the trunk (see figure below), and wherein the second arm comprises a second narrowed portion (see figure below) positioned between the second plurality of pawl teeth and the trunk (see figure below).
[AltContent: textbox (Surface of base acing away from the first arm and the second arm)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Pawl teeth)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Trunk)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Second narrowed portion)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First narrowed portion)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image6.png
205
183
media_image6.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 20, Kuo et al. disclose that the base further comprises a surface (see figure above) facing away from the first arm and the second arm, wherein the surface of the base engages an inner surface (i.e. 24) of the body (Figure 7).
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 16, is under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krivec (5174176) in view of Mayer (4592255).
In reference to claim 16, Krivec discloses the claimed invention
the workpiece engagement surface is a radially inward facing surface.
However, Mayer teaches that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to form a workpiece engagement surface as an inner surface of a socket attached by drive projection (17, see Figure 9, which is similar to the inner surface of the socket that is attached by drive projection 28, of Krivec) or as a radially inward facing surface (22, in Figure 3) thereby teaching that these two workpiece engagement surfaces are equivalent to one another.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the workpiece engagement surface, of Krivec, with the known technique of forming a workpiece engagement surface as the radially inward facing surface, as taught by Mayer, and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile workpiece engagement surface that more effectively engages with standard nuts and bolts in a conventional manner (Column 3, Lines 61-66).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Van Lenten (5873286) discloses a pawl (10) having a flexible joint (28 and 30) located between a base (20) and an arm (24 or 26, Figure 2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT J SCRUGGS whose telephone number is (571)272-8682. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6-2.
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.
/ROBERT J SCRUGGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights