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
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
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.
Claim 8 is 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.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the carrier retention assembly" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, “the carrier retention assembly has been interpreted as --a carrier assembly--.
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.
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) 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2,624,223 A to (CLARK) in combination with US 6,339,976 B1 to (Jordan).
Regarding claim 1, (CLARK) provides a bidirectional extractor tool comprising: a driven end (shank 7 that includes a substantially cylindrical portion 8, and a projecting stud 9 for engaging a socket 10) and configured to receive drive power from a driving device (“The shank shown is of the type commonly used in connection with power driven screw drivers, the shank having the inner end portion thereof of hexagonal or noncircular cross section for forming a driving connection with the power actuated screw driver or similar tool.” – Col. 1, lines 49-55); a drive end (socket member 10) configured to interface with a fastener (a screw or bolt 26; Fig. 3; Col. 3, lines 45-46); and a body portion (projecting stud 9) extending between the driven end (7) and the drive end (10) about an axis of the extractor tool, wherein the drive end (10) comprises a fastener engagement recess (recessed part or socket 14) extending into the body portion (10) and coaxial with the body portion, the fastener engagement recess comprises a plurality of faces (not labeled but evident in the drawings) that form a suitable cross section to cooperate with a fastener for driving a
The subject-matter of claim 1 therefore differs from the extractor tool of (CLARK) in that the crossed out features are recited.
The problem to be solved by the present invention may be regarded as providing a means for bi-directional gripping, driving, removing, and retaining fasteners, including rounded, corroded, or damaged fasteners.
(Jordan) provides a tool (10), i.e., a socket, that is useful in the removal of threaded fasteners that have been damaged or corroded such that the outer surface of the fastener has been damaged and the fastener cannot be readily removed by wrenches, sockets or other tools that are designed for the removal of fasteners that are in good condition (Col. 3, lines 49-54). (Jordan) teaches that the drive end of the tool (10) comprises a fastener engagement recess ( extending into the body portion and coaxial with the body portion, the fastener engagement recess comprises a plurality of engagement ribs (splines 25 with respective crests 26) that are configured to engage with the fastener such that the fastener is drivable while avoiding contact with corner portions of the fastener (See Fig. 2), wherein the engagement ribs (25) extend inwardly toward each other to define an inner diameter between opposing ribs, wherein the inner diameter is greatest at the drive end and decreases along at least a portion of a length of the engagement ribs extending toward the driven end (Figs. 1 and 2; Col. 4, lines 25-32).
Therefore, as both (CLARK) and (Jordan) provide a socket for engaging and driving a fastener, 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 (CLARK) by providing an alternative socket that has an engagement recess having a plurality of engagement ribs that are configured to engage with the fastener such that the fastener is drivable while avoiding contact with corner portions of the fastener, wherein the engagement ribs extend inwardly toward each other to define an inner diameter between opposing ribs, wherein the inner diameter is greatest at the drive end and decreases along at least a portion of a length of the engagement ribs extending toward the driven end, as taught by (Jordan) for the purpose of driving, removing, and retaining fasteners, including rounded, corroded, or damaged fasteners.
Regarding claim 3, in (CLARK) as modified in combination with (Jordan) as applied to claim 1, (Jordan) provides ribs (splines 25) having an apex (26) that extends a length of each of the engagement ribs and is substantially non-linear. (spiral shape – Col. 4, lines 36-38).
Regarding claim 4, in (CLARK) as modified in combination with (Jordan) as applied to claim 1, (CLARK) provides the magnet carrier assembly with a carrier base (shell 17) and a spring (18), wherein the carrier base (17) comprises a first side operably coupled to the magnet (16) and a second side operably coupled to the spring (18), and wherein a carrier retention assembly (a hole is drilled in the outer end of the portion 9 of the shank and the shell (17) may be secured in the hole in any suitable manner, for example, by pressing the shell (17) into the hole – see Col. 3, lines 16-23) is configured to support the magnet carrier assembly in a rest position when there is no fastener in the fastener engagement recess.
Regarding claim 7, in (CLARK) as modified in combination with (Jordan) as applied to claim 4, in (CLARK) an engagement face (of outer end portion 22) of the magnet (16) is recessed relative to the drive end when the magnet is in the rest position (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 8, in (CLARK) as modified in combination with (Jordan) as applied to claim 1, both (CLARK) and (Jordan) provide the fastener engagement recess with a depth measured from the drive end to the carrier retention assembly.
Regarding claim 10, in (CLARK) as modified in combination with (Jordan) as applied to claim 8, in (CLARK) the driven end (7) comprises a hex-shaped drive projection for receiving drive power from the driving device (“The shank shown is of the type commonly used in connection with power driven screw drivers, the shank having the inner end portion thereof of hexagonal or noncircular cross section for forming a driving connection with the power actuated screw driver or similar tool.” – Col. 1, lines 49-55).
Claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over US 2,624,223 A to (CLARK) in combination with US 11,554,470 B2 to (McKenzie et al.).
The applied reference has a common joint inventor with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
Regarding claim 1, (CLARK) provides a bidirectional extractor tool comprising: a driven end (shank 7 that includes a substantially cylindrical portion 8, and a projecting stud 9 for engaging a socket 10) and configured to receive drive power from a driving device (“The shank shown is of the type commonly used in connection with power driven screw drivers, the shank having the inner end portion thereof of hexagonal or noncircular cross section for forming a driving connection with the power actuated screw driver or similar tool.” – Col. 1, lines 49-55); a drive end (socket member 10) configured to interface with a fastener (a screw or bolt 26; Fig. 3; Col. 3, lines 45-46); and a body portion (projecting stud 9) extending between the driven end (7) and the drive end (10) about an axis of the extractor tool, wherein the drive end (10) comprises a fastener engagement recess (recessed part or socket 14) extending into the body portion (10) and coaxial with the body portion, the fastener engagement recess comprises a plurality of faces (not labeled but evident in the drawings) that form a suitable cross section to cooperate with a fastener for driving a such that the fastener is drivable in either a clockwise or a counterclockwise direction
The subject-matter of claim 1 therefore differs from the extractor tool of (CLARK) in that the crossed out features are recited.
The problem to be solved by the present invention may be regarded as providing a means for bi-directional gripping, driving, removing, and retaining fasteners, including rounded, corroded, or damaged fasteners.
(McKenzie et al.) provides a bidirectional extraction socket may include a driven end configured to receive drive power from a driving tool, a drive end configured to interface with a fastener, and a body portion extending between the driven end and the drive end about an axis of the extraction socket. The drive end includes a fastener engagement recess extending into the body portion and coaxial with the body portion. The fastener engagement recess is configured to engage with the fastener such that the fastener is drivable in either a clockwise or a counterclockwise direction while avoiding contact with corner portions of the fastener (Abstract). The “engagement ribs 150 that are defined between respective arc shaped grooves 152 or fluted portions. The arc shaped grooves 152 and the engagement ribs 150 may each extend in a direction substantially parallel to the axis 130 to define the depth of the fastener engagement recess 122. A distance between engagement ribs 150 on opposing sides of the fastener engagement recess 122 may define the inside diameter of the fastener engagement recess 122. This distance (i.e., the inside diameter of the fastener engagement recess 122) may be tapered along at least a portion of (and perhaps all of) the length of the engagement ribs 150 such that the engagement ribs 150 are farther apart from each other at the driven end 120 end of the engagement recess 122 than at any other point along the length of the engagement ribs 150.”(Col. 5, lines 35-49).
Therefore, as both (CLARK) and (McKenzie et al.) provide a socket for engaging and driving a fastener, 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 (CLARK) by providing an alternative socket that has an engagement recess having a plurality of engagement ribs that are configured to engage with the fastener such that the fastener is drivable while avoiding contact with corner portions of the fastener, wherein the engagement ribs extend inwardly toward each other to define an inner diameter between opposing ribs, wherein the inner diameter is greatest at the drive end and decreases along at least a portion of a length of the engagement ribs extending toward the driven end, as taught by (McKenzie et al.) for the purpose of driving, removing, and retaining fasteners, including rounded, corroded, or damaged fasteners.
Regarding claim 2, in (CLARK) as modified in combination with (McKenzie et al.) as applied to claim 1, each of the engagement ribs 150 (or engagement ribs 612 in Fig. 9) of (McKenzie et al.) defines an apex that lies in a straight line extending a length of each of the engagement ribs (see Claim 1 in McKenzie et al. and Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 4, in (CLARK) as modified in combination with (McKenzie et al.) as applied to claim 1, (CLARK) provides the magnet carrier assembly with a carrier base (shell 17) and a spring (18), wherein the carrier base (17) comprises a first side operably coupled to the magnet (16) and a second side operably coupled to the spring (18), and wherein a carrier retention assembly (a hole is drilled in the outer end of the portion 9 of the shank and the shell (17) may be secured in the hole in any suitable manner, for example, by pressing the shell (17) into the hole – see Col. 3, lines 16-23) is configured to support the magnet carrier assembly in a rest position when there is no fastener in the fastener engagement recess.
Regarding claim 7, in (CLARK) as modified in combination with (McKenzie et al.) as applied to claim 4, in (CLARK) an engagement face (of outer end portion 22) of the magnet (16) is recessed relative to the drive end when the magnet is in the rest position (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 8, in (CLARK) as modified in combination with (McKenzie et al.) as applied to claim 1, both (CLARK) and (McKenzie et al.) provide the fastener engagement recess with a depth measured from the drive end to the carrier retention assembly.
Regarding claim 10, in (CLARK) as modified in combination with (McKenzie et al.) as applied to claim 8, in (CLARK) the driven end (7) comprises a hex-shaped drive projection for receiving drive power from the driving device (“The shank shown is of the type commonly used in connection with power driven screw drivers, the shank having the inner end portion thereof of hexagonal or noncircular cross section for forming a driving connection with the power actuated screw driver or similar tool.” – Col. 1, lines 49-55).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the limitation of “a carrier retention assembly is integrally formed from the body portion and configured to support the magnet carrier assembly in a rest position” (claim 11); and the limitation of “a carrier retention assembly is configured to support the magnet carrier assembly in a rest position when there is no fastener in the fastener engagement recess, and wherein the carrier retention assembly is an annular ring formed separate from the body portion and secured within the body portion via a press fit” (claim 16), together in combination with the rest of the limitations in the respective independent claim, has neither been disclosed nor suggested by the prior art of record considered as a whole, alone, or in combination.
Claims 5, 6, and 9 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 claim 5, that the carrier retention assembly is integrally formed from the body portion; in claim 6, that the carrier retention assembly is an annular ring formed separate from the body portion and secured within the body portion via a press fit; and, in claim 9 that the body portion further comprises a spring cavity extending into the body portion and coaxial with the body portion, wherein the spring cavity is partitioned from the fastener engagement recess by the carrier retention assembly, and wherein the depth of the fastener engagement recess is less than a depth of the spring cavity, together in combination with the rest of the limitations in the independent claim, has 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 sockets and tools having features related to the present disclosure.
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