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 .
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 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.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 – 21 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/01/2025 was filed before the first office action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 – 5, 7, 10 – 15, 17 – 18 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Annis et al. (U. S. Patent No. 5,130,700).
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Annis teaches an apparatus (torque wrench, 10; Fig. 1) operable to determine an applied torque (Col. 1, lines 13 – 37), the apparatus (10) comprising: processing circuitry (control circuit, 31) configured to at least: receive an indication of a target torque (Col. 4, lines 19 – 28); determine the applied torque (Col. 4, lines 19 – 28); determine an indication torque that is less than the target torque by an estimated torque overshoot representing an added amount over the applied torque for an estimated response time of an operator (Col. 4, lines 29 – 56); compare the applied torque and the indication torque to determine when the applied torque matches the indication torque (Col. 4, lines 29 – 56); and in response, output an alert to the operator to release a force from which the applied torque is produced (Col. 4, lines 19 – 28 and 48 – 56); and one or more transducers (strain gauges, 18; Col. 2, line 66 – Col. 3, line 11) operably coupled to the processing circuitry (31), the alert output as an output signal (Col. 5, lines 17 – 28), and the one or more transducers (19) configured to convert the output signal to user-perceptible feedback (Col. 5, lines 17 – 28).
Regarding Independent Claim 11, Annis teaches a method of operating an apparatus (torque wrench, 10; Fig. 1) to determine an applied torque (Col. 1, lines 13 – 37), the method comprising: receiving an indication of a target torque (Col. 4, lines 19 – 28); determining the applied torque (Col. 4, lines 19 – 28); determining an indication torque that is less than the target torque by an estimated torque overshoot representing an added amount over the applied torque for an estimated response time of an operator (Col. 4, lines 29 – 56); comparing the applied torque and the indication torque to determine when the applied torque matches the indication torque (Col. 4, lines 29 – 56); and in response, outputting an alert to the operator to release a force from which the applied torque is produced (Col. 4, lines 19 – 28 and 48 – 56).
Regarding Claims 2 and 12, Annis teaches the apparatus (torque wrench, 10; Fig. 1) and method wherein the apparatus (10) is embodied as an electronic torque wrench (Fig. 1), and the applied torque is a torque applied by the electronic torque wrench to a fastener (Fig. 1).
Regarding Claims 3 and 13, Annis teaches the apparatus (torque wrench, 10; Fig. 1) and method wherein the applied torque matches the indication torque when the applied torque is within a threshold torque of the indication torque (Col. 1, lines 38 – 47).
Regarding Claims 4 and 14, Annis teaches the apparatus (torque wrench, 10; Fig. 1) and method wherein the processing circuitry (31) is further configured to: determine a time rate of change of the applied torque (Col. 4, lines 29 – 56); and determine the estimated torque overshoot based on the time rate of change of the applied torque, and the estimated response time (Col. 5, lines 17 – 28).
Regarding Claims 5 and 15, Annis teaches the apparatus (torque wrench, 10; Fig. 1) and method wherein the estimated torque overshoot is determined as a product of the time rate of change of the applied torque, and the estimated response time (Abstract).
Regarding Claims 7 and 18, Annis teaches the apparatus (torque wrench, 10; Fig. 1) and method wherein the one or more transducers (18) include one or more of an electromechanical transducer configured to convert the output signal to haptic feedback (Col. 5, lines 17 – 28), or an electroacoustic transducer configured to convert the output signal to audible feedback.
Regarding Claims 10 and 21, Annis teaches the apparatus (10) and method is operable for an operation to determine the applied torque (Col. 4, lines 19 – 28) and the processing circuitry (31) is further configured to: determine an actual response time for the operation as a time between output of the alert and release of the force by the operator (Col. 5, Lines 17 – 28); and determine the estimated response time for a next operation of the apparatus from the actual response time (Col. 4, line 57 – Col. 5, line 2). Regarding Claim 17, Annis teaches the method wherein the alert is output as an output signal (Col. 5, lines 17 – 28), and the method further comprises converting the output signal to user-perceptible feedback by one or more transducers of the apparatus (10; Col. 5, lines 17 – 28).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Annis et al. (U. S. Patent No. 5,130,700) in view of Wille (DE 202004003978 U1).
Regarding Claim 6, Annis teaches the apparatus of claim 1, as discussed above.
Annis further teaches a strain gauge assembly (18) configured to measure the applied torque configured to produce an analog electrical signal that varies in voltage with the applied torque (Col. 4, lines 29 – 56).
Annis does not teach wherein the apparatus further comprises: a strain gauge assembly; and an analog-to-digital converter configured to convert the analog electrical signal to an equivalent digital electrical signal, and wherein the processing circuitry is configured to determine the applied torque from the equivalent digital electrical signal.
Wille, however, teaches an analog-to-digital converter configured to convert the analog electrical signal to an equivalent digital electrical signal (Paragraph [0010]), and wherein the processing circuitry (24) is configured to determine the applied torque from the equivalent digital electrical signal (Paragraph [0017]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Annis to further include an analog-to-digital converter configured to convert the analog electrical signal to an equivalent digital electrical signal, and wherein the processing circuitry is configured to determine the applied torque from the equivalent digital electrical signal, as taught by Willie, to provide a wrench that eliminates guesswork and provided a real-time torque reading with precision.
Regarding Claim 16, Annis teaches the method of claim 11, as discussed above.
Annis further teaches wherein determining the applied torque includes measuring the applied torque, and producing an analog electrical signal that varies in voltage with the applied torque (Col. 4, lines 29 – 56).
Annis does not teach converting the analog electrical signal to an equivalent digital electrical signal; and determining the applied torque from the equivalent digital electrical signal.
Wille, however, teaches an analog-to-digital converter configured to convert the analog electrical signal to an equivalent digital electrical signal (Paragraph [0010]), and wherein the processing circuitry (24) is configured to determine the applied torque from the equivalent digital electrical signal (Paragraph [0017]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Annis to further include converting the analog electrical signal to an equivalent digital electrical signal; and determining the applied torque from the equivalent digital electrical signal, as taught by Willie, to provide a wrench that eliminates guesswork and provided a real-time torque reading with precision.
Claims 8 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Annis et al. (U. S. Patent No. 5,130,700) in view of Vizachero (U. S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0048168 A1).
Regarding Claims 8 and 19, Annis teaches the apparatus of claim 1 and method of claim 11, as discussed above.
Annis does not teach wherein the one or more transducers include one or more electro-optical transducers configured to convert the output signal to visual feedback, and the one or more electro-optical transducers include one or more light emitting diode (LED) indicators.
Vizachero, however, teaches the one or more transducers (Paragraph [0016]) include one or more electro-optical transducers configured to convert the output signal to visual feedback, and the one or more electro-optical transducers include one or more light emitting diode (LED) indicators (Paragraph [0049]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Annis to further include an analog-to-digital converter configured to convert the analog electrical signal to an equivalent digital electrical signal, and wherein the processing circuitry is configured to determine the applied torque from the equivalent digital electrical signal, as taught by Vizachero, to provide a wrench with higher accuracy in recognition, better accessibility for users with tactile limitations, and the ability to convey detailed information, making them more reliable in certain contexts than haptic alerts.
Claims 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Annis et al. (U. S. Patent No. 5,130,700) in view of Calloway et al. (U. S. Patent Publication No. 2010/0058901 A1).
Regarding Claims 9 and 20, Annis teaches the apparatus of claim 1 and method of claim 11, as discussed above.
Annis does not teach wherein the apparatus is operable for an operation to determine the applied torque, and the estimated response time is determined from an actual response time for a previous operation of the apparatus.
Calloway, however, teaches the apparatus (hand tool, 104) is operable for an operation to determine the applied torque (Paragraph [0015]), and the estimated response time is determined from an actual response time for a previous operation of the apparatus (Claim 5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Annis to further include the apparatus is operable for an operation to determine the applied torque, and the estimated response time is determined from an actual response time for a previous operation of the apparatus, as taught by Calloway, to improve measurement accuracy, process control, and predictive maintenance in mechanical systems.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATINA N HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8024. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday; 5:30am to 3:30pm.
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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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.
/KATINA N. HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
