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 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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “an assembling portion configured to be assembled with a driving member” in claim 1. However, claim limitations are read in view of the specification. In the instant case, the Specification in applicant’s PG-PUB describes “the assembling portion” as being, “a protruding head or a recessed hole” (see paragraph 16). Thus, in view of the specification, the limitation, “a assembling portion”, is being interpreted as a protruding head or a recessed hole and/or equivalents thereof.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wypych (2021/0094154) in view of Chiang (7114415) and/or Shen (2005/0235782).
In reference to claim 1, Wypych discloses a ratchet wrench (see Title) including:
a rod body (formed from 2 and 10), two ends of the rod body including a working head (10) and a handle (2) respectively, the working head including a chamber (formed from 11 and 12, Figure 1);
a ratchet member (40) rotatably received in the chamber and including an assembling portion (i.e. protruding head 44, which meets the limitation of the assembling portion, as previously interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), see section 4a above) configured to be assembled with a driving member (i.e. socket, paragraph 41);
a blocking member (20) received in the chamber;
a dial member (30) inserted in the working head, the dial member including a body portion (i.e. upper portion of 30 as seen in Figure 4) extending into the chamber and a toggle portion (31) blocked on an outer side of the working head (Figure 4), the body portion including an insertion hole (32) and a receiving hole (36);
a fixation member (33) inserted in the insertion hole, the fixation member restricting the blocking member between the fixation member and an inner surface (i.e. inner surface of 50) of the chamber (Figure 4); and
an elastic urging mechanism (formed from 35 and 37) received in the receiving hole and urging the blocking member so that the blocking member and the ratchet member are engaged with each other (Figures 1-4).
Wypych lacks,
the fixation member including a hollowed portion elastically engaged with the body portion.
However, Chiang teaches that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a fixation member (60, which restricts a blocking member 40, similar to the fixation member, of Wypych) that includes a hollowed portion (62) elastically engaged (i.e. by spring 50) with a body portion (32) of a dial member (30, Figures 1, 3, 57 and 8).
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 fixation member, of Wypych, with the known technique of providing a fixation member including the hollowed portion elastically engaged with a body portion of a dial member, as taught by Chiang, and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile device that more effectively biases or forces the fixation member to engage with protrusions of a blocking member (Column 4, Lines 59-65).
In addition, Shen also teaches that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a fixation member (35, which positions a dial member 31 “rigidly and stably positioned in a receiving chamber 14” (see paragraph 33 of Shen, which is similar to how the fixation member, of Wypych, “prevents[ing] the dial member 30 [or selector switch 30] from falling out of the [second] cavity 12”, see paragraph 37 of Wypych) that includes a hollowed portion (see figure below) elastically engaged (i.e. at 36 because it is a spring, see Figure 4 and paragraph 32) with a body portion (at 31 in Figure 1) of a dial member (formed from 30 and 31, Figures 1 and 4).
PNG
media_image1.png
347
494
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 fixation member, of Wypych, with the known technique of providing a fixation member including the hollowed portion elastically engaged with a body portion of a dial member, as taught by Shen, and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile device that more rigidly and stably positions the dial member in a receiving chamber (paragraph 33).
In reference to claim 2, Wypych discloses that the fixation member extends radially beyond more than 0.5 times a thickness of the blocking member (see figure below).
[AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Extension of fixation member )][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Thickness of blocking member)]
PNG
media_image2.png
416
279
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 3, Chiang discloses that the hollowed portion includes a slot (see figure below), and one end of the slot (i.e. right end of the slot in the figure below) is open on one side of the fixation member (Figure 3 of Chiang). In addition, Shen also discloses that the hollowed portion includes a slot (see figure below), and one end of the slot (i.e. right end of the slot in the figure below) is open on one side of the fixation member (Figure 4 of Shen).
[AltContent: textbox (Slot of Chiang)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image3.png
605
479
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Slot of Shen)]
PNG
media_image4.png
269
279
media_image4.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 4, Shen discloses that the fixation member is generally Ω-shaped (Figure 1).
In reference to claim 7, Chiang discloses that the hollowed portion includes an open end (i.e. right end of 62 in Figure 3), and the hollowed portion gradually widens (from starting point represented by the dot below) toward the open end (see left figure below). In addition, Shen discloses that the hollowed portion includes an open end (i.e. right end of 36), and the hollowed portion gradually widens (from starting point represented by the dot below) toward the open end (see right figure below).
[AltContent: textbox (Shen)][AltContent: textbox (Chiang)]
[AltContent: oval][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: oval][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Areas of hollowed portion that gradually widens to the open end)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image3.png
605
479
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
97
138
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Areas of hollowed portion that gradually widens to the open end)]
In reference to claim 8, Chiang discloses that the hollowed portion further includes a closed end, and the closed end includes an enlarged hole (see figure below).
[AltContent: textbox (Thinner portion at open end)]
[AltContent: textbox (Wider portion at closed end)][AltContent: ][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Closed end)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: ][AltContent: oval][AltContent: textbox (Enlarged hole)]
PNG
media_image5.png
97
138
media_image5.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 9, Shen discloses that the fixation member gradually thins from the closed end toward the open end (see figure above).
In further reference to claim 9, Chiang discloses a reverse configuration of the fixation members such that the fixation member gradually widens from the closed end toward the open end, instead of gradually thinning from the closed end toward the open end. However, the examiner notes that the applicant fails to provide any criticality in providing that the fixation member gradually thins from the closed end toward the open end or that this specific arrangement provides any unexpected result. Thus, 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 rearrange the fixation member such that it gradually thins from the closed end toward the open end, since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167. In this situation, one could modify the closed end, of Chiang, such that it is larger than the hole 62, and thins toward the open end thereby more effectively holding or retaining the spring therein.
In reference to claim 10, Chiang discloses that there is a gap between a portion of the fixation member adjacent to the open end and an inner surface of the insertion hole (see figure below).
[AltContent: textbox (Portion of the fixation member adjacent to the open end)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Inner surface of the insertion hole)][AltContent: textbox (Gap)][AltContent: ][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image3.png
605
479
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 6 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 an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance: The present invention pertains to a ratchet wrench. It is the examiner's opinion that the art of record considered as a whole, alone or in combination, neither anticipates nor renders obvious of providing that; the fixation member includes a U-shaped body and two engaging blocks connected to the two ends of the U-shaped body, the U-shaped body is disposed through the insertion hole and elastically engages with an inner surface of the insertion hole, and the two engaging blocks are positioned at one side of the body portion (as in claim 5), together in combination with the rest of the limitations of the independent claims.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chow (5533427) discloses a coiled spring fixation member (70) attached to a dial member (60) and engages with an upper surface (54) of a pawl/blocking member (50, Figures 1-6).
Lin (8960054) discloses a coiled spring fixation member (50) attached to a dial member (40) and engages with an upper surface (66) of a pawl/blocking member (60, Figures 2-4).
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