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 .
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 – 20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/11/2024 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, 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Banholzer et al. (U. S. Patent Publication No. 2020/0061782 A1).
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Banholzer teaches a powered ratchet tool (battery-powered hand held ratchet tool, 10; Fig.1) comprising: a housing (main housing, 18) including a head portion (head housing, 18); a drive assembly (drive assembly, 70) including an output (cage, 110; Fig. 2) rotatable about a first axis (A; Fig. 2); a yoke (yoke, 142) supported within the head portion (18) and pivotable about a second axis (B; Fig. 2) perpendicular to the first axis (A; Fig. 2); an anvil (anvil, 146; Fig. 3) extending from the head portion (15; Fig. 2) and configured to engage a socket (Paragraph [0031]); a pawl (pawl, 154) moveable between a first position (pivotable about pin, 358 toward direction 190), in which the pawl (154) couples the anvil (146) for co-rotation with the yoke (142) in a first direction about the second axis (Paragraphs [0038] and [0041]), and a second position (pivotable about pin, 358 toward direction 194), in which the pawl (154) couples the anvil (146) for co-rotation with the yoke (142) in a second direction about the second axis (Paragraphs [0038] and [0041]); and a shaft assembly (Fig. 2) extending between the output (74) of the drive assembly (70) and the yoke (142), the shaft assembly (Fig. 2) formed as a multi-piece construction (Fig. 2), the shaft assembly including: a shaft (motor drive shaft, 66) extending along the first axis (A) and having a first end (Fig. 2) and a second end (Fig. 2) opposite the first end (Fig. 2), a first coupler (106) fixed to the first end of the shaft (66), the first coupler (Annotated Fig. 2) configured to couple the shaft assembly for co-rotation with the output (110) of the drive assembly about the first axis (A), a second coupler (106) fixed to the second end of the shaft (66), and a pin (126) extending from the second coupler (106) to the yoke (142), wherein the pin (126) is offset from the first axis (A) such that rotation of the shaft assembly (66) about the first axis (A) causes reciprocation of the yoke (142) about the second axis (B).
PNG
media_image1.png
415
827
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 4, Banholzer teaches the powered ratchet tool (battery-powered hand held ratchet tool, 10; Fig.1) wherein the drive assembly (70) includes a motor (motor, 62) and a planetary transmission (Paragraph [0030]) and wherein the output (110) is a carrier of the planetary transmission (Paragraph [0030]).
Regarding Claim 7, Banholzer teaches the powered ratchet tool (battery-powered hand held ratchet tool, 10; Fig.1) wherein the yoke (142) receives a bushing (drive bushing, 130), and wherein the bushing (130) receives the pin (126) of the shaft assembly (Fig. 2).
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 2 – 3, 5 – 6 and 8 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banholzer et al. (U. S. Patent Publication No. 2020/0061782 A1).
Regarding Claim 2, Banholzer teaches the powered ratchet tool of claim 1, as discussed above.
Banholzer does not explicitly teach wherein the first coupler is made of powdered metal.
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 coupler of Banholzer to further include the first coupler is made of powdered metal, as claimed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding Claim 3, Banholzer teaches the powered ratchet tool of claim 1, as discussed above.
Banholzer does not explicitly teach wherein the second coupler is made of powdered metal.
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 coupler of Banholzer to further include the second coupler is made of powdered metal, as claimed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding Claim 5, Banholzer teaches the powered ratchet tool (battery-powered hand held ratchet tool, 10; Fig.1) wherein the first coupler (106) includes a spline (splines of gear, 106), and wherein the spline is received within the carrier (110) of the planetary transmission (Fig. 2).
Regarding Claims 6 and 15, Banholzer teaches the powered ratchet tool of claims 1 and 9, as discussed above.
Banholzer does not explicitly teach wherein the shaft is made of chromoly steel.
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 coupler of Banholzer to further include the shaft is made of chromoly steel, as claimed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding Independent Claim 9, Banholzer teaches a powered ratchet tool (battery-powered hand held ratchet tool, 10; Fig.1) comprising: a housing (main housing, 18) including a head portion (head housing, 18); a drive assembly (drive assembly, 70); a yoke (yoke, 142) supported within the head portion (18); and a shaft assembly (Fig. 2) extending between the output (74) of the drive assembly (70) and the yoke (142), the shaft assembly (Fig. 2) including: a shaft (motor drive shaft, 66) extending along the first axis (A) and having a first end (Fig. 2) and a second end (Fig. 2) opposite the first end (Fig. 2), a first coupler (106) fixed to the first end of the shaft (66), the first coupler (Annotated Fig. 2) configured to couple the shaft assembly for co-rotation with the output (110) of the drive assembly, and a second coupler (106) fixed to the second end of the shaft (66).
Banholzer does not explicitly teach the shaft formed by a first manufacturing process; the first coupler formed by a second manufacturing process; the second coupler formed by a third manufacturing process, wherein at least one of the second manufacturing process or the third manufacturing process is different than the first manufacturing process; however, In regards to the "first, second and third manufacturing processes” it is noted that “Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted). For more information, see MPEP§ 2113.
Regarding Independent Claim 10, Banholzer teaches the powered ratchet tool (battery-powered hand held ratchet tool, 10; Fig.1), wherein the shaft assembly (66) includes a pin (126) extending from the second coupler (106), wherein the pin (126) is offset (Fig. 2) from the first axis (A) such that rotation of the shaft assembly (66) about the first axis causes reciprocation of the yoke (142) about a second axis (B; Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 11, Banholzer teaches the powered ratchet tool of claim 9, as discussed above.
Regarding the limitation “wherein at least one of the second manufacturing process or the third manufacturing process is a powdered metal manufacturing process”, it is noted that “Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted). For more information, see MPEP§ 2113.
Regarding Claim 12, Banholzer teaches the powered ratchet tool of claim 9, as discussed above.
Regarding the limitation “wherein the second manufacturing process and the third manufacturing process are the same manufacturing processes”, it is noted that “Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted). For more information, see MPEP§ 2113.
Regarding Claim 13, Banholzer teaches the powered ratchet tool of claim 9, as discussed above.
Banholzer does not explicitly teach wherein the first coupler and the second coupler have a different hardness than the shaft.
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 coupler of Banholzer to further include wherein the first coupler and the second coupler have a different hardness than the shaft, as claimed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding Claim 14, Banholzer teaches the powered ratchet tool of claim 9, as discussed above.
Regarding the limitation “wherein the first manufacturing process includes machining”, it is noted that “Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted). For more information, see MPEP§ 2113.
Regarding Independent Claim 16, Banholzer teaches a powered ratchet tool (battery-powered hand held ratchet tool, 10; Fig.1) comprising: a housing (main housing, 18) including a head portion (head housing, 18); a drive assembly (drive assembly, 70) including an output (cage, 110; Fig. 2) rotatable about a first axis (A; Fig. 2); a yoke (yoke, 142) supported within the head portion (18) and pivotable about a second axis (B; Fig. 2) perpendicular to the first axis (A; Fig. 2); an anvil (anvil, 146; Fig. 3) extending from the head portion (15; Fig. 2) and configured to engage a socket (Paragraph [0031]); a pawl (pawl, 154) moveable between a first position (pivotable about pin, 358 toward direction 190), in which the pawl (154) couples the anvil (146) for co-rotation with the yoke (142) in a first direction about the second axis (Paragraphs [0038] and [0041]), and a second position (pivotable about pin, 358 toward direction 194), in which the pawl (154) couples the anvil (146) for co-rotation with the yoke (142) in a second direction about the second axis (Paragraphs [0038] and [0041]); and a shaft assembly (Fig. 2) extending between the output (74) of the drive assembly (70) and the yoke (142), the shaft assembly (Fig. 2) formed as a multi-piece construction (Fig. 2), the shaft assembly including: a shaft (motor drive shaft, 66) extending along the first axis (A) and having a first end (Fig. 2) and a second end (Fig. 2) opposite the first end (Fig. 2), a first coupler (106) fixed to the first end of the shaft (66), the first coupler (Annotated Fig. 2) configured to couple the shaft assembly for co-rotation with the output (110) of the drive assembly about the first axis (A), a second coupler (106), and a pin (126) extending from the second coupler (106) to the yoke (142), wherein the pin (126) is offset from the first axis (A) such that rotation of the shaft assembly (66) about the first axis (A) causes reciprocation of the yoke (142) about the second axis (B).
Banholzer does not explicitly teach wherein the shaft is made of a first material, and wherein at least one of the first coupler or the second coupler is made of a second material different than the first material.
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 coupler of Banholzer to further include the shaft is made of a first material, and wherein at least one of the first coupler or the second coupler is made of a second material different than the first material, as claimed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding Claim 17, Banholzer teaches the powered ratchet tool of claim 16, as discussed above.
Banholzer does not explicitly teach wherein the shaft is made of forged steel.
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 coupler of Banholzer to further include the shaft is made of forged steel, and wherein at least one of the first coupler or the second coupler is made of a second material different than the first material, as claimed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding Claim 18, Banholzer teaches the powered ratchet tool of claim 16, as discussed above.
Banholzer does not explicitly teach wherein both the first coupler and the second coupler are made of the second material.
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 coupler of Banholzer to further include both the first coupler and the second coupler are made of the second material, as claimed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding Claim 19, Banholzer teaches the powered ratchet tool of claim 16, as discussed above.
Banholzer does not explicitly wherein the pin is made of forged steel.
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 coupler of Banholzer to further include the pin is made of forged steel, as claimed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding Claim 20, Banholzer teaches the powered ratchet tool (battery-powered hand held ratchet t wherein the drive assembly (70) includes a motor (62) and a planetary transmission (Paragraph [0030]), wherein the output (110) is a carrier of the planetary transmission Paragraph [0030]), wherein the first coupler (106) includes a spline (splines of gear, 106), wherein the spline is received within the carrier (110) of the planetary transmission, and wherein the shaft (66) is pressed into a recess of the first coupler (Fig. 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 is 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: Although Banholzer teaches a powered rachet tool, the reference, however, fails to teach, suggest or make obvious the second coupler includes a recess to receive the pin, a first wing, and a second wing, wherein the recess is formed at least partially in the second wing, and wherein the first wing and the second wing are sized differently so the first axis intersects a center of mass of the second coupler, along with the additional limitations of the claim.
Conclusion
Art made of record, however, not relied upon for the current rejection is as follows: U. S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0080561 A1 to Banholzer et al. teaches A power tool includes a main housing having a pair of clamshells, each of which has a mating face and a blind bore within the mating face. The power tool further includes a motor having a front bearing retainer, a plurality of fasteners configured to secure the front bearing retainer within the main housing, and a pin received within the blind bores of the respective clamshells, such that each of the clamshells is inhibited from moving with respect to the other clamshell. The power tool further includes an output assembly having an anvil with an output member configured to engage a socket and a pawl that is moveable between a first position in which the pawl is operatively coupled to drive the anvil in a first direction and a second position in which the pawl is operatively coupled to drive the anvil in a second direction.
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
Prosecution Insights