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 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.
Claims 1-13 are 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.
Regarding claims 1-13, line 1, the phrase "claw-type" renders the claim(s) indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "-type"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
It is unclear if the “tail end” recited in claim 1, line 9, claims 5-8, line 3, and claim 13, line 4, is referencing and/or includes the “terminal end” previously recited in claim 1, line 6. It is noted the specification identifies element 1211 as both a “terminal end” and “tail end”.
In claim 3, line 4, the phrase “the multiple clamping teeth” lacks antecedent basis. Further, claim 3 is incomplete for failing to recite sufficient structural cooperation between the multiple clamping teeth and the tool. It noted claim 2, lines 1-3, recites sufficient structural cooperation.
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 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Richie (US#2009/0074538).
Regarding claim 1, a claw-type rivet-pulling tool (see abstract, engages rivet installation tool) comprising: a tool base 16; a claw portion 20 disposed at an end of the tool base and comprising multiple clamping pieces 20A-B, which are flexible and are expanded or contracted (abstract, bidirectionally flexible) when operated; a middle hole elongated from a terminal end (free end portion adjacent terminal surfaces 22A-B) of the claw portion into the tool base (see Fig. 1.1A); each one of the multiple clamping pieces comprising a tail end (free end portion adjacent terminal surfaces 22A-B); a shared backwardly-pulling (direction 6A, Figs. 1.5-1.8) clamping portion 30,40 disposed at an inner wall 24A-B of the tail end.
Regarding claim 1, the rivet assembly and mandrel thereof are not being claimed and represent the intended use of the invention. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. The multiple clamping pieces are capable of collaboratively clamping a mandrel of a rivet assembly through the backwardly-pulling clamping portion to pull the mandrel.
Regarding claim 5, wherein each one of the multiple clamping pieces 20A-B comprises a guiding inclined surface ([0062], Fig. 1.1A) disposed at a terminal surface 22A-B of the tail end of said clamping piece.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4 and 6-13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM L MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-7068. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 - 6:00 PM.
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, Jason San can be reached at (571) 272-6531. 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.
WILLIAM L. MILLER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3677
/WILLIAM L MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3677
Prosecution Insights