Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with:
37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show a free diameter around a stud is equal to the diameter of the stud times the square root of 2, as recited in the claim.
37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: Db and Dm.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it begins with a phrase that can be implied. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The claim 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. The claim is directed to a combination of an apparatus (i.e. a mechanism for joining studs) and a method of using the apparatus (i.e. used when . . .). A single claim which claims both an apparatus and a method of using apparatus is indefinite because it is not clear what applicant regards as his invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(p)II.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cross, US 49,386. Cross shows a mechanism (B) for joining studs, the mechanism comprising:
a two-part stud comprising:
a first part (A’) of the two-part stud; and
a second part (A) of the two-part stud disposed on a side opposite to the first part of the two-part stud;
wherein the joining mechanism is connected to the first part of the two-part stud by threads (see also “Screw-threads” near the bottom the first column of text),
wherein the second part of the two-part stud is connected to the joining mechanism by threads (see also “Screw-threads” near the bottom the first column of text);
wherein Fig. 1 shows the length of the joining mechanism is at least twice the diameter of the stud.
The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Papousek, US 5,888,025. Papousek shows a mechanism (1) for joining studs, the mechanism comprising:
a two-part stud comprising:
a first part (2) of the two-part stud; and
a second part (2) of the two-part stud disposed on a side opposite to the first part of the two-part stud;
wherein the joining mechanism is connected to the first part of the two-part stud by threads (5’, 4),
wherein the second part of the two-part stud is connected to the joining mechanism by threads (5”, 4);
wherein Fig. 1 shows the length of the joining mechanism is at least twice the diameter of the stud.
The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Break, US 4,784,554. Break discloses a mechanism (40) for joining studs, the mechanism comprising:
a two-part stud comprising:
a first part (30) of the two-part stud; and
a second part (24) of the two-part stud disposed on a side opposite to the first part of the two-part stud;
wherein the joining mechanism is connected to the first part of the two-part stud by threads (42, col. 2, line 68),
wherein the second part of the two-part stud is connected to the joining mechanism by threads (42, col. 2, line 47);
wherein Fig. 3 shows the length of the joining mechanism is at least twice the diameter of the stud.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Each of Brill and Wright shows a mechanism for joining studs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Greg Binda whose telephone number is (571)272-7077. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-5:30 et.
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, Matthew Troutman can be reached at 571-270-3654. 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.
/Greg Binda/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679
Prosecution Insights