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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 9-20 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on August 20, 2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I and Species 1 in the reply filed on August 20, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the claims and species are sufficiently related in that a thorough search for the subject matter of any one group of claims or species would encompass a search for the subject matter of the remaining species. Applicant argues there is no search burden. This is not found persuasive because Group I is directed to a vise and the structures(s) of the vise classified in at least B23D55/04, where, as Group II is directed to a reciprocating saw and the structures of the reciprocating saw classified in at least B23D51/16 and B23D49/10, which requires a different field of search and a different text search than the vise. The vise has specific structures such as a tightening tool and an elastic member, requiring a focused search on the vise and the specific components of the vise. Prior art to Fein (FR1065266) is an example of the divergent scope and search of the vise and reciprocating saw. Fein teaches a vise having a tightening tool, but does not teach an elastic member. Therefore, in order to determine if there is a reasonable prior art rejection for the vise, the Examiner’s search is centered on the vise and the structural components of the vise. While Fein teaches a reciprocating saw, there are no details to a reciprocating motion conversion mechanism, a slider, and a shoe, which are components of the reciprocating saw. These structures are divergent in scope from the vise and require a different field and text search.
The vise of Species 1 is directed to a pin, recess, hinge, ball, and spring arrangement, which requires at least B23D55/04. Species 2 is drawn to a holding member and a coil arrangement, which is mutually exclusive from Species 1. Species 3 is drawn to a gate member and is mutually exclusive from Species 1 and 2. For example, Fein teaches a vise having a pin, but in order to modify Fein the Examiner’s search would either be focused on the a pin, recess, hinge, ball, and spring arrangement, the holding member and coil arrangement, or the gate arrangement, since all three structures are mutually exclusive, cannot be used in combination with one another different, and require a different text search. After further consideration, the requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-8 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 claim 1, the phrase “the vise includes an insertion space into which the pin is inserted and a recess provided in the insertion space” is infinite. Per Merriam Webster Dictionary, the term space is defined as “a boundless three-dimensional extent in which objects and events occur and have relative position and direction; a limited extend in one, two, or three dimensions.” Per Merriam Webster Dictionary, the term recess is defined as “a hidden, secret, or secluded place or part.” Based on the BRI of the terms space and recess, it is unclear how a recess is provided in a space.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "a pair of the elastic members" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if “a pair of the elastic members” are the same or a different elastic member, as in line 5. It is also unclear if “a pair of the elastic members” are the same or a different elastic member than the elastic member of claim 1.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The phrase “a pair of the recesses is provided in the insertion space” in claim 2 does not further limit “a recess” as set forth in claim 1. A pair cannot further limit a (single) recess.
It is suggested Applicant amend claim 1, to recite “at least one recess provided in the insertion space” or similar language.
Regarding claim 2, the phase “a pair of the elastic members” is disposed in an insertion port... does not further limit “an elastic member” as set forth in claim 1. A pair cannot further limit a (single) elastic member.
It is suggested Applicant amend claim 1, to recite “at least elastic member that prevents the pin hooked in the recess from dropping” or similar language.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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. If claim 1 is amended to overcome the 112, second paragraph rejection, claims 11-17 will be rejoined.
Fushiya et al. (US 496258) teaches a vise having a chain-like clamp band. The band is secured at one end via a lever and an opposing end via a pin disposed in a recess. The clamp band extends around a workpiece and is tightened by a rotating screw member (with a handle) which engages the lever. Fushiya teaches a vise having an insertion space into which a pin is inserted in a recess and a tightening tool. Fushiya does not teach an elastic member that prevents the pin hooked in the recess from dropping, in combination with the other claimed elements.
Fein (FR1065266) teaches a vise having a chain. The chain is connected to the frame via a bolt on one end and a lever on the opposing end. A screw bolt is used to tension the chain Fein teaches a vise having a tightening tool. Fein does not teach an elastic member that prevents the pin hooked in the recess from dropping, in combination with the other claimed elements.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER S MATTHEWS whose telephone number is (571)270-5843. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8am-4pm.
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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at 571-272-4502. 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.
/JENNIFER S MATTHEWS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724
