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 .
Application Status
This action is responsive to the claims filed 22 January 2025.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and being examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 28 May 2025 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because a list of patents, publications, applications, or other information is not provided on the IDS form, as required by 37 CFR 1.98(a)(1). It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits. Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
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 1-3 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lefavour (US 2003/0154761).
PNG
media_image1.png
417
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 1, Lefavour teaches a hydraulic power tool (10-fig.1) comprising:
a handle assembly (annotated fig.1) having a frame (12-fig.1) with a main body portion (annotated fig.1), a neck portion (annotated fig.1) and a hand grip portion (annotated fig.1), the handle assembly housing a power unit (fig. 2) that includes:
a motor (18-fig.2);
a transmission assembly (40-fig.2) in series with and operatively coupled to the motor (¶[0023]); and
a pump assembly (16-fig.2) in series with and operatively coupled to the transmission assembly (¶[0023]); and
a working head assembly (14-fig.1) operatively coupled to the handle assembly, the working head assembly having a head frame (28-fig.1) and a piston assembly (30-fig.1) coupled to the head frame, the piston assembly being rotatably coupled (¶[0020]) to the pump assembly such that the piston assembly is in fluid communication with an output conduit of the pump assembly (¶[0020]-[0023]).
Claim 2, Lefavour teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 1, further comprising a fluid reservoir (22-fig.2) in fluid communication with a pump of the pump assembly (16-fig.2).
Claim 3, Lefavour teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 1, wherein the transmission assembly (40-fig.2) comprises a gear assembly and a pump drive assembly (16,18,40-fig.2; ¶[0023]).
PNG
media_image1.png
417
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 14, Lefavour teaches a hydraulic power tool (10-fig.1) comprising:
a frame (12-fig.1) with a main body portion (annotated fig.1), a neck portion (annotated fig.1) and a hand grip portion (annotated fig.1), the frame housing a power unit (fig.2) that includes:
a motor (18-fig.2) having a motor housing and a motor drive shaft (¶[0023]);
a transmission assembly (40-fig.2) enclosed within a housing, the transmission assembly housing having a first end in series with and directly or indirectly coupled to the motor housing (¶[0023]; fig.2), the transmission assembly being operatively coupled to the motor drive shaft (¶[0023]); and
a pump assembly (16-fig.2) enclosed within a housing, the pump assembly housing having a first end in series with and directly or indirectly coupled to a second end of the transmission assembly housing (¶[0023]; fig.2), the pump assembly being operatively coupled to the transmission assembly (¶[0023]); and
a working head assembly (14-fig.1) operatively coupled to the neck portion of the frame, the working head assembly having a head frame (28-fig.1) and a piston assembly (30-fig.1) coupled to the head frame, the piston assembly being rotatably coupled (¶[0020]) to a second end of the pump assembly housing such that the piston assembly is in fluid communication with an output conduit of the pump assembly (¶[0020]-[0023]).
Claim 15, Lefavour teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 14, further comprising a fluid reservoir (22-fig.2) in fluid communication with a pump of the pump assembly (16-fig.2).
Claim 16, Lefavour teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 14, wherein the transmission assembly (40-fig.2) comprises a gear assembly and a pump drive assembly (16,18,40-fig.2; ¶[0023]).
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 4 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lefavour (US 2003/0154761) in view of Luo (US 2013/0097873).
Claim 4, Lefavour teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 3.
Lefavour does not teach the gear assembly comprises a multi-stage gear system.
However, Luo teaches the gear assembly comprises a multi-stage gear system (four-state planetary gear reduction 162-fig.4; ¶[0036]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to modify the device of Lefavour, by having a multi-state gear system, as taught by Luo, to improve the transmission efficiency and smooth the operation of the tool.
Claim 17, Lefavour teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 16.
Lefavour does not teach the gear assembly comprises a multi-stage gear system.
However, Luo teaches the gear assembly comprises a multi-stage gear system (four-state planetary gear reduction 162-fig.4; ¶[0036]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to modify the device of Lefavour, by having a multi-state gear system, as taught by Luo, to improve the transmission efficiency and smooth the operation of the tool.
Claims 5-6 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lefavour (US 2003/0154761) in view of Montminy (US 2007/0256554).
Claim 5, Lefavour teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 3.
Lefavour does not teach a pump drive assembly comprises a drive member operatively coupled to a wobble plate such that rotational movement of the drive member is translated to reciprocal linear movement of the wobble plate.
However, Montminy teaches a pump drive assembly (fig.4) comprises a drive member (68-fig.3) operatively coupled to a wobble plate (60-fig.4) such that rotational movement of the drive member is translated to reciprocal linear movement of the wobble plate (¶[0032]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to modify the device of Lefavour, by having a wobble plate, as taught by Montminy, to allow for smoother operating tool with less vibration.
Claim 6, Lefavour as modified by Montminy teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 5, wherein the drive member is associated with a first bearing system (Montminy: 88-fig.4), and the wobble plate (Montminy: 60-fig.4) is associated with a second bearing system (Montminy: 108-fig.4).
Claim 18, Lefavour teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 16.
Lefavour does not teach the pump drive assembly comprises a drive member operatively coupled to a wobble plate such that when the motor drive shaft rotates the rotational movement of the motor drive shaft is translated to rotational movement of the drive member, and rotational movement of the drive member is translated to reciprocal linear movement of the wobble plate.
However, Montminy teaches a pump drive assembly (fig.4) comprises a drive member (68-fig.3) operatively coupled to a wobble plate (60-fig.4) such that when the motor drive shaft rotates the rotational movement of the motor drive shaft is translated to rotational movement of the drive member (¶[0032]), and rotational movement of the drive member is translated to reciprocal linear movement of the wobble plate (¶[0032]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to modify the device of Lefavour, by having a wobble plate, as taught by Montminy, to allow for smoother operating tool with less vibration.
Claim 19, Lefavour as modified by Montminy teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 18, wherein the drive member is associated with a first bearing system (Montminy: 88-fig.4), and the wobble plate (Montminy: 60-fig.4) is associated with a second bearing system (Montminy: 108-fig.4).
Claims 7-10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lefavour (US 2003/0154761) in view of Gregory (US 8,935,948).
Claim 7, Lefavour teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 1.
Lefavour does not teach wherein the pump assembly comprises a unitary pump that includes low pressure pump and a high pressure pump.
However, Gregory teaches a pump assembly (90-fig.3) comprises a unitary pump that includes low pressure pump and a high pressure pump (“The pump assembly provides a high and a low stage pumping mechanism. When pumping in the high stage mode, the pump delivers a high volume of hydraulic fluid at low pressure preferably being 300 PSI. When pumping in the low stage mode, the pump delivers a low volume of hydraulic fluid at a high pressure preferably being 10,000 PSI.” 5:1-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to modify the device of Lefavour, by having a unitary pump, as taught by Gregory, for being able to operate the tool depending on the application the tool is being used for.
PNG
media_image1.png
417
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 8, Lefavour teaches a hydraulic power tool (10-fig.1) comprising:
a frame (12-fig.1) with a main body portion (annotated fig.1), a neck portion (annotated fig.1) and a hand grip portion (annotated fig.1), the frame housing a modular power unit (fig.2) that includes:
a motor module (18-fig.2); and
a transmission module (40-fig.2) in series with and operatively coupled to the motor module (¶[0023]) such that rotational movement within the transmission module is translated to reciprocal linear movement to drive a pump module (16-fig.2) that is in series with the transmission module (¶[0023]); and
a working head assembly (14-fig.1) operatively coupled to the frame, the working head assembly having a head frame (28-fig.1) and a piston assembly (30-fig.1) coupled to the head frame, the piston assembly being rotatably coupled (¶[0020]) to the pump assembly such that the piston assembly is in fluid communication with an output conduit of the pump assembly (¶[0020]-[0023]).
Lefavour does not teach the pump module having a unitary pump that includes low pressure pump and a high pressure pump.
However, Gregory teaches a pump assembly (90-fig.3) comprises a unitary pump that includes low pressure pump and a high pressure pump (“The pump assembly provides a high and a low stage pumping mechanism. When pumping in the high stage mode, the pump delivers a high volume of hydraulic fluid at low pressure preferably being 300 PSI. When pumping in the low stage mode, the pump delivers a low volume of hydraulic fluid at a high pressure preferably being 10,000 PSI.” 5:1-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to modify the device of Lefavour, by having a unitary pump, as taught by Gregory, for being able to operate the tool depending on the application the tool is being used for.
Claim 9, Lefavour as modified by Gregory teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 8, further comprising a fluid reservoir (Lefavour: 22-fig.2) in fluid communication with the pump of the pump module (Lefavour: 16-fig.2).
Claim 10, Lefavour as modified by Gregory teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 8, wherein the transmission module (Lefavour: 40-fig.2) comprises a gear assembly and a pump drive assembly (Lefavour: 16,18,40-fig.2; ¶[0023]).
Claim 20, Lefavour teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 14.
Lefavour teaches the pump assembly comprises a unitary pump that includes low pressure pump and a high pressure pump.
However, Gregory teaches a pump assembly (90-fig.3) comprises a unitary pump that includes low pressure pump and a high pressure pump (“The pump assembly provides a high and a low stage pumping mechanism. When pumping in the high stage mode, the pump delivers a high volume of hydraulic fluid at low pressure preferably being 300 PSI. When pumping in the low stage mode, the pump delivers a low volume of hydraulic fluid at a high pressure preferably being 10,000 PSI.” 5:1-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to modify the device of Lefavour, by having a unitary pump, as taught by Gregory, for being able to operate the tool depending on the application the tool is being used for.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lefavour (US 2003/0154761) in view of Gregory (US 8,935,948), further in view of Luo (US 2013/0097873).
Claim 11, Lefavour as modified by Gregory teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 10.
Lefavour as modified by Gregory does not teach the gear assembly comprises a multi-stage gear system.
However, Luo teaches the gear assembly comprises a multi-stage gear system (four-state planetary gear reduction 162-fig.4; ¶[0036]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to modify the device of Lefavour as modified by Gregory, by having a multi-state gear system, as taught by Luo, to improve the transmission efficiency and smooth the operation of the tool.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lefavour (US 2003/0154761) in view of Gregory (US 8,935,948), further in view of Montminy (US 2007/0256554).
Claim 12, Lefavour as modified by Gregory teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 10.
Lefavour as modified by Gregory the pump drive assembly comprises a drive member operatively coupled to a wobble plate, and wherein the rotational movement within the transmission module is rotational movement of the drive member and the rotational movement of the drive member is translated to reciprocal linear movement of the wobble plate.
However, Montminy teaches a pump drive assembly (fig.4) comprises a drive member (68-fig.3) operatively coupled to a wobble plate (60-fig.4), and wherein the rotational movement within the transmission module is rotational movement of the drive member and the rotational movement of the drive member is translated to reciprocal linear movement of the wobble plate (¶[0032]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to modify the device of Lefavour and Gregory, by having a wobble plate, as taught by Montminy, to allow for smoother operating tool with less vibration.
Claim 13, Lefavour as modified by Gregory and Montminy teaches the hydraulic power tool according to claim 12, wherein the drive member is associated with a first bearing system (Montminy: 88-fig.4), and the wobble plate (Montminy: 60-fig.4) is associated with a second bearing system (Montminy: 108-fig.4).
Conclusion
This is a continuation of applicant's earlier Application No. 17/967,446. All claims are identical to, patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with the invention claimed in the earlier application (that is, restriction (including lack of unity) would not be proper) and could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the earlier application. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action in this case. See MPEP § 706.07(b). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATIE L GERTH whose telephone number is (303)297-4602. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am-4pm (CT).
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, Shelley Self can be reached on (571)272-4524. 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.
/KATIE L GERTH/Examiner, Art Unit 3731
/STEPHEN F. GERRITY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731 16 December 2025