DETAILED ACTION
Receipt is acknowledged of Applicant’s Response, dated 28 October 2025, which papers have been made of record.
Claims 1-3 and 5-9 are currently presented for examination, of which claim 8 is withdrawn from consideration.
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
Newly submitted claims 8 is directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons:
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-3 and 5-6, drawn to an apparatus.
II. Claim 8, drawn to an apparatus.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions of Groups I and II are directed to related apparatuses. The related inventions are distinct if: (1) the inventions as claimed are either not capable of use together or can have a materially different design, mode of operation, function, or effect; (2) the inventions do not overlap in scope, i.e., are mutually exclusive; and (3) the inventions as claimed are not obvious variants. See MPEP § 806.05(j). In the instant case, the inventions as claimed can have a materially different design. For example, the invention of Group I can have a design not including a structural component wherein the structural component and the rotating fastener body are anti-rotated with each other by an anti-rotation portion. The invention of Group II can have a design not including a main body, wherein the main body. Furthermore, the inventions as claimed do not encompass overlapping subject matter and there is nothing of record to show them to be obvious variants.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
(a) The inventions require a different field of search (for example, searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries);
(b) The prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable to another invention.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claim 8 is withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 28 October 2025 was filed after the mailing date of the Office Action on 29 July 2025. 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 § 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 2-3 and 5 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.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the anti-rotation portion" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the mating object" in line `. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the anti-rotation portion of the rotating fastener body" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the anti-rotation portion of the main body" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the anti-rotation portion of the rotating fastener body" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites “the anti-rotation portion of the rotating fastener body, or the anti-rotation portion of the main body, or the anti-rotation portion of the mating object are combined” at lines 1-3. Claim 5 also recites “different components therebetween are anti-rotated with each other by the anti-rotation portion” at lines 7. It is unclear which anti-rotation portion is referenced at line 5. The examiner notes that an anti-rotation was previously recited in claim 1 but has been canceled from the claim.
Claim 9 recites “an anti-rotation portion” at line 4 and “an anti-rotation portion” at line 5. It is unclear how many anti-rotation portions are required by the claim.
Claim 9 recites “wherein the anti-rotation portion of the rotating fastener body is configured to move in the first anti-rotation portion and the second anti-rotation portion of the main body to limit positions or control the direction or switch or movement of the fastening portion of the rotating fastener body” at lines 8-11. It is unclear what the wherein clause actually requires, as the phrase “to limit positions or control the direction or switch or movement of the fastening portion of the rotating fastener body” is at least grammatically irregular.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3 and 5-6
Claims 1-3 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by United States Patent Application Publication 2013/0183086 to Wang (hereinafter “Wang”).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses a fastener structure (see Figs. 10 and 11), comprising: a rotating fastener body (212); and a main body (1), including a non-circular protruding portion (231); and a structural component (10, 20), including an assembled substrate (20), wherein the assembled substrate include a non-circular through hole (hole 201; see paragraph [0051]), wherein the non-circular protruding body (231) and the non-circular through hole (201) correspond with ach other in shape (see paragraph [0051]), and the non-circular protruding body and the non-circular through hole are joined and anti-rotated with each other (compare Figures 11 and 13, there is a depth of the portion 23 which prevents rotation between the through hole and the protruding body).
Regarding claim 2, Wang discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Wang discloses that the fastener structure (see Fig. 10) further comprises a connecting rod (22), a first end part of the connecting rod penetrates the rotating fastener body (see Fig. 10), a second end part of the connecting rod is disposed at the main body (upper end of rod 22; see Fig. 11), the anti-rotation portion comprises an insert pin (unnumbered pin allowing pivoting; see paragraph [0049]), the insert pin is inserted into the rotating fastener body and the first end part (see Figs. 10 and 11; unnumbered pin shown extending through fastener body and connecting rod portion).
Regarding claim 3, Wang discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Wang discloses that the mating object comprises an anti-rotation portion, a fastening portion of the rotating fastener body comprises a corresponding fastening portion, the anti-rotation portion and the corresponding fastening portion are anti-rotation with each other; or the fastener structure further comprises a corresponding engaging member, the mating object comprises a an anti-rotation portion, the corresponding engaging member comprises an anti-rotation portion, the anti-rotation portion of the mating object and the anti-rotation portion of the corresponding engaging member are anti-rotated with each other; or the structural component (10 or 20; see Fig. 11) comprises an anti-rotation portion , the main body (1) comprises an anti-rotation portion (end portion 15; see Fig. 11), the anti-rotation portion of the structural component and the anti-rotation portion of the main body (11) are anti-rotated with each other (see Fig. 11). The recited mating object and structural component are not understood to be positively required by the fastener structure, and thus are understood to reflect intended use. The structure of the positively recited fastener is understood by the examiner to be capable of interacting with a mating object or structural component having the recited structure. Thus, Wang is understood to read on the limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 5, Wang discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Wang discloses that the anti-rotation portion (planar surface shown abutting upper surface of main body in Fig. 11) of the rotating fastener body (212), or the anti-rotation portion (at 15) of the main body (1), or the anti-rotation portion of the mating object (not positively required) are combined; or arrangement and combination of the anti-rotation portion of the rotating fastener body, or the anti-rotation portion of the main body, or the anti-rotation portion of the mating object are combined, so that the rotating fastener body and the main body, or the main body and the mating object, or the rotating fastener body (212) and the mating object, or different components therebetween are anti-rotated with each other by the anti-rotation portion.
Regarding claim 6, Wang discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Wang discloses that the rotating fastener body (212) comprises an anti-rotation portion (planar surface shown abutting main body in Fig. 11) and a fastening portion (mass at the pivot point, see Fig. 10), the main body (1) comprises a first anti-rotation portion (at 15) or a second anti-rotation portion ; or the anti-rotation portion is used to move in the first anti-rotation portion and the second anti-rotation portion to limit positions or control the direction or switch the movement of the fastening portion, wherein the first anti-rotation portion and the second anti-rotation portion is upper and lower two-stage, or upper and lower two-layer, or is a grooving structure or a non-grooving structure.
Alternatively, Claims 1, 3, 5 and 6
Claims 1, 3, 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by United States Patent 10,465,735 to Hsieh (hereinafter “Hsieh”).
Regarding claim 1, Hsieh discloses a fastener structure (see Fig. 10), comprising: a rotating fastener body (21); a main body (16), including a non-circular protruding body (161); and a structural component (3, 32; see Figs. 10-12), including an assembled substrate (3), wherein the assembled substrate includes a non-circular through hole (31), wherein the non-circular protruding body (161) and the non-circular through hole (31) correspond to each other in shape (see Fig. 10), and the non-circular protruding body and the non-circular through hole are joined (see Fig. 12) and anti-rotated with each other (see clipped position in Fig. 12; ).
Regarding claim 3, Hsieh discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Hsieh discloses that the mating object (4) comprises an anti-rotation portion (42), a fastening portion (at 231) of the fastener body (21) comprises a corresponding fastener portion (23), the anti-rotation portion (42) and the corresponding fastener portion (23) are anti-rotated with each other (see Col. 7, lines 28-49 and Fig. 12); or the fastener structure further comprises a corresponding engaging member, the mating object comprises an anti-rotation portion, the corresponding engaging member comprises an anti-rotation portion, the anti-rotation portion of the mating object and the anti-rotation portion of the corresponding engaging member are anti-rotated with each other; or the structural component comprises an anti-rotation portion, the main body comprises an anti-rotation portion, the anti-rotation portion of the structural component and the anti-rotation portion of the main body are anti-rotated with each other.
Regarding claim 5, Hsieh discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Hsieh discloses that the anti-rotation portion (23) of the rotating fastener body (21), or the anti-rotation portion of the main body, or the anti-rotation portion (42) of the mating object (4) are combined (see Fig. 12; fastener body and mating object combined), or arrangement and combination of the anti-rotation of the rotating fastener body, or the anti-rotation portion of the main body, or the anti-rotation portion of the mating object are combined, so that the rotating fastener body and the main body, or the main body and the mating object, or the rotating fastener body and the mating object, or different components therebetween are anti-rotated with each other by the anti-rotation portion.
Regarding claim 6, Hsieh discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Hsieh discloses that the rotating fastener body (21) comprises an anti-rotation portion (23) and a fastening portion (212), the main body (16) comprises a first-anti-rotation portion or a second-anti-rotation portion (opposed wings 162); or the anti-rotation portion is used to move in the first anti-rotation portion and the second anti-rotation portion to limit positions or control the direction or switch or movement of the fastening portion, wherein the first anti-rotation portion and the second portion and the second anti-rotation portion is upper and lower two-stage, or upper and lower two-layer, or is a grooving structure or a non-grooving structure.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 7, the prior art of record does not explicitly disclose or fairly teach “a connecting rod, wherein a first end part of the connecting rod penetrates the rotating fastener body, and a second end part of the connecting rod is disposed at the main body; and a corresponding engaging member, including a fastening hole, wherein the second end part of the connecting rod extends to form a fastening portion to engage and abut against the fastening hole, wherein the fastening hole is a long strip and the fastening portion is a long strip, and the fastening portion enters the fastening hole in a corresponding same direction and then rotates to produce an engaging and abutting effect of a function of anti-rotation,” in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim. United States Patent 2013/0183086 to Wang appears to teach an anti-rotation portion (23) illustrated as a strip and an opening (201; see paragraph [0051) which is non-circular, however does not fairly disclose the claimed engaging and abutting effect.
Claim 9 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.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Applicant’s arguments, see Response, filed 28 October 2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 4 under 35 USC 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Rejection of 29 July 2025 has been withdrawn.
Claim 4 was previously rejected, and has been canceled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Applicant's arguments filed 28 October 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claims 1-6 were previously rejected as anticipated by Wang.
Applicant notes that claim 1 has been amended to recite “a main body, including a non-circular protruding body,; and a structural component, including an assembled substrate, wherein the assembled substrate includes a non-circular through hole.”
Wang is understood to disclose that a main body portion (231) and a through hole (201) may have corresponding non-circular shapes at paragraph [0051].
Applicant’s arguments, see Response, filed 28 October 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 4, and 6 under 35 USC 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Claims 1, 4, and 6 were previously rejected as anticipated by Cao.
Applicant asserts that the amended claim 1 is not anticipated by Cao.
The examiner agrees.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 DARRELL C. FORD whose telephone number is (313)446-6515. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM to 5:15 PM, Monday to Friday.
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, Sunil K Singh can be reached at (571) 272-3460. 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.
/D.C.F/Examiner, Art Unit 3726
/SARANG AFZALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726 12/12/2025