DETAILED ACTION
This non-final Office action is in response to Applicant’s patent application filed on 5/15/2025. An action on the merits follows.
Claims 1-20 are pending in the application.
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/Restriction
Claims 10-16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/22/2026.
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 2-6 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “the first die and the ram are retained within a head of the hydraulic power tool” is vague and unclear because claim 2 is directed to a die retention mechanism (for a hydraulic tool) while the above limitation is claiming parts of a hydraulic tool. Therefore, it is unclear if the claimed head, which is part of the hydraulic tool is a required limitation for the die retention mechanism. In order to prosecute the application, Examiner assumes the above limitation is optional.
Regarding claims 3-6, the limitation “the head of the hydraulic power tool includes: a clevis defining a guide channel …the guide channel includes a wall...a shelf” is vague and unclear because claim 3 is directed to a die retention mechanism (for a hydraulic tool) while the above limitation is claiming parts of a hydraulic tool. Therefore, it is unclear if the claimed head and its parts (clevis and guide channel), which is part of the hydraulic tool is a required limitation for the die retention mechanism. In order to prosecute the application, Examiner assumes the above limitations are optional.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 7, 17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by USPGP# 20130264085 of Ciotti (henceforth Ciotti).
Regarding claim 1, Ciotti teaches
A die retention mechanism (22, 80, 82, 86) for a hydraulic power tool (abstract, 12), the die retention mechanism
comprising:
a first die (22) including a flange (see annotated fig. 6, flange is interpreted to be “a rib or rim for strength, for guiding, or for attachment to another object” as defined by Merriam-webster dictionary. See https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flange. accessed 7/27/2026) and a first series of keyed protrusions (80) extending from the flange; and
a ram (26, 28), including:
a first end (distal (left) of 28 end in annotated fig. 6) defining a slot (see annotated fig. 6), the slot to receive the flange of the first die (¶0037);
a first ledge (left ledge of 28, see annotated fig. 6) and a second ledge (right edge of 28, see annotated fig. 6, ¶0030) together defining the slot, the first ledge including a second
series of keyed protrusions (86); and
the second series of keyed protrusions interlocking with the first series of keyed protrusions
to secure the first die to the ram (¶0036-0037).
PNG
media_image1.png
927
1401
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, as shown in claim 1, Ciotti teaches
wherein the first die and the ram are retained within a head (20) of the hydraulic power tool (12).
Regarding claim 7, as shown in claim 1, Ciotti teaches
wherein the first die is one of a crimping die (¶0022) or a cutting die.
Regarding claim 17, Ciotti teaches
A hydraulic tool (12), comprising:
a body (44); and
a head (30) extending from the body, the head including:
a ram (26, 28) moveable between a retracted position (¶0030) and an extended position (¶0030); and
a die retention mechanism (80, 82, 86) removably securing a die (22) to the ram, the die retention
mechanism including:
a slot (see annotated fig. 6) in a first end of the ram (distal (left) end in fig. 6), the slot having a first series of keyed protrusions (86); and
a flange (see annotated fig. 6, flange is interpreted to be “a rib or rim for strength, for guiding, or for attachment to another object” as defined by Merriam-webster dictionary. See https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flange. accessed 7/27/2026) extending from the die, the flange having a second series of keyed protrusions (80) to interlock with the first series of keyed protrusions of the slot to secure the die to the ram (¶0036-0037).
Regarding claim 19, as shown in claim 17, Ciotti teaches
wherein the first series of keyed protrusions and the second series of keyed protrusions are interspaced by grooves (gaps between 86).
Regarding claim 20, as shown in claim 19, Ciotti teaches
wherein grooves of the first series of keyed protrusions receive the second series of keyed protrusions during installation of the die (¶0037, fig. 6).
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 1-9, 17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPGP# 20140260505 of Bowles et al. (henceforth Bowles) in view of Ciotti.
Regarding claim 1, Bowles teaches
A die retention mechanism (616, 630, 632, 634) for a hydraulic power tool (abstract, 100), the die retention mechanism
comprising:
a first die (630, 632); and
a ram (616, 642), including:
a first end (distal (top) end in fig. 10) defining a slot (628), the slot configured to connect the ram to the first die (¶0066).
Bowles uses a threaded screw (632) to attach the die (630) to the ram (616, 642) and therefore does not teach
the first die including a flange and a first series of keyed protrusions extending from the flange; and the ram, including: a first end defining a slot, the slot to receive the flange of the first die; a first ledge and a second ledge together defining the slot, the first ledge including a second series of keyed protrusions; and the second series of keyed protrusions interlocking with the first series of keyed protrusions to secure the first die to the ram.
Ciotti teaches an alternate way of attaching a die to a ram comprising
A die retention mechanism (22, 80, 82, 86) for a hydraulic power tool (abstract, 12), the die retention mechanism comprising:
a first die (22) including a flange (see annotated fig. 6, flange is interpreted to be “a rib or rim for strength, for guiding, or for attachment to another object” as defined by Merriam-webster dictionary. See https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flange. accessed 7/27/2026) and a first series of keyed protrusions (80) extending from the flange; and
a ram (26, 28), including:
a first end (distal (left) end in fig. 6) defining a slot (see annotated fig. 6), the slot to receive the flange of the first die (¶0037);
a first ledge (left edge of 28, see annotated fig. 6) and a second ledge (right edge of 28, see annotated fig. 6, ¶0030) together defining the slot, the first ledge including a second
series of keyed protrusions (86); and
the second series of keyed protrusions interlocking with the first series of keyed protrusions
to secure the first die to the ram (¶0036-0037).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to replace the screwed mechanism for connecting the die to the ram of Bowles with cooperating keyed protrusion mechanism taught by Ciotti in order to predictable result of rapid and easy interchangeability of heads, rapid and easy interchangeability of power units, ease of use, simplicity, reduced manufacturing cost, improved reliability, and versatility (Ciotti: ¶0015). Additionally, a skilled artisan would have recognized that the modification of Bowles with the teachings of Ciotti. involves no more than the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions. The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. KSR, 550 U.S. at 416
PNG
media_image2.png
919
1224
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, as shown in claim 1, the combination of Bowles and Ciotti teaches
wherein the first die and the ram are retained within a head (Bowles: 20, Ciotti: 20) of the hydraulic power tool (Bowles: 100, Ciotti: 12).
Regarding claim 3, as shown in claim 2, the combination of Bowles and Ciotti teaches
wherein the head of the hydraulic power tool includes: a clevis (Bowles: 132) defining a guide channel (Bowles: channel between 134, 136, please note as described in ¶0065 clevis 132 and die 630 in figs. 9-10 is similar in design to clevis 132 and die 320 in figs. 3-5) to guide movement of the first die during movement of the ram (Bowles: ¶0047).
Regarding claim 4, as shown in claim 3, the combination of Bowles and Ciotti teaches
wherein the guide channel includes:
a first side (Bowles: 150, 152, see annotated and zoomed fig. 9) defining a wall (Bowles: see annotated and zoomed fig. 9); and
a second side (Bowles: 140, 142, see annotated and zoomed fig. 9) defining a shelf (Bowles: see annotated and zoomed fig. 9), the wall and the shelf contacting opposing sides of the first
die during movement of the first die (Bowles: see fig. 10).
Regarding claim 5, as shown in claim 4, the combination of Bowles and Ciotti teaches
wherein a height of the shelf is less than a height of the wall (Bowles: see annotated fig. 9).
Regarding claim 6, as shown in claim 4, the combination of Bowles and Ciotti teaches
wherein, when the first die is secured to the ram, the shelf and the wall of the clevis mitigate lateral movement of the first die (Bowles: ¶0047, the wall and shelf as annotated in fig. 9 define/delimit the channel in which die 630 is retained and as such will inherently mitigate lateral movement of the first die 630 when the first dies is secured to the ram).
Regarding claim 7, as shown in claim 1, the combination of Bowles and Ciotti teaches
wherein the first die is one of a crimping die (Bowles: 0047, Ciotti: ¶0022) or a cutting die (Bowles: 0047).
Regarding claim 8, as shown in claim 1, the combination of Bowles and Ciotti teaches
the ram further includes:
a first portion (Bowles: 622) defining a pocket (Bowles: 700) at one end (Bowles: end of 616 closer to 642); and
a second portion (Bowles: 642) defining a protrusion (Bowles: 668) at one end (Bowles: the end closer to 622), the protrusion of the second portion nesting within the pocket of the first portion to rotatably secure the first portion to the second portion (Bowles: ¶0070, see figs. 9-10, 670 is circumferential groove and pins 686 engage that groove which will inherently allow at least some amount of rotation between the first and second portion. Additionally, the claims as recited, allow for rotation between the first and second portion prior to, during or after connecting the two portions).
Regarding claim 9, as shown in claim 8, the combination of Bowles and Ciotti teaches
wherein the first portion is rotatably secured to the second portion via a pin (Bowles: 686) arranged through an aperture (Bowles: 684) in the first portion and into a groove (Bowles: 670) of the second portion.
Regarding claim 17, Bowles teaches
A hydraulic tool (100), comprising:
a body (102); and
a head (600) extending from the body, the head including:
a ram (616, 642) moveable between a retracted position and an extended position (¶0070); and
a die retention mechanism (632) removably securing a die (630) to the ram.
Bowles uses a threaded screw (632) to attach the die (630) to the ram (616, 642) and therefore does not teach the die retention mechanism including: a slot in a first end of the ram, the slot having a first series of keyed protrusions; and a flange extending from the die, the flange having a second series of keyed protrusions to interlock with the first series of keyed protrusions of the slot to secure the die to the ram.
Ciotti teaches
A hydraulic tool (12), comprising:
a body (44); and
a head (30) extending from the body, the head including:
a ram (26, 28) moveable between a retracted position (¶0030) and an extended position (¶0030); and
a die retention mechanism (80, 82, 86) removably securing a die (22) to the ram, the die retention
mechanism including:
a slot (see annotated fig. 6) in a first end of the ram (distal (left) end in fig. 6), the slot having a first series of keyed protrusions (86); and
a flange (see annotated fig. 6, flange is interpreted to be “a rib or rim for strength, for guiding, or for attachment to another object” as defined by Merriam-webster dictionary. See https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flange. accessed 7/27/2026) extending from the die, the flange having a second series of keyed protrusions (80) to interlock with the first series of keyed protrusions of the slot to secure the die to the ram (¶0036-0037).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to replace the screwed mechanism for connecting the die to the ram of Bowles with cooperating keyed protrusion mechanism taught by Ciotti in order to predictable result of rapid and easy interchangeability of heads, rapid and easy interchangeability of power units, ease of use, simplicity, reduced manufacturing cost, improved reliability, and versatility (Ciotti: ¶0015). Additionally, a skilled artisan would have recognized that the modification of Bowles with the teachings of Ciotti. involves no more than the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions. The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. KSR, 550 U.S. at 416
Regarding claim 19, as shown in claim 17, the combination of Bowles and Ciotti teaches
wherein the first series of keyed protrusions and the second series of keyed protrusions are interspaced by grooves (Ciotti: gaps between 86).
Regarding claim 20, as shown in claim 19, the combination of Bowles and Ciotti teaches
wherein grooves of the first series of keyed protrusions receive the second series of keyed protrusions during installation of the die (Ciotti: ¶0037, fig. 6).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ciotti in view of USPGP# 20210082645 of Marlin et al. (henceforth Marlin).
Regarding claim 18, as shown in claim 17, Ciotti does not teach
wherein the first series of keyed protrusions of the slot and the second series of keyed protrusions of the flange include interlocking chamfered edges.
Marlin teaches
a first series of keyed protrusions (44a, 44b) of a first part (40) and a second series of keyed protrusions (52a, 52b) of a second part (51) include interlocking chamfered edges (¶0046).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the first and second keyed protrusions of Ciotti with the addition of interlocking chamfered edges, as taught by Marlin, in order to provide the predictable result of easy guiding of the first and second keyed protrusion during interlocking while accommodating small mispositioning between the first and second keyed protrusion (Marlin: ¶0046). This makes the die retention mechanism more user friendly and makes it more reliable to use (Marlin: ¶0046). Additionally, a skilled artisan would have recognized that the modification of Ciotti with the teachings of Marlin involves no more than the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions. The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. KSR, 550 U.S. at 416
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Bowles and Ciotti in view of Marlin.
Regarding claim 18, as shown in claim 17, the combination of Bowles and Ciotti does not teach
wherein the first series of keyed protrusions of the slot and the second series of keyed protrusions of the flange include interlocking chamfered edges.
Marlin teaches
a first series of keyed protrusions (44a, 44b) of a first part (40) and a second series of keyed protrusions (52a, 52b) of a second part (51) include interlocking chamfered edges (¶0046).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the first and second keyed protrusions of the combination of Bowles and Ciotti with the addition of interlocking chamfered edges, as taught by Marlin, in order to provide the predictable result of easy guiding of the first and second keyed protrusion during interlocking while accommodating small mispositioning between the first and second keyed protrusion (Marlin: ¶0046). This makes the die retention mechanism more user friendly and makes it more reliable to use (Marlin: ¶0046). Additionally, a skilled artisan would have recognized that the modification of the combination of Bowles and Ciotti with the teachings of Marlin involves no more than the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions. The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. KSR, 550 U.S. at 416
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOBEEN AHMED whose telephone number is (571) 272-0356. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (8:30 am to 5 pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anna Kinsaul can be reached on 571-270-1926. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/M. A./
Examiner, Art Unit 3731
/VERONICA MARTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights