DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16th, 2013 is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Examiner Response to Restriction Election
Applicant’s response to the restriction requirement dated 02/19/2026 has been fully considered. In light of both the arguments and the interview dated 02/26/2026, the restriction requirement has been withdrawn. As identified in the applicant’s arguments/remarks filed 04/09/2026, pending claims 1-20 read on the species shown in figures 5-10 of the drawings. Therefore, pending claims 1-20 will be fully considered.
Information Disclosure Sheet
The information disclosure statements (IDS’s) submitted on 07/01/2025 and 04/14/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 10, 18, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
These claims appear to be missing a comma after the preamble. It appears that the claims should instead recite the language of “…claim 9,…”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation – 35 USC §112f
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The following elements are interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
Regarding claims 1, 9, and 20, “drive unit” (because A – “unit” is the placeholder/nonce term, B – “…for providing torque to move the drive blade from the BDC position towards the TDC position…” designates the function, and C – no additional structure is provided in the claim body, thus “drive unit” is understood as equivalent to “means for providing torque to move the drive blade from the BDC position towards the TDC position”). A review of the specification suggests that the corresponding structure is an electric motor 156 and a transmission 160 (see ¶ [0025] of the specification) or equivalent.
If the applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre -AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre –AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC §112(b)
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.
Claim 16 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 16, this claim recites “”wherein the master supply cylinder includes a plurality of bosses having internal threads and extending from the first end…” However, neither claim 16 nor claim 9, upon which claim 16 depends, introduces a first end of the master supply cylinder. Therefore, “the first end” of claim 16 lacks proper antecedent basis, rendering the claim indefinite. However, claim 11 successfully introduces “a first end” and “a second end.” To overcome this rejection, the applicant may amend claim 16 to either introduce the first and second ends, or change the dependence of claim 16 to properly establish antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC §102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pomeroy (US 2018/0126527 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Pomeroy discloses a powered fastener driver (Figure 1A, #10) comprising:
a drive blade (Figure 6, #38) movable from a top-dead-center (TDC) position (Shown in figure 6) to a driven or bottom-dead-center (BDC) position (Shown in figure 7) for driving a fastener into a workpiece (Described in ¶ [0024]);
a piston (Figure 6, #36) coupled to the drive blade (Shown in figures 6 and 7) for movement therewith between the TDC position and the BDC position (Described in ¶ [0024] - [0025]);
a drive unit (Figure 2, #50/#51) for providing torque to move the drive blade from the BDC position toward the TDC position (Described in ¶'s [0025] - [0026]);
a rotary lifter (Figure 6, #48) engageable with the drive blade (Described in ¶ [0026]), the rotary lifter configured to receive torque from the drive unit in a first rotational direction for returning the drive blade from the BDC position toward the TDC position (Described in ¶'s [0025] - [0026]); and
a gas spring assembly (Figure 6, #22) including
a master supply cylinder (Figure 6, #44) in which gas is stored and compressed by the piston in response to the piston being moved from the BDC position toward the TDC position (Described in ¶'s [0030] - [0032]),
a drive cylinder (Figure 6, #34) at least partially positioned within the master supply cylinder (Shown in figure 6) and having a flange (Figure 6, #83/#82) against which an end of the master supply cylinder is abutted (Shown in ¶ [0029]), and
an end cap (Figure 6, #138) secured to the master supply cylinder to apply a clamping force to the flange against the end of the master supply cylinder, thereby axially affixing the drive cylinder to the master supply cylinder (Shown in figure 6 and described in ¶'s [0032] & [0034] - [0037]).
Regarding claim 2, Pomeroy further discloses a fill valve (Figure 6, #188) coupled to the master supply cylinder (Shown in figure 6).
Regarding claim 3, Pomeroy further discloses wherein the flange extends from a first end of the drive cylinder (Shown in figure 6).
Regarding claim 4, Pomeroy further discloses wherein the drive cylinder includes an outer surface from which the flange extends (Figure 6 shows that the drive cylinder #34 includes an outer surface from which the flange #83 extends), the outer surface having a circumferential groove in which a seal is disposed, the seal engaging the master supply cylinder (Shown in figures 6 and 8, via #82/#104).
Regarding claim 5, Pomeroy further discloses wherein the end cap is threadedly coupled to the master supply cylinder and the flange is positioned between the master supply cylinder and a flange of the end cap, and wherein the clamping force is applied to the flange of the drive cylinder by the flange of the end cap in response to the end cap being threaded to the master supply cylinder (Shown in figure 6, and described in ¶'s [0032] - [0034]).
Regarding claim 6, Pomeroy further discloses wherein the master supply cylinder includes external threads to which the end cap is threaded (Shown in figures 6 and 11 and described in ¶'s [0034] - [0037]).
Regarding claim 7, Pomeroy further discloses a lifter housing (Figure 2, #26/#51) rotatably supporting the rotary lifter (Shown in figures 1-6), and wherein the drive cylinder is coupled to the lifter housing (Shown in figures 1-6).
Regarding claim 8, Pomeroy further discloses wherein the drive cylinder includes a flare portion having internal threads (Shown in figure 6 on #82), and wherein the lifter housing has external threads to which the internal threads on the flare portion are engaged (Described in ¶'s [0024] - [0025]).
Regarding claim 9, Pomeroy discloses a powered fastener driver (Figure 1A, #10) comprising:
a drive blade (Figure 6, #38) movable from a top-dead-center (TDC) position (Shown in figure 6) to a driven or bottom-dead-center (BDC) position (Shown in figure 7) for driving a fastener into a workpiece (Described in ¶ [0024]);
a piston (Figure 6, #36) coupled to the drive blade (Shown in figures 6 and 7) for movement therewith between the TDC position and the BDC position (Described in ¶ [0024] - [0025]);
a drive unit (Figure 2, #50/#51) for providing torque to move the drive blade from the BDC position toward the TDC position (Described in ¶'s [0025] - [0026]);
a rotary lifter (Figure 6, #48) engageable with the drive blade (Described in ¶ [0026]), the rotary lifter configured to receive torque from the drive unit in a first rotational direction for returning the drive blade from the BDC position toward the TDC position (Described in ¶'s [0025] - [0026]); and
a gas spring assembly (Figure 6, #22) including
a master supply cylinder (Figure 6, #44) in which gas is stored and compressed by the piston in response to the piston being moved from the BDC position toward the TDC position (Described in ¶'s [0030] - [0032]),
a drive cylinder (Figure 6, #34) at least partially positioned within the master supply cylinder (Shown in figure 6) and having a flange (Figure 6, #83/#82) against which an inner shoulder of the master supply cylinder is abutted (Shown in ¶ [0029]), and
an end cap (Figure 6, #138) secured to an end of the master supply cylinder opposite the inner shoulder to apply a clamping force to the flange against the inner shoulder, thereby axially affixing the drive cylinder to the master supply cylinder (Shown in figure 6 and described in ¶'s [0032] & [0034] - [0037]).
Regarding claim 10, Pomeroy further discloses a seal (Figures 6 and 8, #104) disposed between the drive cylinder and the master supply cylinder (Shown in figures 6 and 8, via #82/#104).
Regarding claim 11, Pomeroy further discloses wherein the master supply cylinder includes a bore (Shown in figure 6, #130) at least partially defined by an inner shoulder at a first end (Shown in figures 7 and 9 at the top of cylinder area #128), and the end cap is coupled to a second end of the master supply cylinder opposite the inner shoulder (Shown in figure 6, shoulder at bottom of cylinder area #130 which connects to the end cap #138. Further shown in figure 11, #136).
Regarding claim 20, Pomeroy discloses a powered fastener driver (Figure 1A, #10) comprising:
a drive blade (Figure 6, #38) movable from a top-dead-center (TDC) position (Shown in figure 6) to a driven or bottom-dead- center (BDC) position (Shown in figure 7) for driving a fastener into a workpiece (Described in ¶ [0024]);
a piston (Figure 6, #36) coupled to the drive blade (Shown in figures 6 and 7) for movement therewith between the TDC position and the BDC position (Described in ¶ [0024] - [0025]);
a drive unit (Figure 2, #50/#51) for providing torque to move the drive blade from the BDC position toward the TDC position (Described in ¶'s [0025] - [0026]);
a rotary lifter (Figure 6, #48) supported in a lifter housing (Figure 2, #26/#51), the rotary lifter engageable with the drive blade (Described in ¶ [0026]) and configured to receive torque from the drive unit in a first rotational direction for returning the drive blade from the BDC position toward the TDC position (Described in ¶'s [0025] - [0026]); and
a gas spring assembly (Figure 6, #22) including
a master supply cylinder (Figure 6, #44) in which gas is stored and compressed by the piston in response to the piston being moved from the BDC position toward the TDC position (Described in ¶'s [0030] - [0032]), the master supply cylinder having an inner shoulder (Shown in figure 6) and bosses (Figure 6, #58) that are fastened to the lifter housing (Shown in figure 6),
a drive cylinder (Figure 6, #34) having an outer surface and a flange (Figure 6, #83/#82) extending from the outer surface proximate a first end of the drive cylinder (Shown in figure 6), the drive cylinder at least partially positioned within the master supply cylinder (Shown in figure 6) with the flange abutted against the inner shoulder of the master supply cylinder (Shown in figures 6 and 7), and
an end cap (Figure 6, #138) threaded to an end of the master supply cylinder opposite the inner shoulder to apply a clamping force to an opposite, second end of the drive cylinder to abut the flange against the inner shoulder, thereby axially affixing the drive cylinder to the master supply cylinder (Shown in figure 6 and described in ¶'s [0032] & [0034] - [0037]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB A SMITH whose telephone number is (571) 272-3974 and email address is Jacob.Smith@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:30AM - 5:30PM.
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, Anna Kinsaul can be reached at (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.
/JACOB A SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights