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 .
This action is in response to the documents received on August 27, 2025.
Claim Objections
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.
The numbering of claims is not in accordance with 37 CFR 1.126 which requires the original numbering of the claims to be preserved throughout the prosecution; they must be numbered consecutively beginning with the number next following the highest numbered claims previously presented (whether entered or not).
Misnumbered claims 2-18 have been renumbered 4-20.
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.
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 2-9 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.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the cover" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examining purposes, Examiner has understood the claim to be drawn to a single cover element rather than two separate and distinct cover elements.
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.
A series of singular dependent claims is permissible in which a dependent claim refers to a preceding claim which, in turn, refers to another preceding claim.
A claim which depends from a dependent claim should not be separated by any claim which does not also depend from said dependent claim. It should be kept in mind that a dependent claim may refer to any preceding independent claim. In general, applicant's sequence will not be changed. See MPEP § 608.01(n).
Claims 4-7 and 15-18 are 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 include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The dependency of claims 4-7 and 15-17 are circular; also, claim 18 depends from itself. 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.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 –
Claims 1, 2, 5, 10, 13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by TSO et al. (US 2023/0061621)
In reference to claims 1, 10 and 13, figure 19 of TSO et al. discloses a torque measuring adapter 1000 comprising: a shaft 1200 extending from a body 1110 and adapted to be engaged with a driving tool T1 at a first end and a driven implement T2 at a second & opposing end (figure 1); and an electronics unit 1700 including a torque measurement system 1300 operably connected (figures 2 & 3) to the shaft 1200 to measure torque exerted through the shaft (paragraph [0021] & [0024]); wherein the torque measurement system includes a torque sensor 1330 (e.g. strain gauge; paragraph [0020]) disposed on the shaft 1200 and operably connected to the electronics unit 1700 by a transceiver 1340 (paragraph [0024).
The limitations of claim 15 are not found to further limit the claimed torque measuring adapter; rather, the limitations are drawn to an intended use of the torque measuring adapter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by TSO et al. (US 2023/0061621) in view of LIMBERG (US 8,851,201).
In reference to claim 14, TSO et al. discloses a torque measuring adapter 1000 comprising: a shaft 1200 extending from a body 1110 and adapted to be engaged with a driving tool T1 at a first end and a driven implement T2 at a second & opposing end (figure 1). However, the driving tool of T1 is disclosed as a hand driving tool rather than a power tool having a clutch.
Figure 15 of LIMBERG et al. teaches a torque measuring adapter 234 comprising: a shaft 50 extending from a body 238 and adapted to be engaged with a power driving tool at a first end 58, 158 and with a driven implement at an second opposing end 54(figure 14; column 5 lines 2-5); wherein a clutch mechanism 154 is operably engaged between the driving tool end 158 of the shaft and the driven implement end (figures 14-15).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-20 are allowed.
Claims 2-9 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 11 and 12 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter in claims 2-9 and 16-20: Upon examination, the art considered as a whole, alone or in combination, neither anticipated nor renders obvious the claimed torque measuring adapter for a driving tool comprising a sleeve engaged with a shaft and extending through a cover that is rotable secured to a housing of the adapter as claimed.
While related prior art, such as TSO et al. (US 2023/0061621) and LIMBERG (US 8,851,201), are found to discloses a torque measuring adapter comprising a housing enclosing an electronics unit and torque measurement system wherein a (bearing) sleeve rotably supports a shaft extending through the housing of the adapter, such prior art is not found to disclose the sleeve elements to be within a cover that is rotably secured to the housing as claimed. Thus, it is Examiner’s opinion that it would not have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine or modify the prior art in order to arrive at Applicant's invention as claimed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter in claims 11 and 12: Upon examination, the art considered as a whole, alone or in combination, neither anticipated nor renders obvious the claimed torque measuring adapter for a driving tool comprising a remote platform including a central processing unit (CPU) including an electronic memory.
While related prior art, such as TSO et al. (US 2023/0061621) is found to disclose a torque measuring adapter comprising a first transceiver operably connected to an electronic unit that sends feedback to a display supported in the body of the adapter, TSO et a. does not further disclose a CPU with electronic memory as claimed. Other related prior art is found to disclose a driving tool that is coupled with the adapted, wherein a CPU is provided within the driving tool such that the CPU is remote from the adapter and not included in the adapter structure as required in Applicant’s invention. Thus, it is Examiner’s opinion that it would not have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine or modify the prior art in order to arrive at Applicant's invention as claimed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to the attached PTO-892 for a notice of references cited and recommended for consideration based on their disclosure of limitations related to the claimed invention. In particular, BALES, JR. et al. (US 2012/0078278) discloses the knowledge in the art to provide a surgical instrument with a torque adapter 8602. The torque measuring adapter of BRUE et al. (US 2019/0242769) is also found to be comparable to that of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GLORIA R WEEKS whose telephone number is (571)272-4473. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-2pm & 5pm-7pm EST.
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 at 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.
Other helpful telephone numbers are listed for applicant's benefit:
Allowed Files & Publication (888) 786-0101
Assignment Branch (800) 972-6382
Certificates of Correction (703) 305-8309
Fee Questions (571) 272-6400
Inventor Assistance Center (800) PTO-9199
Petitions/special Programs (571) 272-3282
Information Help line 1-800-786-9199
/GLORIA R WEEKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
October 2, 2026
