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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s preliminary amendment filed 6/16/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-24 and 35-92 are cancelled.
Claims 25-34 and 93-102 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/24/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 25 and 93 are objected to because of the following informalities:
-Claim 25, line 7, “the lifter assembly including” a colon should be added after “including”.
-Claim 93, line 7, “the lifter assembly including” a colon should be added after “including”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 26 and 94 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.
Regarding Claims 26 and 94, both claims recite “first and second eccentric pins are positioned proximate the outer circumferential surface”. These limitations render the claims indefinite as it is unclear as to what “positioned proximate” is intending to encompass. Specifically it is unclear as to how close to the outer circumferential surface the term “proximate” is intending to encompass.
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 25-30 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Saitou (US PGPUB 2021/0101272).
Note: two different embodiments of Saitou are viewed as disclosing and/or rendering obvious (note the 103 rejection below) the claimed inventions. The first embodiment is referenced below.
First Interpretation of Saitou (Figures 1-5):
Regarding Claim 25, Saitou (Figures 1-5) discloses a fastener driver (10; Figure 1) comprising:
a housing (11) defining a head portion (16) and a handle portion (18; Para. 0031);
a drive mechanism (motor 15) positioned within the housing (11);
a firing mechanism (striking mechanism 12) including a piston (24) and a driver blade (25) that are moveable from a top dead center position toward a bottom dead center position (i.e. Paras. 0030); and
a lifter assembly (a power conversion mechanism 14 including pin wheel 45, pins 45A-45H) operated by the drive mechanism (15) to rotate about a rotational axis (A2) to return the piston (24) and the driver blade (25) towards the TDC position (i.e. Paras 0043, 0058-0062, 0075, the lifter assembly (14) including:
a first eccentric pin (any of 45A-45H; i.e. pin 45G; Figures 2-3) located at a first radial distance (R1) relative to the rotational axis (A2; Para. 0044), and
a second eccentric pin (any other of 45A-45H; i.e. pin 45H) located at a second radial distance (R1) relative to the rotational axis (A2), the second radial distance being less than the first radial distance (R1; note Para. 0044-0045 outlines the radii R1 is different for each pin 45A-45H; as shown pin 45G is further from axis A2 than pin 45H).
Regarding Claim 26, Saitou (Figures 1-5) discloses the lifter assembly (14) includes an outer circumferential surface (of plates 45J, 45K) and each of the first and second eccentric pins (45A-45H) are positioned proximate the outer circumferential surface (of plates 45J, 45K as shown in Figure 3).
Regarding Claim 27, Saitou (Figures 1-5) discloses a primary guide member (cylinder 22) supported within the head portion (16) of the housing (11), wherein the primary guide member (22) defines a first axis (A1), and wherein the piston (24) is slidable along the primary guide member (22; Para. 0032).
Regarding Claim 28, Saitou (Figures 1-5) discloses a frame (holder 27) located within the housing (11) and configured to support the lifter assembly (14) and the primary guide member (22; Para. 0036; Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 29, Saitou (Figures 1-5) discloses the rotational axis (A2) of the lifter assembly (14) is transverse to the first axis (A1 as shown).
Regarding Claim 30, Saitou (Figures 1-5) discloses the first eccentric pin (45A-45H) has a first height and the second eccentric pin (45A-45H) has a second height that is greater than the first height (as shown in Figure 3, the diameters, which extend in the height direction are variable).
Regarding Claim 34, Saitou (Figures 1-5) discloses a magazine (50) configured to receive fasteners (51); and a nosepiece (30) including a fastener driving channel (34), in which the driver blade (25) is located, from which consecutive fasteners from the magazine are driven (Para. 0036).
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 25-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saitou (US PGPUB 2021/0101272).
Second Interpretation of Saitou (Figures 13-17):
Alternatively regarding Claim 25, Saitou (Figures 13-17) discloses a fastener driver (110; Figure 13) comprising:
a housing (111) defining a head portion (119) and a handle portion (120);
a drive mechanism (114) positioned within the housing (111);
a firing mechanism (112) including a piston (plunger 126) and a driver blade (127) that are moveable from a top dead center (TDC) position toward a bottom dead center (BDC) position (i.e. Para. 0080, 0103); and
a lifter assembly (115 specifically 150, 151 and pins thereof) operated by the drive mechanism (114) to rotate about a rotational axis (E2 or E3) to return the piston (126) and the driver blade (127) towards the TDC position (Para. 0090, 0095-0100), the lifter assembly (115) including:
a first eccentric pin (157) located at a first radial distance (R11) relative to the respective rotational axis (E2), and
a second eccentric pin (157, 158, 202) located at a second radial distance (R12) relative to the respective rotational axis (E3; Para. 0090, 0095-0100), wherein the second radial distance is less than the first radial distance (Para. 0092 outlines R12<R11).
However, Saitou (Figures 13-17) does not readily disclose the first and second pins are located relative to the same rotational axis in the manner as claimed. Saitou (Figures 13-17) does further teach an alternative embodiment where hubs (150 and 151) of the lifter assembly can be one rotational element with several eccentric pins (“fourth engaging portions”) that comprise different radial distances (Para. 0120).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have utilized a singular rotational element/hub comprising several pins which comprise respective radial distances (i.e. R11 and R12) from a singular rotational axis thereof (i.e. E2) in the manner as outlined by Para. 0120 of Saitou as such a modification would lead to a more compact tool.
Regarding Claim 26, Saitou (Figures 13-17) discloses the lifter assembly (115) includes an outer circumferential surface (of 150,151) and each of the first and second eccentric pins (157, 158, 202) are positioned proximate the outer circumferential surface (as shown).
Regarding Claim 27, Saitou (Figures 13-17) discloses a primary guide member (128; Figure 14) supported within the head portion (119) of the housing (111), wherein the primary guide member (128) defines a first axis (E1), and wherein the piston (126) is slidable along the primary guide member (128; Para. 0080).
Regarding Claim 28, Saitou (Figures 13-17) discloses a frame (129, 130) located within the housing (111) and configured to support the lifter assembly (115) and the primary guide member (128; Para. 0079; note Figure 14 clearly shows an internal frame supporting the gearing of 115).
Regarding Claim 29, Saitou (Figures 13-17) discloses the rotational axis (E2, E3) of the lifter assembly (115) is transverse to the first axis (E1 as shown).
Regarding Claim 30, Saitou (Figures 13-17) discloses the first eccentric pin (157) has a first height and the second eccentric pin (158, 202) has a second height (as shown in Figure 14) but does not readily disclose the second height is greater than the first height and instead discloses the first height being greater. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have reconfigured the heights of the pins and the protrusions (204-206) such that the first pin is shorter than the second pins because Applicant has not disclosed that such arrangement provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Applicant’s invention to perform equally well with the pin and protrusion configuration of Saitou because in either instance the firing mechanism is returned.
Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify Saitou (Figures 13-17) to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
Regarding Claim 31, Saitou (Figures 13-17), as modified, discloses a bracket (structure comprising portions 204-206) coupled for movement with the piston (126), wherein the bracket (204-206) includes a first protrusion (204) and a second protrusion (205, 206) vertically spaced from the first protrusion along the first axis (E1 as shown), and wherein the first eccentric pin (157) is configured to engage the first protrusion (204) and the second eccentric pin (202, 158) is configured to engage the second protrusion (205, 206).
Regarding Claim 32, Saitou (Figures 13-17), as modified, discloses several features but does not disclose the bracket is integrally formed with the piston (126). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to form the bracket (204-206) integrally with the piston (126), since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1993). Please note that in the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations. See MPEP 2144.04 (V)(B)
Regarding Claim 33, Saitou (Figures 13-17), as modified, discloses the first protrusion (204) extends farther from the bracket than the second protrusion (205-206; note as modified in the rejection of claim 30, the extensions lengths would be switched).
Regarding Claim 34, Saitou (Figures 13-17) discloses a magazine (113) configured to receive fasteners (125); and a nosepiece (123) including a fastener driving channel (124), in which the driver blade (127) is located, from which consecutive fasteners from the magazine are driven (Para. 0076).
Claims 93-102 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saitou (US PGPUB 2021/0101272), in view of Enta (US PGPUB 2021/0138622).
Regarding Claim 93, Saitou (Figures 1-5) discloses a fastener driver (10; Figure 1) comprising:
a housing (11) defining a head portion (16) and a handle portion (18; Para. 0031);
a drive mechanism (motor 15) positioned within the housing (11);
a firing mechanism (striking mechanism 12) including a piston (24) and a driver blade (25) that are moveable from a top dead center position toward a bottom dead center position (i.e. Paras. 0030); and
a lifter assembly (a power conversion mechanism 14 including shaft 44, pin wheel 45, pins 45A-45H) operated by the drive mechanism (15) to rotate about a rotational axis (A2) to return the piston (24) and the driver blade (25) towards the TDC position (i.e. Paras 0043, 0058-0062, 0075, the lifter assembly (14) including:
an input shaft (44);
a hub (wheel 45) coupled for co-rotation with the input shaft (44);
a first eccentric pin (any of 45A-45H; Figures 2-3) located within a second recess of the hub (45; see Figures 1-2; note the alternative modification below) at a first radial distance (R1) relative to the rotational axis (A2; Para. 0044), and
a second eccentric pin (any other of 45A-45H) located within a first recess of the hub (shown in Figures 1-2; note the alternative modification below) at a second radial distance (R1) relative to the rotational axis (A2), the second radial distance being less than the first radial distance (R1; note Para. 0044 outlines the radii R1 is different for each pin 45A-45H).
However, Saitou fails to explicitly disclose the hub (45) is integrally formed with the input shaft (44) as a single piece and assuming arguendo that the eccentric pins of Saitou are not located within a recess in the hub (45), in which the Examiner does not concede to, further reference is made to Enta below.
Attention is brought to Enta which teaches another driver (1; Figures 1-2) comprising lifter assembly comprising an input shaft (41) and a hub (wheel 40) that are integrally formed (Para. 0024; shown in Figure 2) and wherein the lifter assembly further comprises pins (44) that are located within respective recesses of the hub (40; shown in Figure 2; further Paras. 0025-0026 discloses the pins 44 provided in the wheel and therefore must be situated within recesses thereof)
First, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have formed the input shaft and hub of Saitou integrally as a single piece as taught by Enta. By modifying Saitou in this manner, manufacturing of such pieces can be readily simplified and cost saving. Also, force from the shaft can be better transmitted to the hub/wheel. Further, it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1993). See MPEP 2144.04 (V)(B).
Alternatively regarding the location of the pins, while it can be at least implied the pins (45) of Saitou are within recesses of the hub (40), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have located the pins of Saitou in recesses of the hub as taught by Enta. By modifying Saitou in this manner, the pins can be readily located and attached securely to the hub.
Regarding Claim 94, Saitou (Figures 1-5), as modified, discloses the lifter assembly (14) includes an outer circumferential surface (of plates 45J, 45K) and each of the first and second eccentric pins (45A-45H) are positioned proximate the outer circumferential surface (of plates 45J, 45K as shown in Figure 3).
Regarding Claim 95, Saitou (Figures 1-5), as modified, discloses a primary guide member (cylinder 22) supported within the head portion (16) of the housing (11), wherein the primary guide member (22) defines a first axis (A1), and wherein the piston (24) is slidable along the primary guide member (22; Para. 0032).
Regarding Claim 96, Saitou (Figures 1-5), as modified, discloses a frame (holder 27) located within the housing (11) and configured to support the lifter assembly (14) and the primary guide member (22; Para. 0036; Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 97, Saitou (Figures 1-5), as modified, discloses the rotational axis (A2) of the lifter assembly (14) is transverse to the first axis (A1 as shown).
Regarding Claim 98, Saitou (Figures 1-5), as modified, discloses the first eccentric pin (45A-45H) has a first height and the second eccentric pin (45A-45H) has a second height that is greater than the first height (as shown in Figure 3, the diameters, which extend in the height direction are variable).
Alternatively regarding Claim 93, Saitou (Figures 13-17) discloses a fastener driver (110; Figure 13) comprising:
a housing (111) defining a head portion (119) and a handle portion (120);
a drive mechanism (114) positioned within the housing (111);
a firing mechanism (112) including a piston (plunger 126) and a driver blade (127) that are moveable from a top dead center (TDC) position toward a bottom dead center (BDC) position (i.e. Para. 0080, 0103); and
a lifter assembly (115 specifically 150, 151 and pins thereof) operated by the drive mechanism (114) to rotate about a rotational axis (E2 or E3) to return the piston (126) and the driver blade (127) towards the TDC position (Para. 0090, 0095-0100), the lifter assembly (115) including:
an input shaft (149);
a hub coupled (150) for co-rotation with the input shaft (149; Para. 0090);
a first eccentric pin (157) located within a first recess in the hub (see Figures 1-2; note alternative modification below) at a first radial distance (R11) relative to the respective rotational axis (E2), and
a second eccentric pin (157, 158, 202) located within a second recess in the hub (see Figures 1-2; note alternative modification below) at a second radial distance (R12) relative to the respective rotational axis (E3; Para. 0090, 0095-0100), wherein the second radial distance is less than the first radial distance (Para. 0092 outlines R12<R11).
However, Saitou fails to explicitly disclose the hub (45) is integrally formed with the input shaft (44) as a single piece and assuming arguendo that the eccentric pins of Saitou are not located within a recess in the hub (45), in which the Examiner does not concede to, further reference is made to Enta below.
Attention is brought to Enta (see previous rejection of Claim 93).
First, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have formed the input shaft and hub of Saitou integrally as a single piece as taught by Enta. By modifying Saitou in this manner, manufacturing of such pieces can be readily simplified and cost saving. Also, force from the shaft can be better transmitted to the hub/wheel. Further, it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1993). See MPEP 2144.04 (V)(B).
Alternatively regarding the location of the pins, while it can be at least implied the pins (45) of Saitou are within recesses of the hub (40), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have located the pins of Saitou in recesses of the hub as taught by Enta. By modifying Saitou in this manner, the pins can be readily located and attached securely to the hub.
Further, Saitou (Figures 13-17) does not readily disclose the first and second pins are located relative to the same rotational axis in the manner as claimed. Saitou (Figures 13-17) does further teach an alternative embodiment where hubs (150 and 151) of the lifter assembly can be one rotational element with several eccentric pins (“fourth engaging portions”) that comprise different radial distances (Para. 0120).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have utilized a singular rotational element/hub comprising several pins which comprise respective radial distances (i.e. R1 and R12) from a singular rotational axis thereof (i.e. E2) in the manner as outlined by Para. 0120 of Saitou as such a modification would lead to a more compact tool.
Regarding Claim 94, Saitou (Figures 13-17) discloses the lifter assembly (115) includes an outer circumferential surface (of 150,151) and each of the first and second eccentric pins (157, 158, 202) are positioned proximate the outer circumferential surface (as shown).
Regarding Claim 95, Saitou (Figures 13-17) discloses a primary guide member (128; Figure 14) supported within the head portion (119) of the housing (111), wherein the primary guide member (128) defines a first axis (E1), and wherein the piston (126) is slidable along the primary guide member (128; Para. 0080).
Regarding Claim 96, Saitou (Figures 13-17) discloses a frame (129, 130) located within the housing (111) and configured to support the lifter assembly (115) and the primary guide member (128; Para. 0079; note Figure 14 clearly shows an internal frame supporting the gearing of 115).
Regarding Claim 97, Saitou (Figures 13-17) discloses the rotational axis (E2,E3) of the lifter assembly (115) is transverse to the first axis (E1 as shown).
Regarding Claim 98, Saitou (Figures 13-17) discloses the first eccentric pin (157) has a first height and the second eccentric pin (158, 202) has a second height (as shown in Figure 14) but does not readily disclose the second height is greater than the first height and instead discloses the first height being greater. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have reconfigured the heights of the pins and the protrusions (204-206) such that the first pin is shorter than the second pins because Applicant has not disclosed that such arrangement provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Applicant’s invention to perform equally well with the pin and protrusion configuration of Saitou because in either instance the firing mechanism is returned.
Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify Saitou (Figures 13-17) to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
Regarding Claim 99, Saitou (Figures 13-17), as modified, discloses a bracket (structure comprising portions 204-206) coupled for movement with the piston (126), wherein the bracket (204-206) includes a first protrusion (204) and a second protrusion (205, 206) vertically spaced from the first protrusion along the first axis (E1 as shown), and wherein the first eccentric pin (157) is configured to engage the first protrusion (204) and the second eccentric pin (202, 158) is configured to engage the second protrusion (205, 206).
Regarding Claim 100, Saitou (Figures 13-17), as modified, discloses several features but does not disclose the bracket is integrally formed with the piston (126). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to form the bracket (204-206) integrally with the piston (126), since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1993). Please note that in the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations. See MPEP 2144.04 (V)(B).
Regarding Claim 101, Saitou (Figures 13-17), as modified, discloses the first protrusion (204) extends farther from the bracket than the second protrusion (205-206; note as modified in the rejection of claim 30, the extensions lengths would be switched).
Regarding Claim 102, Saitou (Figures 13-17) discloses a magazine (113) configured to receive fasteners (125); and a nosepiece (123) including a fastener driving channel (124), in which the driver blade (127) is located, from which consecutive fasteners from the magazine are driven (Para. 0076).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See “Notice of References Cited”.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA G KOTIS whose telephone number is (571)270-0165. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 6am-430pm.
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.
/JOSHUA G KOTIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3731 10/8/2026
