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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/25/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 21, 23-26, 34, 37-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In this case, independent claim 21 recites the subject matter “said laser torch head can be activated only if said top interlock switch is in said lock position” was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. In particular, the limitation “said interlock switch” is interpreted as one top interlock switch such that claim 21 is construed as if only the one top interlock switch is in said locked position, the laser is activated and this limitation is not disclosed in the specification. In contract, the specification discloses, all the top, middle, and bottom switches must be in the locked positions/none of the switches are in the unlocked position in order for the laser to be activated. In other words, if all the top, middle and bottom switches are in the locked positions, but at least one of the top, middle and bottom switches is in unlocked position, the laser would not be activated.
Hence, claim 21 fails to comply with the written description requirement. It is suggested to amend the limitation as “said laser torch head can be deactivated an unlock
Claims 23-26, 34, 37-38 are also rejected as being dependent upon claim 21.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 21 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Trumpf teaches a frame 21, the top protection assembly with the opening as seen in Fig. 2, Huonker teaches an annular shield brush assembly 15 to cover the opening to prevent the laser to seal the laser light for coming out, and Harrison further teaches, complex mechanical interlocks and shutter systems designed to disable the laser when safety sensors are triggered.
However, Trumpf does not explicitly teach the top protection assembly is removable or interlocked with a frame, Huonker does not explicitly teach an annular shield brush assembly 15 is removable or interlocked with a frame, hence, the modification of Harrion to make “said laser torch head can be deactivated if said at least one top interlock switch is in an unlock position” or “all the top, middle and bottom switches are in locked positions in order to activate the laser head” to reach the claimed invention would be unreasonable and based on hindsight since there is no suggestion or motivation in the references to indicate obviousness in such extensive changes to Trumpf and/or Huonker. No additional evidence was found to reasonably render a case of obviousness against the claimed invention.
Response to Amendment/Response to Arguments
The amendment of 11/25/2025 is acknowledged.
Applicant's arguments filed 11/25/2025 have been fully considered but a decision on determining allowability could not be made because the claims are presently rejected under 112a as set forth and explained above.
The Double Patenting rejections as being unpatentable over claims of co-pending application 15403450 or US patent 10807200 have been withdrawn in view of the TD on 10/21/2025.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VY T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday approx. 8:00 am-4:00 pm ET.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached on (571) 272-9059. 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.
/VY T NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761