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
The amendments filed July 14, 2026 have been entered. Accordingly, claims 6-11, 14-16, 18-21, and 23-29 are currently pending and have been examined. The examiner acknowledges the amendments of claims 6, 26, and 29. Claims 1-5, 12-13, 17, and 22 are cancelled by applicant. The previous 103 rejections have been modified due to applicants amendments. For the reason(s) set forth below, applicant’s arguments have not been found persuasive. The action is Final.
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.
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 6-8, 10-11, 15-16, 18, and 25-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scholz (US Pub. No. 2014/0024298) in view of Elfner (US Pub. No. 2015/0038064) and Machens US Pub. No. 2007/0056575).
Regarding claim 6, Scholz discloses: a hand-held work tool (Figures 1-6 and see also paragraph 0025) comprising an interface (see figure 1 annotated below Detail A) for holding the a circular cutting tool (see figure 1 annotated below showing portions of the interface (Detail A) operably holding a cutting tool (element 12)), an motor arranged to drive the circular cutting tool (see paragraph 0025 where the prior art discloses utilizing “an engine” (motor) which “drives” element 12 (circular cutting tool)), and a support arm (elements 10/11),
wherein the support arm is arranged to support the circular cutting tool on a first end of the support arm (see paragraph 0030 tool-side end (first end) of elements 10/11), and to support the electric motor at a second end of the support arm see paragraph 0030 engine-side end (second end) of elements 10/11) opposite to the first end (see figure 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
422
600
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Scholz discloses a different means of utilizing a motor (engine) to drive the cutting tool (see paragraph 0025), but appears to be silent of utilizing an electric motor arranged to drive the cutting tool, a battery compartment for holding a battery arranged to power the electric motor, wherein the support arm comprises a recess disposed at the second end of the support arm, a motor housing of the electric motor being disposed within the recess, and wherein the support arm is arranged to enclose at least 30% of a volume of the electric motor within the recess.
Elfner is also concerned in providing a hand-held work tool (Figures 1-8 and see also paragraph 0033) comprising a cutting tool (element 7), a support arm (element 5) arranged to support the circular cutting tool on a first end (see figures 6 and 9 annotated below Detail A), a second end (see figures 6 and 9 annotated below Detail B), an electric motor (combination of elements 19/20/37, see also paragraph 0037 where the prior art discloses element 19 as “a drive motor”, and see also paragraph 0013 where the prior art discloses the drive motor as “an electric motor”) arranged to drive the cutting tool (see paragraph 0041), a battery compartment for holding a battery arranged to power the electric motor (see paragraph 0035 where the prior art discloses in the housing “a rechargeable battery pack” (element 13) is provided for “supplying energy to the drive motor” and further discloses element 13 (battery) is inserted into “a compartment” (battery compartment)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the engine (motor) of Scholz with the electrical motor of Elfner and to further provide a battery compartment for holding a battery arranged to power the electric motor. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having an electrical motor powered by batteries would necessarily provide the same predictable result of driving the cutting tool during operations with a reasonable expectation of success. (See MPEP 2143.1 (B))
However, Scholz modified appears to be silent wherein the support arm comprises a recess disposed at the second end of the support arm, a motor housing of the electric motor being disposed within the recess, and wherein the support arm is arranged to enclose at least 30% of a volume of the electric motor within the recess.
Machens is also concerned in providing a hand-held work tool (Figures 1-6 and see also paragraph 0018) comprising a support arm (elements 2/11) and a motor (element 3 and see also paragraph 0019) arranged to drive a circular cutting tool (element 11 and see also paragraph 0019). Machens further teaches silent wherein the support arm comprises a recess (see figure 2 annotated below Detail A) disposed at the second end of the support arm (see figure 2 annotated below), a motor housing (phantom lines of element 3 as best showing in figure 2 annotated below) of the motor being disposed within the recess (see figure 2 annotated below), and wherein the support arm is arranged to enclose at least 30% of a volume of the motor within the recess (see figure 2 annotated below showing the motor (element 3) which includes the motor housing (phantom lines) entirely enclosed (i.e. 100%) within the recess (Detail A) of the support arm (elements 2/6), thus the support arm is necessarily arranged to enclose at least 30% of a volume of the motor within the recess).
PNG
media_image2.png
468
1307
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Scholz to incorporate the teachings of Machens to provide wherein the support arm comprises a recess disposed at the second end of the support arm, a motor housing of the motor being disposed within the recess, and wherein the support arm is arranged to enclose at least 30% of a volume of the motor within the recess. Thus, as modified, the electric motor would necessarily be disposed within the recess of the support arm. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having the electric motor disposed within the support arm would necessarily allow the tool to continue to function as intended while also providing the additional feature of having an exterior barrier provided by the support arm in order to protect and prevent the electric motor from outside obstacles during operations.
Regarding claim 7, Scholz modified discloses: the hand-held work tool according to claim 6, wherein the hand-held work tool comprises a fan (element 15), configured to generate a flow of cooling air (see paragraph 0026 where the prior art discloses element 15 as “a fan wheel” and see also paragraph 0012 where the prior art discloses an “air flow” provided by the fan wheel in the form “a cooling air”), and a belt guard (elements 21/22), wherein the belt guard and at least a part of the support arm are configured to enclose an interior space (see paragraph 0030), wherein a portion of the flow of cooling air is arranged to be guided via an opening (element 18) into the interior space (see paragraph 0029 and see also figure 2 showing air flow (arrows) arranged such that it enters the interior space via an opening (element 18)), thereby increasing an air pressure in the belt guard interior space above an ambient air pressure level (Giving that the prior art meets the structural limitations of the hand-held work tool including the fan generating the flow of cooling air, belt guard, the interior space, the opening, and there is no additional structural difference, thus the prior art would be capable of increasing an air pressure in the belt guard interior space above an ambient air pressure level, as recited.).
Regarding claim 8, Scholz modified discloses: the hand-held work tool according to claim 7, wherein the electric motor is arranged to drive the fan (see paragraph 0026 of prior art of Scholz disclosing the fan (element 15) being driven by the engine (motor), thus Scholz as modified (with the teaching of the electrical motor of Elfner now in place of the engine of Scholz (see rejection in page 6-7 above) would necessarily have the electrical motor arranged to drive the fan).
Regarding claim 11, Scholz modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claims 6-7 and 10, but appears to be silent wherein the opening has an area between 600mm2 and 1000mm2 or wherein the area of the air outlet is greater than an area of the opening.
However, it would have been it would have been to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Scholz to provide wherein the opening has an area between 600mm2 and 1000mm2, since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the hand-held work tool of Scholz modified would not operate differently with the claimed area range and would function appropriately having the claimed range. Lastly, applicant has not disclosed that the following claim limitations solves any stated problem, indicating additional “preferable” ranges (see page 40, ll. 9-15 of the specification). Furthermore, it would have been it would have been to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Scholz to provide wherein an area of the air outlet is greater than an area of the opening, since such modification would involve a mere change in the size of the component. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having a desired greater area of the air outlet would necessarily provide the predictable result of allowing sufficient air to flow inside the tool in order to cool the interior components of the tool. (See MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(A))
Regarding claim 15, Scholz modified discloses: the hand-held work tool according to claim 10, wherein the air outlet is located in an area of a lower portion of either the belt guard or the support arm (See figure 3 showing the air outlet (element 23) located at an area of a portion of the belt guard (element 21) and is capable of being located at a lower portion depending on relative orientation of the tool during operations.).
Regarding claim 18, Scholz modified discloses: the hand-held work tool according to claim 10, wherein the air outlet mainly is positioned at a lower half of the belt guard and/or the support arm when the hand-held work tool is in an upright rest position (See figure 3 showing the air outlet (element 23) located at an end portion of the belt guard (element 21) and is capable of positioned at a lower half when facing down and thus would be in an upright rest position).
Regarding claim 25, Scholz modified discloses: the hand-held work tool according to claim 6, wherein at least 20% of a volume of the electric motor is enclosed by the recess, and wherein at least 20% of an axial length of the electric motor is enclosed by the recess (As described in the rejection of claim 6 above (see pages 5-6), as modified, see figure 2 annotated above of prior art Machens showing the motor (element 3) which includes the motor housing (phantom lines) entirely enclosed (i.e. 100%) within the recess (Detail A), thus at least 20% of a volume of the electric motor is necessarily enclosed by the recess, and wherein at least 20% of an axial length of the electric motor is necessarily enclosed by the recess) .
Regarding claim 26, Scholz discloses: a hand-held work tool comprising (Figures 1-6 and see also paragraph 0025) an interface (see figure 1 annotated below Detail A) for holding a circular cutting tool (see figure 1 annotated below showing portions of the interface (Detail A) operably holding a cutting tool (element 12)), a motor arranged to drive the circular cutting tool (see paragraph 0025 where the prior art discloses utilizing “an engine” (motor) which “drives” element 12 (circular cutting tool)), and a support arm (elements 10/11),
wherein the support arm is arranged to support the circular cutting tool on a first end (see paragraph 0030 tool-side end (first end) of element 11) of the support arm, and to support the motor at a second end (see paragraph 0030 engine-side end (second end) of element 11 )of the support arm opposite to the first end (see figure 3),
wherein the hand-held work tool comprises a fan (element 15) configured to generate a flow of cooling air (see paragraph 0026 where the prior art discloses element 15 as “a fan wheel” and see also paragraph 0012 where the prior art discloses an “air flow” provided by the fan wheel in the form “a cooling air”), and a belt guard (elements 21/22),
wherein the belt guard and at least a part of the support arm are configured to enclose an interior space (see paragraph 0030),
wherein a portion of the flow of cooling air is arranged to be guided via an opening (element 18) into the interior space (see paragraph 0029 and see also figure 2 showing air flow (arrows) arranged such that it enters the interior space via an opening (element 18)), thereby increasing an air pressure in the belt guard interior space above an ambient air pressure level (Giving that the prior art meets the structural limitations of the hand-held work tool including the fan generating the flow of cooling air, belt guard, the interior space, the opening, and there is no additional structural difference, thus the prior art would be capable of increasing an air pressure in the belt guard interior space above an ambient air pressure level, as recited.),
wherein the belt guard comprises an air outlet (see figure 3 showing a portion of the belt guard (element 21) comprising an air outlet (element 23)) through which the flow of cooling air exits the interior space (see paragraph 0029-0031), the air outlet having a flow area that defines a rate at which the flow of cooling air exits the interior space (See figure 4-6 showing the air outlet (element 23) comprising an area, and giving that the prior art meets the structural limitations of the hand-held work tool including the air outlet with the area, and there is no additional structural difference, thus the prior art would be capable of having the air outlet having a flow area that defines a rate at which the flow of cooling air exits the interior space, as recited.) , and
wherein the air pressure in the belt guard interior space increases above the ambient air pressure level by a desired amount during operation due to the flow area of the air outlet defining the rate at which the flow of cooling air exits the interior space to be less than the rate at which the flow of cooling air is guided into the interior space (See figure 4-6 showing the air outlet (element 23) comprising an area, and giving that the prior art meets the structural limitations of the hand-held work tool including the air outlet with the area, belt guard, the interior space, and there is no additional structural difference, thus the prior art would be capable of having wherein the air pressure in the belt guard interior space increases above the ambient air pressure level by a desired amount during operation due to the flow area of the air outlet defining the rate at which the flow of cooling air exits the interior space to be less than the rate at which the flow of cooling air is guided into the interior space, as recited.).
PNG
media_image1.png
422
600
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Scholz discloses a different means of utilizing a motor (engine) to drive the cutting tool (see paragraph 0025), but appears to be silent of utilizing an electric motor arranged to drive the cutting tool, a battery compartment for holding a battery arranged to power the electric motor, and wherein the support arm is arranged to enclose a majority portion of the electric motor within a recess disposed at the second end of the support arm.
Elfner is also concerned in providing a hand-held work tool (Figures 1-8 and see also paragraph 0033) comprising a cutting tool (element 7), a support arm (element 5) arranged to support the circular cutting tool on a first end (see figures 6 and 9 annotated below Detail A), a second end (see figures 6 and 9 annotated below Detail B), an electric motor (combination of elements 19/20/37, see also paragraph 0037 where the prior art discloses element 19 as “a drive motor”, and see also paragraph 0013 where the prior art discloses the drive motor as “an electric motor”) arranged to drive the cutting tool (see paragraph 0041), a battery compartment for holding a battery arranged to power the electric motor (see paragraph 0035 where the prior art discloses in the housing “a rechargeable battery pack” (element 13) is provided for “supplying energy to the drive motor” and further discloses element 13 (battery) is inserted into “a compartment” (battery compartment)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the engine (motor) of Scholz with the electrical motor of Elfner and to further provide a battery compartment for holding a battery arranged to power the electric motor. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having an electrical motor powered by batteries would necessarily provide the same predictable result of driving the cutting tool during operations with a reasonable expectation of success. (See MPEP 2143.1 (B))
However, Scholz modified appears to be silent wherein the support arm is arranged to enclose a majority portion of the electric motor within a recess disposed at the second end of the support arm.
Machens is also concerned in providing a hand-held work tool (Figures 1-6 and see also paragraph 0018) comprising a support arm (elements 2/11) and a motor (element 3 and see also paragraph 0019) arranged to drive a circular cutting tool (element 11 and see also paragraph 0019). Machens further teaches silent wherein the support arm is arranged to enclose a majority portion of the motor within a recess (see figure 2 annotated below Detail A) disposed at the second end of the support arm (see figure 2 annotated below showing the motor (element 3) entirely enclosed (i.e. 100%) within the recess (Detail A) of the support arm (elements 2/6) at a second end, thus the support arm is necessarily arranged is arranged to enclose a majority portion of the electric motor within a recess disposed at the second end of the support arm).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Scholz to incorporate the teachings of Machens to provide wherein the support arm is arranged to enclose a majority portion of the electric motor within a recess disposed at the second end of the support arm. Thus, as modified, the electric motor would necessarily be disposed within the recess of the support arm. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having the electric motor disposed within the support arm would necessarily allow the tool to continue to function as intended while also providing the additional feature of having an exterior barrier provided by the support arm in order to protect and prevent the electric motor from outside obstacles during operations.
Regarding claim 27, Scholz modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claim 26, but appears to be silent wherein an area of the air outlet is greater than an area of the opening.
However, it would have been it would have been to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Scholz to provide wherein an area of the air outlet is greater than an area of the opening, since such modification would involve a mere change in the size of the component. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having a desired greater area of the air outlet would necessarily provide the predictable result of allowing sufficient air to flow inside the tool in order to cool the interior components of the tool. (See MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(A))
Regarding claim 28, Scholz modified discloses: the hand-held work tool according to claim 26, wherein the air outlet is located at a rear end portion of either the belt guard or the support arm (see figure 3 showing the air outlet (element 23) at a rear portion (right end) of a portion of the belt guard (element 21)), said rear end portion being the portion of the belt guard and support arm that is proximate to a user of the hand-held work tool (Giving that the prior discloses the air outlet located in the rear end portion of the belt guard, thus the prior art would be capable of having said rear end portion being the portion of the belt guard and support arm that is proximate to a user of the hand-held work tool, as recited.).
Regarding claim 29, Scholz discloses: a hand-held work tool (Figures 1-6 and see also paragraph 0025) comprising an interface (see figure 1 annotated below Detail A) for holding a circular cutting tool (see figure 1 annotated below showing portions of the interface (Detail A) operably holding a cutting tool (element 12)), a motor arranged to drive the circular cutting tool (see paragraph 0025 where the prior art discloses utilizing “an engine” (motor) which “drives” element 12 (circular cutting tool)), and a support arm (element 11),
wherein the support arm is arranged to support the circular cutting tool on a first end (see paragraph 0030 tool-side end (first end) of element 11) of the support arm, and to support the motor at a second end (see paragraph 0030 engine-side end (second end) of element 11) of the support arm opposite to the first end (see figure 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
422
600
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Scholz discloses a different means of utilizing a motor (engine) to drive the cutting tool (see paragraph 0025), but appears to be silent of utilizing an electric motor arranged to drive the cutting tool, a battery compartment for holding a battery arranged to power the electric motor, wherein the support arm comprises a recess disposed at the second end of the support arm, a motor housing of the electric motor being disposed within the recess, wherein a bottom portion of the recess supports the electric motor in an axial direction, and wherein the support arm is arranged to entirely enclose the electric motor within the recess.
Elfner is also concerned in providing a hand-held work tool (Figures 1-8 and see also paragraph 0033) comprising a cutting tool (element 7), a support arm (element 5) arranged to support the circular cutting tool on a first end (see figures 6 and 9 annotated below Detail A), a second end (see figures 6 and 9 annotated below Detail B), an electric motor (combination of elements 19/20/37, see also paragraph 0037 where the prior art discloses element 19 as “a drive motor”, and see also paragraph 0013 where the prior art discloses the drive motor as “an electric motor”) arranged to drive the cutting tool (see paragraph 0041), a battery compartment for holding a battery arranged to power the electric motor (see paragraph 0035 where the prior art discloses in the housing “a rechargeable battery pack” (element 13) is provided for “supplying energy to the drive motor” and further discloses element 13 (battery) is inserted into “a compartment” (battery compartment) provided in the housing).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the engine (motor) of Scholz with the electrical motor of Elfner and to further provide a battery compartment for holding a battery arranged to power the electric motor. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having an electrical motor powered by batteries would necessarily provide the same predictable result of driving the cutting tool during operations with a reasonable expectation of success. (See MPEP 2143.1 (B))
However, Scholz modified appears to be silent wherein the support arm comprises a recess disposed at the second end of the support arm, a motor housing of the electric motor being disposed within the recess, wherein a bottom portion of the recess supports the electric motor in an axial direction, and wherein the support arm is arranged to entirely enclose the electric motor within the recess.
Machens is also concerned in providing a hand-held work tool (Figures 1-6 and see also paragraph 0018) comprising a support arm (elements 2/11) and a motor (element 3 and see also paragraph 0019) arranged to drive a circular cutting tool (element 11 and see also paragraph 0019). Machens further teaches silent wherein the support arm comprises a recess (see figure 2 annotated below Detail A) disposed at the second end of the support arm (see figure 2 annotated below), a motor housing (phantom lines of element 3 as best showing in figure 2 annotated below) of the motor being disposed within the recess (see figure 2 annotated below), wherein a bottom portion of the recess supports the electric motor in an axial direction (see figure 2 annotated below), and wherein the support arm is arranged to entirely enclose the electric motor within the recess (see figure 2 annotated below showing the motor (element 3) which includes the motor housing (phantom lines) entirely enclosed (i.e. 100%) within the recess (Detail A) of the support arm (elements 2/6)).
PNG
media_image2.png
468
1307
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Scholz to incorporate the teachings of Machens to provide wherein the support arm comprises a recess disposed at the second end of the support arm, a motor housing of the electric motor being disposed within the recess, wherein a bottom portion of the recess supports the electric motor in an axial direction, and wherein the support arm is arranged to entirely enclose the electric motor within the recess. Thus, as modified, the electric motor would necessarily be disposed within the recess of the support arm. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having the electric motor disposed within the support arm would necessarily allow the tool to continue to function as intended while also providing the additional feature of having an exterior barrier provided by the support arm in order to protect and prevent the electric motor from outside obstacles during operations.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scholz (US Pub. No. 2014/0024298) in view of Elfner (US Pub. No. 2015/0038064) and Machens US Pub. No. 2007/0056575) as applied to claims 6-7 above, and further in view of Moores (US Pub. No. 2002/0034682).
Regarding claim 9, Scholz modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claims 6-7, but appears to be silent wherein a cooling air conduit is arranged to guide a portion of the flow of cooling air towards the battery compartment for cooling the battery.
Moores is also concerned in providing a hand-held work tool (Figure 1 and see also paragraph 0034-0035) comprising a motor (element 32), flow of cooling air (see arrows in figure 1), a battery compartment (element 34) for holding a battery (element 36 and see also paragraph 0035 where the prior art discloses element 36 as “a plurality of battery cells”) and wherein a cooling air conduit (element 40) is arranged to guide a portion of the flow of cooling air towards the battery compartment for cooling the battery (See Figure 1 showing portions of the flow of cooling air (arrows) entering and being guided via the cooling air conduit 9element 40) towards the battery compartment (element 34) and see also paragraph 0035 where the prior art discloses element 40 is used “to distribute the fluid flow around” element 36 (battery) “so that all of the battery cells are cooled”.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Scholz to incorporate the teachings of Moores to provide wherein a cooling air conduit is arranged to guide a portion of the flow of cooling air towards the battery compartment for cooling the battery. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that directing the cooling air to the batteries via the cooling air conduit would necessarily maintain batteries within a desired temperature range for optimum performance and prevent overheating.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scholz (US Pub. No. 2014/0024298) in view of Elfner (US Pub. No. 2015/0038064) and Machens US Pub. No. 2007/0056575) as applied to claims 6-7 and 10 above, and further in view of Bian (WO 2019096223).
Regarding claim 14, Scholz modified discloses: the hand-held work tool according to claim 10, wherein the air outlet is located at a rear end portion of either the belt guard or the support arm (see figure 3 showing the air outlet (element 23) at a rear portion (right end) of a portion of the belt guard (element 21)), said rear end portion being the portion of the belt guard and support arm that is proximate to a user of the hand held work tool (Giving that the prior discloses the air outlet located in the rear end portion of the belt guard, thus the prior art would be capable of having the rear end portion being the portion of the belt guard and support arm that is proximate to a user of the hand held work tool, as recited.).
However, Scholz modified appears to be silent wherein the air outlet comprises a plurality of air outlets.
Bian is also concerned in providing a hand-held work tool (Figures 1-9 and see also paragraph 0075) comprising a fan (element 35 and see also paragraph 0080) generating a cooling air (see paragraph 0080), an air outlet (element 121), and wherein the air outlet comprises a plurality of air outlets (see paragraph 0192 where the prior art discloses the number of air outlets “can be increased, and an additional group of air outlets”, thus having a plurality of outlets).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Scholz to incorporate the teachings of Bian to provide wherein the air outlet comprises a plurality of air outlets. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having a plurality of air outlets would necessarily increase the discharge amount of hot air and improving the heat dissipation efficiency of the motor as disclosed by Bian (see paragraph 0192).
Claim 19 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scholz (US Pub. No. 2014/0024298) in view of Elfner (US Pub. No. 2015/0038064) and Machens US Pub. No. 2007/0056575) as applied to claims 6-7 and 10 above, and further in view of Iida (US Pub. No. 2014/0175721).
Regarding claim 19, Scholz modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claims 6-7 and 10, but appears to be silent wherein the opening is one of a plurality of openings located along a circle surrounding a rotational axis of the electric motor.
Iida is also concerned in providing a hand-held work tool (Figures 1-5 and see also paragraph 0019-0025) comprising a motor (element 30), an opening (see figures 2/4 and paragraph 0039/0042 where the prior art defines a flow path (element CA) that is used to cool the engine) and wherein the opening is one of a plurality of openings (the other opening TA is diverted to a passageway used to suck dust (see paragraph 0038)) located along a circle surrounding a rotational axis (rotational axis of element 35) of the electric motor (see annotated figure 4 below showing the plurality of openings located around a circle (it is noted that the claim does not require the circle to be located around a center of the rotational axis of the motor (element 30), only needs to surround the rotational axis (axis of element 35)).
PNG
media_image3.png
798
1246
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Scholz to incorporate the teachings of Iida to provide wherein the opening is one of a plurality of openings located along a circle surrounding a rotational axis of the electric motor. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having a plurality of openings would necessarily increase the discharge amount of hot air and increase the amount of cooling air passing through the inner components of the tool.
Regarding claim 21, Scholz modified discloses the hand-held work tool according to claim 19, wherein a shortest distance between the rotational axis of the motor and the air outlet is greater than a shortest distance between said rotational axis and the opening (See figure 3 showing air outlet (element 23) is positioned on an opposite end of the support arm (element 11), opposite the engine side (element 22) of the belt guard (as described in paragraph 0030), see figure 1 showing the opening (element 18) where the air comes in is placed near the motor end (see paragraph 0029) being closer to the motor axis (middle point of element 25 as best shown in figure 1), thus the opening having a shortest distance between the rotational axis of the motor and the outlet is greater than a shortest distance between said rotational axis and the opening) ,wherein the support arm comprises a pair of cooling flanges (see annotated figure 2 below Detail B) and wherein the opening is located between the pair of cooling flanges (see annotated figure 2 below showing the openings (see gaps where arrows are passing through) located between the pair of cooling flanges).
PNG
media_image4.png
922
1270
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scholz (US Pub. No. 2014/0024298) in view of Elfner (US Pub. No. 2015/0038064), Machens US Pub. No. 2007/0056575), and Iida (US Pub. No. 2014/0175721) as applied to claims 6-7, 10, and 19 above, and further in view Bian (WO 2019096223).
Regarding claim 20, Scholz modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claims 6-7, 10, and 19 but appears to be silent wherein the air outlet comprises a plurality of air outlets which span over an angle relative to the rotational axis of the electric motor, wherein said angle is greater than 20 degrees, and wherein the plurality of air outlets are located at least partly to a rear of said rotational axis.
Bian is also concerned in providing a hand-held work tool (Figures 1-9 and see also paragraph 0075) comprising a fan (element 35 and see also paragraph 0080) generating a cooling air (see paragraph 0080), an air outlet (element 121), and wherein the air outlet comprises a plurality of air outlets (see paragraph 0192 where the prior art discloses the number of air outlets “can be increased, and an additional group of air outlets”, thus having a plurality of outlets).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Scholz to incorporate the teachings of Bian to provide wherein the air outlet comprises a plurality of air outlets. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having a plurality of air outlets would necessarily increase the discharge amount of hot air and improving the heat dissipation efficiency of the motor as disclosed by Bian (see paragraph 0192).
Furthermore, regarding the claim limitation of the plurality of outlets which span over an angle relative to the rotational axis of the electric axle, wherein said angle is greater than 20 degrees, as noted in the rejection of claim 1 above (see pages 5-6), the motor rotates around an axis (see specifically figure 1) relative to said axis (the outlets position in the apparatus can be defined in terms of angle and distance from a point, or in this case the rotational axis). Additionally, it would have been it would have been to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Scholz to provide wherein said angle is greater than 20 degrees, since such modification would involve a mere change in the size of the component. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having the plurality of outlets spanning over a desired angle would necessarily provide the predictable result of allowing sufficient air to flow inside the tool in order to cool the interior components of the tool (See MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(A)). Furthermore, applicant has failed to provide any critically regarding the claimed degrees would solve any stated problem while also providing alternate preferable angles (see page 41, ll. 11-16 of the specification).
Lastly, regarding the claim limitation of wherein the air outlets are located at least partly to a rear of said axis. As shown in figure 3 showing the air outlet (element 23) located at an end portion of the belt guard (element 21) and would be capable of occurring depending on how the user holds the tool, and the relative orientation of the tool for example when positioned in a rest position where the air outlet 23, fig. 3 is facing down (plural air outlets, as modified), then the air outlet is in the lower half of the belt guard considering that it is at the extreme bottom end thereof.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scholz (US Pub. No. 2014/0024298) in view of Elfner (US Pub. No. 2015/0038064) and Machens US Pub. No. 2007/0056575) as applied to claims 6 above, and further in view of Droste (GB 2450721).
Regarding claim 23, Scholz modified discloses: the hand-held work tool according to claim 6, wherein the hand-held work tool comprises a first part (see figure 1 annotated below Detail A) and a second part (see figure 1 annotated below Detail B),
the first part comprising the interface for holding a cutting tool (see figure 1 annotated below showing the first part (Detail A) having portions of the interface that hold the cutting tool (element 12)) and the support arm tool (see figure 1 annotated below showing the first part (Detail A) having portions of the support arm (element 11).
PNG
media_image5.png
454
765
media_image5.png
Greyscale
However, Scholz modified appears to be silent wherein the first part comprises the electric motor arranged to drive the cutting tool, the second part comprising the battery compartment, and wherein the first part and the second part are arranged vibrationally isolated from each other.
Elfner is also concerned in providing a hand-held work tool (Figures 1-8 and see also paragraph 0033) comprising a cutting tool (element 7), an electric motor (element 19, see also paragraph 0037 where the prior art discloses element 19 as “a drive motor”, and see also paragraph 0013 where the prior art discloses the drive motor as “an electric motor”) arranged to drive the cutting tool (see paragraph 0041), a battery compartment for holding a battery arranged to power the electric motor (see paragraph 0035 where the prior art discloses in the housing “a rechargeable battery pack” (element 13) is provided for “supplying energy to the drive motor” and further discloses element 13 (battery) is inserted into “a compartment” (battery compartment) provided in the housing.), a first part (see figures annotated figures 1 and 4 below Detail A) comprising an interface (element 23) for holding a cutting tool (element 7), a support arm (element 12), the electric motor arranged to drive the cutting tool (see annotated figure 4 below showing the motor (element 19) arranged on the section of the first part), a second part (see figures annotated figure 1 below Detail B), wherein the second part comprising the battery compartment (see figure 1 annotated below showing the second part (Detail B) including the battery compartment (Detail B)).
PNG
media_image6.png
974
732
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Scholz to incorporate the teachings of Elfner to provide wherein the first part comprises the electric motor arranged to drive the cutting tool, the second part comprising the battery compartment. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having the hand-held work tool with only two parts comprising the claimed components would necessarily provide a more compact tool allowing the user to easily maneuver during operations.
However, Scholz modified appears to be silent wherein the first part and the second part are arranged vibrationally isolated from each other.
Droste is also concerned in providing a hand-held work tool (Figures 1-2 and see also Abstract) comprising a first part (element 6), a second part (element 2), and wherein the first part and the second part are arranged vibrationally isolated from each other (see page 14, ll.30-34 and page 15, ll. 1-5 where the prior art discloses utilizing “a vibration dampening material” between the two parts (elements 2/6), thus the first part (element 6) and the second part (element 2) are arranged vibrationally (via the vibration dampening material) isolated from each other).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Scholz to incorporate the teachings of Droste to provide wherein the first part and the second part are arranged vibrationally isolated from each other. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize vibrationally isolating the plurality of different parts would necessarily limit unnecessary movements between the parts, thus increasing sturdiness of the tool during operations.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scholz (US Pub. No. 2014/0024298) in view of Elfner (US Pub. No. 2015/0038064) and Machens US Pub. No. 2007/0056575) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Schuele (DE102012223715).
Regarding claim 24, Scholz modified discloses: the hand-held work tool according to claim 6, wherein the recess comprises one or more cooling flanges (see figure 2 annotated below Detail A) arranged to conduct heat away from the electric motor (see arrows showing the one or more cooling flanges conducting air flow (arrows) away portions of the tool, thus being capable of conduct heat away from the electric motor).
PNG
media_image7.png
876
1218
media_image7.png
Greyscale
However, Scholz modified appears to be silent wherein the support arm and the recess are formed from a thermally conductive material.
Schuele is also concerned in providing a hand-held work tool (Figures 1-2b and see also paragraph 0025) comprising a support arm (element 14) and a recess (see figure 2a annotated below Detail A), and wherein the support arm and the recess are formed from a thermally conductive material the support arm and the recess are formed from a thermally conductive material (As per disclosure, see page 012, ll. 28-31 of the specification, “the support surface 330 makes up the bottom portion of the recess and a cylinder shaped wall 350 extends out from a perimeter of the support surface” , similarly figure 2a annotated below shows the support arm (element 14) having a support surface and a wall extending out from the perimeter of the support surface which make up the recess (Detail A), and see also 0030 where the prior art discloses element 14 being “formed at least partially from a thermally conductive plastic or from another thermally conductive material”).
PNG
media_image8.png
457
874
media_image8.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Scholz to incorporate the teachings of Schuele to provide wherein the support arm and the recess are formed from a thermally conductive material. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that providing the tool with thermally conductive material would necessarily provide preferably good dissipation of thermal energy in an operating state can be achieved as disclosed by Schuele (see paragraph 0011). Lastly, applicant has not disclosed that the following claim limitations solves any stated problem and has not placed any criticality on the claimed percentages, indicating that the percentage is “preferably” within the claimed range and therefore fails to provide any unexpected result (see page 002, ll. 13-16 and page 013, ll. 14-16 of the specification).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 07/14/2026 have been fully considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the current rejection.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBERTO SAENZ whose telephone number is (313)446-6610. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-4:30PM 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, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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.
/A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights