DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Claims 26-30 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 19 June 2025.
Claim Objections
Claims 26-30 are objected to because of the following informalities: the previously restricted and withdrawn claims are not included in the current claim set. 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 16, 18 and 20 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 claim 16:
The term “lamella holder” is unclear because there is not disclosure of how the corresponding structure (7) functions to “hold” the lamella of the filter. To the contrary, the structure is understood to merely have structure that engages or impacts the lamellae, and will be treated as such for the sake of the current Office Action. The amendments to the claim are not understood to clarify in any manner how the structure disclosed as the “lamella holder” actually holds the lamella.
The amended limitation that the lamella holder is “in form-fitting engagement with the filter” is further unclear because the application fails to provide any explanation of how the lamella holder is “form-fitting”. The common definition of “form-fitting” typically relates to an equivalent shape, whereas the shape of the lamella holder in the drawings is clearly a different shape than the lamella of the filter (although similar in shape at the points of contact with the filter, the filter lamella are substantially longer than the engaging fingers of the lamella holder). At best, the disclosed lamella holder at least partially conforms to a shape of the filter lamella, and the limitation will be treated as such for the sake of the current Office Action.
Regarding claim 20, the limitation “rotationally fixed” is unclear because it may suggest that rotation is prevented (fixed from rotation) or fixed from movement other than rotation. As best understood by the examiner, the limitation is considered to be intended to define that rotation is prevented, and will be treated as such for the sake of the current Office Action.
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 –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 16-19 and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JPS 50115453U (to be referred to hereinafter as JP453).
Regarding claim 16, JP453 discloses a dust collecting device that would be inherently capable of collecting dust from a power tool, the dust collecting device comprising: a collecting container (16/17) for receiving dust; a filter (8/9) with lamellae (8) and a rotatable shaft (12) arranged in the collecting container, the shaft being connected to a lamella holder (13/21; with fingers 21 considered to be equivalent in structure and function as the claimed lamellae “holder”), the lamella holder being in form-fitting engagement with the filter (with pointed end portions of the lamella holder of JP453 clearly shown to at least partially conforms to a shape of the filter lamella due to an equivalent angle, and thus reading on the new limitation in the same manner as the disclosed invention), the lamella holder, through a rotary movement of the shaft, being movable in an axial direction (arrows shown in Fig. 2), and the lamella holder cleaning the filter by a return movement.
Regarding claim 17, JP453 further discloses, in the collecting container, a spring (14) against which the lamella holder is pressable during movement in the axial direction.
Regarding claim 18, JP453 further discloses that the shaft has a first profile (cam surface of 12) and the lamella holder has a second profile (end of the shaft that rests against the cam of 12), the first profile and the second profile designed to correspond to one another (the respective surfaces are considered to correspond to one another due to the engagement between the surfaces).
Regarding claim 19, JP453 further discloses that the second profile is engageable with the first profile of the shaft, so that the lamella holder is movable in the axial direction by a rotary movement of the shaft.
Regarding claim 21, JP453 further discloses that the lamella holder has fingers (21) designed to engage in the lamellae of the filter or in free spaces between the lamellae of the filter.
Regarding claim 22, JP453 further discloses that the collecting container has a rotary handle (11), the rotary handle being designed to set the shaft in rotation.
Regarding claim 23, JP453 further discloses that the rotary handle (11) is present in a recess of a housing of the collecting container (the handle may be considered to include the shaft of the handle of JP 453 passing through a recess in the outer wall of the housing, which is considered to read on the limitation in the same manner as the disclosed invention of the current application, which has a linear “handle” portion, mounted on a circular base that connects to the shaft, wherein only the circular base that is connected to the actual handle is shown to be positioned in the recess).
Regarding claim 24, JP453 further discloses that the filter is arranged in an inlet region (near the inlet or may be considered wo be within the inlet of the filter holding portion of the collecting container) of the collecting container of the dust collecting device.
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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JPS 50115453U.
Regarding claim 20, JP453 discloses that the lamellae holder moves in a linear direction, and also discloses “reciprocating slides” (as translated in the English language translation of JP453), wherein the disclosure of the linear motion and the term “reciprocating slides” suggesting only a linear motion, which would also obviously be understood to prevent intended operation of the lamellae holder rotated away from the filter, such that is would have obviously been understood to anyone of ordinary skill in the art that the lamella holder is mounted in a rotationally fixed manner (to prevent rotation) to properly function.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Machida (JP 2019-111595) in view of JPS 50115453U.
Machida discloses a power tool comprising a dust collecting device including a dust container (66) and filter (72) with lamellae (73), and teaches several alternative embodiments for a filter cleaning device (Figs. 9A-12), wherein it also would have been obvious to provide an alternative filter cleaning device of JP453 as an alternative cleaner, known in the art, to provide a similar desired filter cleaning function, wherein the filter cleaner of JP453 would be preferred due to the fingers (21) making contact with the filter at plural locations and the impact provided during motion disclosed by JP453, as opposed to merely brushing limited portions of the filter, as taught by Machida.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7 October 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the arguments relating to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), the amendment to claim 16 has not clarified the claim, but has only raised additional issues, as discussed above. The arguments relating to claim 20 do not clarify the limitation because being “movable in an axial direction, as claimed and disclosed, does not provide any clarifying function or structure to the claimed “rotationally fixed” terminology (i.e. something may be movable in an axial direction and also movable rotationally).
Regarding the prior art rejections, as discussed supra, the term “form-fitting engagement” is unclear, and the structure disclosed by JP453 is considered to be equivalent to the claim limitation in the same manner as the structure disclosed for the current invention.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 2 of Remarks, filed 7 October 2025, with respect to the rejection of claims 21 and 23 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive and the rejection has been withdrawn.
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 BRYAN R MULLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4489. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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.
/BRYAN R MULLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723 8 December 2025