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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention II in the reply filed on 1/12/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Inventions and II are closely related and therefore not a burden on the examiner. This is not found persuasive because regardless of search method, invention of different limitations will require different search strategies, and times to consider the relevancy of collective references would increase proportionally as well. In this case the power tool of invention I has an adaptor that is not required in invention II. The second Invention includes a third power tool that is not required by the first invention. Thereby the Inventions require different structure and different components thus making a search burden upon the examiner.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim 1 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 1/12/2026.
Claim Status
Claim 1 is withdrawn.
Claims 2-9 have been examined below.
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(s) 2 and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over White et al. (US 2016/0020443 A1).
As to claim 2, White discloses a cordless power tool system (title) comprising:
a first power tool [0008] having a first power tool operating voltage (low power tool rated voltage) and a first power tool interface [0011] The first battery pack may be incapable of enabling operation of the second power tool or the third power tool.;
a second power [0008] tool having a second power tool operating voltage (medium power) and a second power tool interface that is different from the first power tool interface;
a third power tool [0008] having a third power tool operating voltage (high power) that is different than the first power tool operating voltage (lower) and a third power tool interface that is different from the first power tool interface;
a first battery pack (first battery pack with low) having a first battery pack nominal voltage that is substantially the same as the first power tool operating voltage and a first battery pack interface that is coupleable to the first power tool interface to provide power to the first power tool, but that is not coupleable to the second power tool interface or the third power tool interface; [0011] (The first battery pack may be incapable of enabling operation of the second power tool or the third power tool.) [0012]
a second battery pack (convertible battery pack [0008]) having a second battery pack interface that is coupleable to the second power tool interface of the second power tool and to the third power tool interface of the third power tool wherein the second battery pack is operable at a second battery pack nominal voltage that is substantially the same the second power tool operating voltage when coupled to the second power tool and is operable at a third battery pack nominal voltage that is substantially the same as the third power tool operating voltage when coupled to the third power tool, [0939] [0815] discloses that the battery pack interface includes rails and grooves that mechanically mate with power tool. And that the battery pack has a conversion element with projections or protrusion that extend from the battery pack interface.
wherein the second battery pack is configured to be coupled to the first power tool to provide power to the first power tool [0891].
Furthermore White discloses that the very high rated voltage power tools may be configured to receive electric power from a plurality of low rated voltage battery packs 20A1, medium rated voltage battery packs 20A2, or high rated voltage battery packs 20A3 that are connected to each other in series to have a total very high rated voltage, a plurality of low/medium rated voltage or medium/high rated voltage convertible battery packs 20A4 operating in their medium or high rated voltage configurations and connected to each other in series to have a total very high rated voltage. In one implementation, the power tools 10 include one or more battery pack interface(s) for coupling to any of the removable battery packs 20A, a terminal block for receiving power from the battery pack 20A, [0891] thereby allowing the second pack to be used in the first, second or third power tool.
However White does not disclose the second power tool operating voltage that is the same as the first power tool operating voltage. White discloses that the first and second power tools have different operating voltages however it would have been obvious to have a power tool with the same voltage operations as the first tool (low) because there are multiple low power tool that can be selected from such as a drill or an impact driver [0462].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to select the power tool from the low powered one because the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
As to claim 7, White discloses the cordless power tool system of claim 2, further comprising a third battery pack operable at the third battery pack nominal voltage and having a third battery pack interface that is coupleable to the third power tool interface of the third power tool but not to the first power tool interface of the first power tool or the second power tool interface of the second power tool. [0011]
As to claim 8, White discloses the cordless power tool system of claim 2, wherein the first power tool comprises at least one of a concrete drill, a concrete saw, a concrete vibrator, a plate compactor, a rammer, or a screed. [0472 low-drills]
As to claim 9, White discloses the cordless power tool system of claim 8, wherein the second power tool comprises at least one of a circular saw, a drill, a grinder, a miter saw, a reciprocating saw, a rotary hammer, or a table saw. [0472] (medium or low).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art reference does not disclose the limitation of further comprising an adaptor having a first adaptor interface configured to be coupled to the first power tool interface of the first power tool and a second adaptor interface configured to the coupled to the second battery pack interface of the second battery pack to couple the second battery pack to the first power tool.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nishibe et al. (US 2011/0197389 A1) discloses power tools 50 (low voltage) 70 (high voltage) and 100 (high voltage) and a low voltage battery pack 10 and a high voltage battery pack. The high voltage tool (70) can be powered with two low voltage battery packs (10) (via adaptor 200 or 300) or one high voltage battery back (30).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIA J LAIOS whose telephone number is (571)272-9808. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10am-6pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
/Maria Laios/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights