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 . This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 12/08/2025 in which claims 1-20 are pending, claims 4, 7-10, 16-18 are withdrawn, and claims 1, 2, 11, 14 and 19 are currently amended.
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 1-3, 5, 6, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Densow (U.S. Patent 3,970,178) in view of in view of Fisher U.S. Patent (7,743,513). In regards to claim 1, Densow discloses a chainsaw comprising: a guide bar (21) supporting a chain (23); a motor (11) configured to drive the chain (23), the motor (11) receiving power from an electrical energy source of the chainsaw; a sprocket (27) operably coupled between the motor (11) and the chain (23) to impart driving force from the motor to the chain; and an operating device (clutch shoes and drum 43-45 / 47) operably coupled between the motor (11) and the sprocket (27) and moveable between a driving state (fig. 3) and a neutral state (fig. 4), wherein the chain is freely moveable in at least one direction relative to the motor when the operating device is in the neutral state (When the operating device is in the neutral state, the clutch shoes do not engage the drum below the predetermined engagement speed. Accordingly, torque is not transmitted from the drive shaft to the sprocket. As a result, the sprocket and the chain carried by the sprocket are capable of movement relative to the motor when the operating device is in the neutral state). (Additionally, the clutch of Densow automatically engages when the engine operates above a predetermined engagement speed and disengages when the engine speed decreases below that speed. When the engine rotates at a higher speed, centrifugal force causes the clutch shoes to move radially outward against the bias of the springs and engage the clutch drum, thereby transmitting torque from the drive shaft to the drum and the chain sprocket. When the engine speed decreases the springs pull the clutch shoes radially inward and away from the drum, thereby disengaging the clutch. When the clutch shoes disengage from the drum, torque is no longer transmitted from the drive shaft to the sprocket. As a result, the sprocket is uncoupled from the motor output shaft and begins to slow due to inertia. During this transition, the chain and sprocket continue rotating while the operating device is in the disengaged or neutral state. Accordingly, the chain is freely moving relative to the guide bar and relative to the motor output shaft when the operating device is in the neutral state during the deceleration of the sprocket and chain.
Densow discloses a chain saw powered by a combustion engine and therefore does not disclose that the chainsaw received power from an electric energy source. Attention is further directed to the Fisher, which discloses that is it well known for chainsaws to be powered by a gasoline engine or alternatively by an electrical energy source such as a cord connected to an electrical outlet or a battery (col. 2, lines 45-50). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the combustion engine of Densow to instead utilize an electric motor powered by an electrical energy source as taught by Fisher, as Fisher expressly teaches such electrical power source are known alternatives for providing power to chainsaws.
In regards to claim 2, the modified device of Densow discloses wherein the operating device comprises a centrifugal clutch (centrifugal clutch 25) including one or more weighted elements (clutch shoes 43/45; counterweights 53/55) moveable between a first position in the driving state and a second position in the neutral state (via springs 75), wherein the chain (23) is free to move in the at least one direction when the one or more weighted elements are in the first position (e.g. Fig. 4), and wherein the one or more weighted elements (43/45; 53/55) transmit power from the motor to the sprocket in the second position (Fig. 3).
In regards to claim 3, the modified device of Densow discloses wherein the one or more weighted (43/45; 53/55) elements are each configured to move in a linear direction of translation (fig. 3-fig. 4) when the operating device moves between the driving state and the neutral state.
In regards to claim 5, the modified device of Densow discloses wherein the one or more weighted elements (43/45) are spring-biased (75) to the second position.
In regards to claim 6, the modified device of Densow discloses wherein the chain (23) is freely moveable in both a forward direction and a rearward direction relative to the motor when the operating device is in the neutral state. (When the operating device is in the neutral state, the clutch shoes do not engage the drum below the predetermined engagement speed. Accordingly, torque is not transmitted from the drive shaft to the sprocket. As a result, the sprocket and the chain carried by the sprocket are capable of movement relative to the motor when the operating device is in the neutral state).
In regards to claim 19, the modified device of Densow discloses chainsaw comprising a motor (19/ engine as modified by Fisher) receiving power from an electrical energy source (battery as modified by Fisher) of the chainsaw, wherein the motor drives a chain (23) about a guide bar (21), wherein the chain (23) is operably fixed to an output shaft (35) of the motor (19/ engine as modified by Fisher) when an operating device (clutch; fig. 3/4) operably coupled between the motor (19/ engine as modified by Fisher) and the chain (23) is in a driving state (fig. 3), wherein the chain (23) is freely moveable in at least one direction relative to the output shaft of the motor when the operating device is in a neutral state (shoes 43/45 are decoupled from the drum 47) , and wherein the operating device is movable between the driving state (fig. 3) and the neutral state (fig. 4/ decoupled state) while remaining at a relatively fixed axial position with respect to a rotation axis of the output shaft.
(When the operating device is in the neutral state, the clutch shoes do not engage the drum below the predetermined engagement speed. Accordingly, torque is not transmitted from the drive shaft to the sprocket. As a result, the sprocket and the chain carried by the sprocket are capable of movement relative to the motor when the operating device is in the neutral state).
(Additionally, the clutch of Densow automatically engages when the engine operates above a predetermined engagement speed and disengages when the engine speed decreases below that speed. When the engine rotates at a higher speed, centrifugal force causes the clutch shoes to move radially outward against the bias of the springs and engage the clutch drum, thereby transmitting torque from the drive shaft to the drum and the chain sprocket. When the engine speed decreases the springs pull the clutch shoes radially inward and away from the drum, thereby disengaging the clutch. When the clutch shoes disengage from the drum, torque is no longer transmitted from the drive shaft to the sprocket. As a result, the sprocket is uncoupled from the motor output shaft and begins to slow due to inertia. During this transition, the chain and sprocket continue rotating while the operating device is in the disengaged or neutral state. Accordingly, the chain is freely moving relative to the guide bar and relative to the motor output shaft when the operating device is in the neutral state during the deceleration of the sprocket and chain.
In regards to claim 20, the modified device of Densow discloses wherein the operating device automatically moves from the driving state to the neutral state when the output shaft rotates below a threshold speed.
(“However, if the engine speed falls below the predetermined low speed or if the engine speed is thereafter reduced to below the predetermined low speed, the counterweights 53 and 55 will be drawn inwardly by the springs 75 and the fingers 81 and 83 will be moved by the spring 123 to the latched position shown in FIG. 3. Thereafter, with the actuating member in the spaced position, advancement of the engine speed above the predetermined high speed will permit outward movement of the clutch shoes 43 and 45 into driving engagement with the clutch drum 47.” Col. 8, lines 25-45)
Claims 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Densow (U.S. Patent 3,970,178) in view of in view of Fisher U.S. Patent (7,743,513) and in further view of Smith (U.S. Patent 4,319,502)
In regards to claim 11, the modified device of Densow discloses a method of operating a chainsaw comprising: providing a chainsaw comprising a guide bar (21) supporting a chain (23), motor (11 / electric motor; col. 2, lines 45-50 Fisher) having an output shaft (35) to drive the chain, the motor being configured to receive power from an electrical energy source of the chainsaw (e.g. battery as modified by Fisher); a sprocket (27) operably coupled between the motor and the chain (23) to transmit driving force from the motor to the chain, and an operating device operably coupled between the motor and the sprocket; moving the operating device from a driving state (e.g. Fig. 3) to a neutral state (the shoes are decoupled from the drum 47; Fig. 4) while remaining at a relatively fixed axial position with respect to a rotation axis of the sprocket (27); and freely moving the chain relative to the guide bar in at least one direction relative to the output shaft of the motor when the operating device is in the neutral state.
The clutch of Densow automatically engages when the engine operates above a predetermined engagement speed and disengages when the engine speed decreases below that speed. When the engine rotates at a higher speed, centrifugal force causes the clutch shoes to move radially outward against the bias of the springs and engage the clutch drum, thereby transmitting torque from the drive shaft to the drum and the chain sprocket. When the engine speed decreases the springs pull the clutch shoes radially inward and away from the drum, thereby disengaging the clutch. When the clutch shoes disengage from the drum, torque is no longer transmitted from the drive shaft to the sprocket. As a result, the sprocket is uncoupled from the motor output shaft and begins to slow due to inertia. During this transition, the chain and sprocket continue rotating while the operating device is in the disengaged or neutral state. Accordingly, the chain is freely moving relative to the guide bar and relative to the motor output shaft when the operating device is in the neutral state during the deceleration of the sprocket and chain.
To the extend that it can be argued that the movement from inertia is not inherent, attention is also directed to Smith. Smith discloses a portable saw chain sharpener which permits sharpening of cutter elements without removing the chain from the guide bar. Smith further teaches that that the support leg provides clearance below the chainsaw bar allowing the chain to be manually moved around the guide bar so that successive cutters may be positioned for sharpening (col.4, lines 30-35).
Smith is directed to maintenance of chainsaw chains and therefore pertains to the same field of endeavor as the claimed chainsaw operation. Routine maintenance operations such as sharpening necessarily involve repositioning successive cutter elements along the guide bar. Accordingly, Smith’s teaching of manually moving the chain relative to the guide bar would have been readily applicable to the chainsaw of Kondo when the chain is not being driven by the motor.
As both Densow and Smith relate to chainsaws, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to freely move the chain relative the guide bar when the chain is not driven by the motor, as taught by Smith in order to position the cutter elements of the chain for maintenance such as sharpening. When the clutch of Densow is in the neutral state and torque is not transmitted from the motor to the sprocket, the chain is not driven and may be moved relative to the guide bar. Accordingly, freely moving the chain relative to the guide bar as claimed, would have been an obvious operation.
In regards to claim 12, the modified device of Densow discloses interrupting power to the motor from an electrical energy source of the chainsaw to stop driving the chain, wherein interrupting power automatically causes the operating device to move from the driving state to the neutral state (As taught by Densow the centrifugal clutch engages when the motor operates above a predetermined engagement speed and disengages when the motor drops below that speed. Accordingly interrupting power automatically reduces the motor speed, causing the clutch shoes to retract from the clutch drum and move the operating device from the driving to the neutral state).
In regards to claim 13, the modified device of Densow discloses further comprising automatically returning the operating device to the driving state upon providing power to the motor (the centrifugal clutch engages when the motor operates above a predetermined engagement speed).
In regards to claim 14, the modified device of Densow discloses wherein moving the operating device comprises moving one or more weighted elements (shoes 43/45 or counterweights 53/55) from a first position to a second position (fig. 3 and fig. 4), wherein the one or more weighted elements transmit power from the motor to the sprocket (27) in the first position (via the drum 47), and wherein the sprocket chain is free to move in the at least one direction when the one or more weighted elements are in the second position (as set forth above).
In regards to claim 15, the modified device of Densow discloses wherein the chain is freely moveable in both a forward direction and a rearward direction relative to the output shaft of the motor when the operating device is in the neutral state (when the clutch disengages, the chain is no longer driven and is not directionally constrained by the motor and positionable as modified by Smith relative to the guide bar in either direction).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 LAURA M LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-8339. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a.m.- 5p.m..
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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at 571-272-4502. 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.
/LAURA M LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724