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 .
Response to Amendment
The Examiner acknowledges the amendments to claims 1, 6, and 13, the cancelation of claims 11 and 12, and the addition of new claim 20.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 6, 8-9, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wolf et al. (US 2017/0165863 A1), hereafter known as Wolf, in view of Nagashima (US 4,654,970 A), and Brenzen (US 3,131,277 A), as evidenced by Jesse (US 2008/0236986 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Wolf teaches a hand-carried work apparatus (Wolf, Fig. 1-18), comprising:
a housing (Wolf, Fig. 1, 2), wherein the housing has
a top side (Wolf, Fig. 1, 47),
a bottom side (Wolf, Fig. 1, 48),
two longitudinal sides (Wolf, Figs. 1 and 4-5, 96 and 97), including
a first longitudinal side (Wolf, Fig. 1, 96), and
a second longitudinal side (Wolf, Figs. 4 and 5, 97),
wherein the top side and the bottom side are connected to one another via the two longitudinal sides (Wolf, Fig. 1 and 4-5, 47, 48, 96, and 97);
a drive motor (Wolf, Fig. 1-3, 7) arranged in the housing (Wolf, Fig. 1, 7), wherein the drive motor drives a tool (Wolf, P. 0038, Fig. 1, 5 and 6) arranged at a front end of the housing (Wolf, P. 0039);
a front handle (Wolf, Fig. 1, 4, and 17-18, 4); and
a rear handle (Wolf, Fig. 1, 4, 7-9, and 14-15, 3),
wherein the front handle is a handlebar and has a transverse section (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 4 (Wolf) below) extending along the top side of the housing and a side section (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 4 (Wolf) below) extending along one of the two longitudinal sides of the housing,
wherein the front handle has a wall (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 18 (Wolf) below) and an interior space (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 18 (Wolf) below) enclosed by the wall,
wherein the wall of the front handle comprises an inside (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 18 (Wolf) below) facing the interior space and an outside facing away from the interior space (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 18 (Wolf) below),
wherein a first electrical functional element (Wolf, Figs. 2 and 17, 28 and 29) is arranged in the housing,
wherein a second electrical functional element (Wolf, Fig. 17, 61) is arranged on the front handle,
wherein the first electrical functional element is connected to the second electrical functional element via at least one connecting cable (Wolf, Fig. 17, 55).
Wolf does not teach wherein a second electrical functional element is arranged on the outside of the front handle and wherein the interior space extends along an entire length of the front handle, and wherein the at least one connecting cable is arranged at least partially in the interior space of the front handle in an area of the side section of the front handle and wherein an opening is provided on the wall of the front handle to the second electrical functional element, wherein the opening extends from the outside of the wall to the inside of the wall, wherein the at least one connecting cable runs from the outside of the wall through the opening into the interior space of the front handle.
Wolf also does not specifically disclose the location to where the second electrical functional element is arranged.
Nagashima teaches a chain saw (Nagashima, Fig. 1) with a handle (Nagashima, Fig. 1-2, 2) wherein a second electrical functional element (Nagashima, Fig. 2, 10) is between the wall of the handle and a grip (Nagashima, Fig. 2, 6 and 7). This arrangement is advantageous for several reasons. First, the grip is able to hold the electrical functional element in place without the need of an adhesive, while also allowing the electrical functional element to be easily attached and detached, if repair needed (Nagashima, Col. 1, lines 56-61). Second, providing the electrical functional element external to the handle structure provides faster and more efficient as the element does not need to conduct heat through the handle first. Further, this modification is a mere re-arrangement of parts, in particular by selecting a position of the electrical function element. Nagashima teaches a second electrical functional element sandwiched between a handle and a grip. As such it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to rearrange the second electrical functional element of Wolf such that it was on the outside of the handle as such a modification would not alter the operation of the device (see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C)).
Brenzen teaches a front handle (Brenzen, Fig. 1-2, 12) with an interior space (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 2 (Brenzen) below) that extends along an entire length of the front handle through which a connecting cable (Brenzen, Fig. 2, 53) and wherein an opening (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 2 (Brenzen) below) is provided on the wall (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 2 (Brenzen) below) of the front handle to the second electrical functional element (Wolf, Fig. 17, 61), wherein the opening extends from the outside of the wall to the inside of the wall (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 2 (Brenzen) below), wherein the at least one connecting cable (Brenzen, Fig. 2, 53) runs from the outside of the wall through the opening into the interior space of the front handle (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 2 (Brenzen) below).
Brenzen further teaches a front handle (Brenzen, Fig. 1-2, 12) wherein the at least one connecting cable (Brenzen, Fig. 2, 53) is arranged at least partially in the interior space of the front handle in an area of the side section of the front handle through an opening in the wall of the front handle (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 2 (Brenzen) below). Additionally, as evidenced by Jesse, it is known in the art protecting cables on power tool is a concern (see Jess, P. 0013) and that routing a cable in an interior space of a handle aids affords protection to the cable (Jesse, Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the front handle taught by Wolf such that front handle had an interior space that extended along the entire length of the front handle, an opening, and wherein a connecting cable runs from the outside of the wall through the opening into the interior space as taught by Brenzen such that the connecting cable was arranged at least partially in the interior space of the front handle in an area of the side section of the front handle as further taught by Brenzen. This modification is advantageous to aid in protecting the cable from damage, which is a known concern in view of the teachings of Jesse.
PNG
media_image1.png
485
738
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
280
335
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
518
705
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Wolf in view of Nagashima, Brenzen, and Jesse teaches the hand-carried work apparatus according to claim 6, wherein the front handle has an approximately horizontally extending holding section (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 4 (Wolf) above), and wherein the opening of the wall is provided outside the holding section (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 4 (Wolf) above).
Regarding claim 9, Wolf in view of Nagashima, Brenzen, and Jesse teaches the hand-carried work apparatus according to claim 6, wherein the transverse section (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 4 (Wolf) above) and the side section (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 4 (Wolf) above) of the front handle (Wolf, Fig. 1, 4, and 17-18, 4) are connected to one another via a curved connecting section (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 4 (Wolf) above), and wherein the opening (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 4 (Wolf) above) is provided in the side section adjacent to the connecting section (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 4 (Wolf) above).
Regarding claim 20, Wolf in view of Nagashima, Brenzen, and Jesse teaches the hand-carried work apparatus according to claim 6, wherein the opening (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 2 (Brenzen) above) is formed on a side of the front handle (Brenzen, Fig. 1-2, 12) facing the housing, as the end of the front handle taught by Brenzen attached directly to the housing of Brenzen the opening would be on a side facing the housing.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wolf (US 2017/0165863 A1) in view of Nagashima (US 4,654,970 A), Brenzen (US 3,131,277 A), and Jesse (US 2008/0236986 A1) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Aiyama et al. (US 5,675,896 A), hereafter known as Aiyama.
Regarding claim 7, Wolf in view of Nagashima, Brenzen, and Jesse teaches the hand-carried work apparatus according to claim 6.
Wolf in view of Nagashima, Brenzen, and Jesse does not teach wherein the opening is provided with a grommet as edge protection.
Aiyama teaches a hand-carried work apparatus (Aiyama, Fig. 1-3, 10) wherein an opening is provided with a grommet (Aiyama, Fig. 1 and 3, 53). Such grommets provide the benefit of separating the wire from the housing or handle to prevent damage to the wires but also help to keep debris or water from entering the housing or handle.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to modify the device of Wolf in view of Nagashima, Brenzen, and Jesse to include a grommet as taught by Aiyama as it is well known in the art of hand tool to provide grommets for wires not only to provide protection from a sharp edge of a housing or handle but to also help keep debris or water from entering the device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5, 10 and 13-19 are allowable.
However, as co-pending claims 6-9 and 20 of the instant invention are still rejected over the prior art of record to put the instant application in a state ready for allowance the applicant should amend the claims such as to put them in an allowable state over the prior art of record or cancel the claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 1, Wolf (US 2017/0165863 A1) teaches a hand-carried work apparatus (Wolf, Fig. 1-18), comprising:
a housing (Wolf, Fig. 1, 2), wherein the housing has
a top side (Wolf, Fig. 1, 47),
a bottom side (Wolf, Fig. 1, 48),
two longitudinal sides (Wolf, Figs. 1 and 4-5, 96 and 97), including
a first longitudinal side (Wolf, Fig. 1, 96), and
a second longitudinal side (Wolf, Figs. 4 and 5, 97),
wherein the top side and the bottom side are connected to one another via the two longitudinal sides (Wolf, Fig. 1 and 4-5, 47, 48, 96, and 97);
a drive motor (Wolf, Fig. 1-3, 7) arranged in the housing (Wolf, Fig. 1, 7), wherein the drive motor drives a tool (Wolf, P. 0038, Fig. 1, 5 and 6) arranged at a front end of the housing (Wolf, P. 0039);
a front handle (Wolf, Fig. 1, 4, and 17-18, 4); and
a rear handle (Wolf, Fig. 1, 4, 7-9, and 14-15, 3),
wherein the front handle is a handlebar and has a transverse section (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 4 (Wolf) above) extending along the top side of the housing and a side section (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 4 (Wolf) above) extending along one of the two longitudinal sides of the housing,
wherein the front handle has a wall (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 18 (Wolf) above) and an interior space (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 18 (Wolf) above) enclosed by the wall,
wherein the wall of the front handle comprises an inside (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 18 (Wolf) above) facing the interior space and an outside facing away from the interior space (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 18 (Wolf) above),
wherein a first electrical functional element (Wolf, Figs. 2 and 17, 28 and 29) is arranged in the housing,
wherein a second electrical functional element (Wolf, Fig. 17, 61) is arranged on the front handle,
wherein the first electrical functional element is connected to the second electrical functional element via at least one connecting cable (Wolf, Fig. 17, 55).
Wolf does not teach wherein a second electrical functional element is arranged on the outside of the front handle and wherein the interior space extends along an entire length of the front handle, and wherein the at least one connecting cable is arranged at least partially in the interior space of the front handle in an area of the side section of the front handle and wherein the work apparatus comprises a handle tube insert for fastening the front handle to the housing of the work apparatus, and wherein the handle tube insert is arranged in the interior space of the handle at one end of the front handle.
Wolf also does not specifically disclose the location to where the second electrical functional element is arranged.
Nagashima (US 4,654,970 A) teaches a chain saw (Nagashima, Fig. 1) with a handle (Nagashima, Fig. 1-2, 2) wherein a second electrical functional element (Nagashima, Fig. 2, 10) is between the wall of the handle and a grip (Nagashima, Fig. 2, 6 and 7). This arrangement is advantageous for several reasons. First, the grip is able to hold the electrical functional element in place without the need of an adhesive, while also allowing the electrical functional element to be easily attached and detached, if repair needed (Nagashima, Col. 1, lines 56-61). Second, providing the electrical functional element external to the handle structure provides faster and more efficient as the element does not need to conduct heat through the handle first. Further, this modification is a mere re-arrangement of parts, in particular by selecting a position of the electrical function element. Nagashima teaches a second electrical functional element sandwiched between a handle and a grip. As such it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to rearrange the second electrical functional element of Wolf such that it was on the outside of the handle as such a modification would not alter the operation of the device (see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C)).
Brenzen (US 3,131,277 A) teaches a front handle (Brenzen, Fig. 1-2, 12) with an interior space (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 2 (Brenzen) above) that extends along an entire length of the front handle through which a connecting cable (Brenzen, Fig. 2, 53).
Brenzen further teaches a front handle (Brenzen, Fig. 1-2, 12) wherein the at least one connecting cable (Brenzen, Fig. 2, 53) is arranged at least partially in the interior space of the front handle in an area of the side section of the front handle through an opening in the wall of the front handle (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 2 (Brenzen) above). Further, as evidenced by Jesse (US 2008/0236986 A1), it is known in the art protecting cables on power tool is a concern (see Jess, P. 0013) and that routing a cable in an interior space of a handle aids affords protection to the cable (Jesse, Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the front handle taught by Wolf such that front handle had an interior space that extended along the entire length of the front handle as taught by Brenzen such that the connecting cable was arranged at least partially in the interior space of the front handle in an area of the side section of the front handle as further taught by Brenzen. This modification is advantageous to aid in protecting the cable from damage, which is a known concern in view of the teachings of Jesse.
Green teaches a hand-carried work apparatus (Green, Fig. 1-4, 1) wherein the work apparatus comprises a handle tube insert (Green, Fig. 4, 18) for fastening the front handle (Green, Fig. 4, 15) to the housing (Green, Fig. 4, 2) of the work apparatus, and wherein the handle tube insert (Green, Fig. 4, 18) is arranged in the interior space of the handle (Green, Fig. 4, 15 and 18) at one end of the front handle. Such structure helps to provide additional rigidity to the handle in the attachment location that helps to resist deformation that may be caused by overtightening the attachment screws.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the device taught by Wolf in view of Nagashima, Brenzen, and Jesse to feature a handle tube insert as taught by Green as an alternative attachment for the front handle as doing so allows provides the front handle with additional rigidity to resist deformation due to overtightening.
Wolf in view of Nagashima, Brenzen, Jesse and Green does not teach wherein the handle tube insert has a cable channel for guiding the at least one connecting cable. Generally, the prior art teaches tube inserts that are for better attachment of the handle to the housing or to provide additional rigid structure for the handle like the inserts taught by Green or the inserts taught by Bidanset (US 4,912,848 A) (Bidanset, Fig. 3, 32) neither teach a cable channel or show a cable being guided through an opening in an insert. As such, for at least these reasons the instant invention of claim 1 and the claimed thereby dependent upon it overcome the prior art and the prior art of record.
Response to Arguments
The applicant asserts that claim 1 has been amended such that it overcomes the drawing objection of record, the U.S.C. 112(a) new matter rejection of record, and the U.S.C. 103 obviousness type prior art rejection of record. The Examiner agrees, withdraws the objection of record, the new matter rejection of record, and the obviousness type prior art rejection of record and has indicated allowable subject matter for the claim and claims 2-5, 10, and 13-19.
The applicant asserts that claim 6 is allowable as the claim provides a meaningful distinction over the prior art of record. The Examiner disagrees. First, when a examiner is determining obviousness it is often necessary for an examiner to rely on some hindsight as “[a]ny judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based on hindsight reasoning, but so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was made and does not include knowledge gleaned only from applicant’s disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper." In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 1395, 170 USPQ 209, 212 (CCPA 1971). Here Wolf teaches that it is known in the art for a hand-carried work apparatus to have wires routed to the handle and for the handle to have an electrical functional element in the handle, Nagashima teaches that it is known to have an electrical functional element external to the handle but under a grip, while Brenzen and Jesse show that it is known in the art of hand-carried work apparatus to route a wire through a handle. This combination with the reasons specified above show that such an arrangement would be obvious as it only considers knowledge taken from the prior art of record. Second, the applicant should understand that the term “electrical functional element” is broader than the suppose and is not limited to the heating element disclosed by the instant specification and could read on other electrical elements commonly found attached to handles. Third, the art does not need to expressly teach the elements. Here the prior art shows that it is known in the art to route the cables in different ways which shows that a person of ordinary skill in the art would be familiar with cable routing through handles. As such, the Examiner finds the applicant’s assertions unpersuasive.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert D Cornett whose telephone number is (571) 270-0182. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 am-5:30 pm.
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.
/ROBERT D CORNETT/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 /BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights