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office action is in response to the amendment filed on 11/03/2025 in which claims 1-20 are pending, claims 13-19 are withdrawn and claims 1, 2, and 8 are currently amended.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the coupling interface and the identical coupling interface must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-12, 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.
Claim 1, lines 8-9 recites, “the saw device having a coupling interface that is configured to couple to at least one system box.” Claim 1, lines 19-20 recites, “wherein the coupling interface is adapted to be couplable to an identical coupling interface”. It is unclear what the relationship is between the system box and the identical coupling interface as they are both being described as being couplable to the coupling interface. If the identical coupling interface part of the system box or is it a separate coupling capability?
Claim 1, lines 19-20 recite, “wherein the coupling interface is adapted to be coupled to an identical coupling interface.” First it is noted that the identical coupling interface is not claimed structure. Secondly, it is unclear what is meant by an “identical coupling interface” and what structure the coupling interface must possess to be capable of being coupled to the identical coupling interface. Does this mean that the identical coupling interface has the exact same structure as the coupling interface, such that the presumable male and female engagement parts are identical, or that the combination of the male/female engagements are the same? As shown in Figure 2, one side of the saw unit has projections 38 and the other side of the saw unit has recesses 36. While the projections 38 could be engageable with the recesses 36 on duplicate saw unit, the recesses and projections are not identical. The projections 38 would not be engageable with identical projections and the recesses 36 would not be engageable with identical recesses.
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 1-4, 6-7, 11, 12, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wood (U.S. Patent 7,290,655) in view of Dreher (U.S. Patent 7,108,131), Koenig et al. (U.S. Patent 8,875,888), herein referred to as Koenig and Christopher et al. (U.S. Publication 2015/0274362), herein referred to as Christopher.
In regards to claim 1, Wood discloses a saw device (fig. 4) comprising a saw unit (circular saw 40), the saw unit comprising a saw blade (45) and a support structure (carrying case 10), wherein the saw unit is positionable with an underside on a base (e.g. workbench via clamps 24; fig. 4) to be put into a working orientation, and has a workpiece support (top panel 16) on which a workpiece is positionable when the workpiece is being sawn with a the saw unit, the workpiece support (16) defining a support plane which is orientated perpendicular to the saw blade (45; see fig. 4) and which is oriented horizontally in the working orientation (per Fig.4, the panel 16 is horizontal to the workbench).
Wood does not disclose the features of the coupling or stacking system, such that Wood does not disclose that the saw device having a coupling interface that is configured to couple to at last one system box as a releasable, vertically tension-proof coupling such that when the saw device is coupled with the at least one system box, the saw device and the at least one system box form a vertical stack together in such a way that the saw device is provided in a transport orientation in the vertical stack, wherein in the transport orientation, the support plane of the workpiece support is orientated vertically wherein the coupling interface comprises lower coupling sections which in the transport orientation of the saw device, are arranged on a lower end side of the saw device, and upper coupling sections which in the transport orientation of the saw device are arranged on an upper end side of the saw device, wherein the coupling interface is adapted to be couplable to an identical coupling interface such that the lower coupling sections of the coupling interface are couplable to upper coupling sections of the identical coupling interface.
Attention is further directed to the Dreher, Koenig and Christopher toolboxes/containers, reproduced below. Dreher, Koenig and Christopher are not being cited in combination but rather to set forth the state of the art at the time of the invention.
PNG
media_image1.png
765
1935
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Dreher and Christopher both disclose containers for transporting power tools. Dreher details in Figure 6, combining multiple tool housings 12 for transport together. Christopher similarly discloses nesting tool storage systems used to store and organize tools, spare parts, and the like that can be latched together and moved as a unit. Koenig, alternatively, discloses a container with a hinged lid, wherein multiple containers can be stacked and transported together as a single unit. Therefore, the prior art discloses multiple instances wherein the idea of combining multiple containers, that contain tools or other parts, together for ease of transport and storage is known and well established. Providing a interface system to combine multiple of the Wood containers would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teachings of Dreher, Koenig and Christopher, since all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. One skilled in the art would have recognized that providing the attachments of any/all of Dreher, Koenig and Christopher on the carrying case of Wood would allow for the attachment of the Wood case to another case such that the multiple tools as shown in Wood (router, circular saw, jigsaw) would each be able to have their own container yet still be connected, allowing for ease of transport and storage.
In regards to claim 2, the modified device of Wood discloses a cover structure (panel door 14) attachable to the saw unit (via the carrying case 10) to put the saw device in a transport configuration in which the saw device is coupable via the coupling interface (as modified by one of Dreher, Koenig and Christopher) to the at least one system box (not positively claimed) to form the vertical stack together with the at least one system box (the system box is not positively claimed).
In regards to claim 3, the modified device of Wood discloses wherein the cover structure comprises the coupling interface (as modified by any/all of Dreher, Koenig and Christopher).
In regards to claim 4, the modified device of Wood discloses wherein, in the transport configuration, the cover structure (14) delimits an interior space which is closed with respect to the environment of the saw device and in which interior space the saw blade and/or the workpiece support is arranged.
In regards to claim 6, the modified device of Wood discloses wherein, in the transport configuration, the saw device (10) has a cuboid outer housing partially or completely formed by the cover structure (14 closes off the side of 10)
In regards to claim 7, the modified device of Wood discloses wherein, in the transport configuration, one side of the cuboid outer housing (10) is formed by the underside of the support structure and all other sides of the outer housing are formed by the cover structure (14).
In regards to claim 11, the modified device of Wood discloses wherein the cover structure comprises a coupling structure (hinges) arranged internally of the cover structure (14) via which the saw unit is suspended from the cover structure (14) when the saw device is in the transport orientation.
In regards to claim 12, the modified device of Wood discloses wherein the cover structure (14) comprises a carrying handle (22) arranged in the area of the inner coupling structure on the outside of the cover structure.
In regards to claim 20, the modified device of Wood discloses wherein the saw device is a circular table saw (40) or a miter saw.
Claims 1-8, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Silva (U.S. Patent 9,403,224) in view of Dreher (U.S. Patent 7,108,131), Christopher et al. (U.S. Publication 2015/0274362), herein referred to as Christopher and in further view of Plaston( DE 202010000218)
In regards to claim 1, Silva discloses a saw device (10) comprising a saw unit (20), the saw unit comprising a saw blade (miter saw blade) and a support structure (support base 12, per Fig. 12), wherein the saw unit is positionable with an underside on a base (e.g. a workbench/table) to be put into a working orientation, and has a workpiece support (top surface of the turntable) on which a workpiece is positionable when the workpiece is being sawn with a the saw unit, the workpiece support (top surface of turntable) defining a support plane which is orientated perpendicular to the saw blade (fig. 5) and which is oriented horizontally in the working orientation (per Fig.5).
Silva does not disclose the features of the coupling or stacking system, such that Wood does not disclose that the saw device having a coupling interface that is configured to couple to at last one system box as a releasable, vertically tension-proof coupling such that when the saw device is coupled with the at least one system box, the saw device and the at least one system box form a vertical stack together in such a way that the saw device is provided in a transport orientation in the vertical stack, wherein in the transport orientation, the support plane of the workpiece support is orientated vertically wherein the coupling interface comprises lower coupling sections which in the transport orientation of the saw device, are arranged on a lower end side of the saw device, and upper coupling sections which in the transport orientation of the saw device are arranged on an upper end side of the saw device, wherein the coupling interface is adapted to be couplable to an identical coupling interface such that the lower coupling sections of the coupling interface are couplable to upper coupling sections of the identical coupling interface.
Attention is further directed to the Dreher, Christopher toolboxes/containers. Dreher, Koenig and Christopher are not being cited in combination but rather to set forth the state of the art at the time of the invention. Dreher and Christopher both disclose containers for transporting power tools. Dreher details in Figure 6, combining multiple tool housings 12 for transport together. Christopher similarly discloses nesting tool storage systems used to store and organize tools, spare parts, and the like that can be latched together and moved as a unit. Therefore, the prior art discloses multiple instances wherein the idea of combining multiple containers, that contain tools or other parts, together for ease of transport and storage is known and well established. Providing an interface system to combine multiple of the Wood containers would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teachings of Dreher, Koenig and Christopher, since all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. One skilled in the art would have recognized that the attachments of any/all of Dreher and Christopher would allow for the multiple tools as shown in Wood (router, circular saw, jigsaw) to each have their own container yet still be connected, allowing for ease of transport and storage.
The modified device of Wood, does not disclose the location of the coupling device such that in the transport location of the saw, the support plane of the workpiece would be vertical. Attention is further directed to the Plaston carrying case. Plaston discloses that while the preferred carrying arrangement is as shown in Figures 3-6, where multiples cases are stacked with the largest surfaces contacting, that other arrangements are understood depending on the specific requirements. Therefore, the arrangements that connect two cases such as shown in Figures 7-10 and also per the arrangement in Figures 11-13, wherein the sides of cases are configured to engage are also contemplated. As shown by Plaston to be known to arrange the cases in multiple arrangements relative to each other for transportation depending on the needs of the user, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have provided for the couplings as shown by either Dreher, Christopher on any side of the Silva cover or support base or alternatively provided connecting elements of all of the corners of the Silva cover and support base as demonstrated by Plaston to allow for the coupling, storage and/or transportation of multiple tool cases.
PNG
media_image2.png
715
1447
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2, the modified device of Silva discloses a cover structure (cover 11) attachable to the saw unit (base 12 is considered part of the saw unit; per Figure 2) to put the saw device in a transport configuration (e.g. Figure 1) in which the saw device is coupleable via the coupling interface (as modified by one of Dreher, Christopher or Plaston) to the at least one system box (not positively claimed) to form the vertical stack together with the at least one system box (legs 15/16 could be extended in Figure 1 and used to couple to another box).
In regards to claim 3, the modified device of Silva discloses wherein the cover structure (11) comprises the coupling interface (as modified by one of Dreher, Christopher or Plaston).
In regards to claim 4, the modified device of Silva discloses wherein, in the transport configuration, the cover structure (11) delimits an interior space which is closed with respect to the environment of the saw device (fig. 1) and in which interior space the saw blade (miter saw) and/or the workpiece support is arranged.
In regards to claim 5, the modified device of Silva discloses wherein the cover structure (11) comprises a cover hood.
In regards to claim 6, the modified device of Silva discloses wherein, in the transport configuration, the saw device (10) has a cuboid outer housing partially or completely formed by the cover structure (11; fig. 1).
In regards to claim 7, the modified device of Silva discloses wherein, in the transport configuration, one side of the cuboid outer housing is formed by the underside of the support structure (12) and all other sides of the outer housing are formed by the cover structure (11).
In regards to claim 8, the modified device of Silva discloses wherein the cover structure (11) comprises a workpiece support section (one of the cover faces/sides of 11 or alternatively 12) and the saw device is settable into a working configuration (fig. 5) in which the workpiece support section provides an additional support (at base 12), which serves to provide, together with the workpiece support (surface of the turntable), a combined workpiece support surface onto which the workpiece is positionable, while the workpiece is being sawn with the saw device (as the cover 11 and support base 12 are detachable, the miter saw and the cover can be manipulated to be at the same height, such that one of the surfaces of the cover is at the same height as the miter saw turntable).
In regards to claim 9, the modified device of Silva discloses wherein, in the working configuration, the saw unit stands with its underside on the base (table/floor, etc; not clear if the base was positively set forth in claim 1) and the workpiece support section (top surface of the turntable) is arranged next to the saw unit so that the additional support is arranged at the same height as the workpiece support (as the cover 11 and support base 12 are detachable, the miter saw and the cover can be manipulated to be at the same height, such that one of the surfaces of the cover is at the same height as the miter saw turntable).
In regards to claim 10, the modified device of Silva discloses wherein the cover structure (11/12) is made in multiple parts and the workpiece support section (11) is detachable from the remaining cover structure to provide the working configuration.
In regards to claim 20, Silva discloses wherein the saw device is a circular table saw or a miter saw (20).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Silva (U.S. Patent 9,403,224) in view of Dreher (U.S. Patent 7,108,131), Christopher et al. (U.S. Publication 2015/0274362), herein referred to as Christopher and in further view of Plaston( DE 202010000218) and in further view of Dreher et al. (U.S. Patent 7,108,131), herein referred to as Dreher.
In regards to claim 11, the modified device of Silva discloses wherein the cover structure (11) comprises a coupling structure (56) via which the saw unit (12) is suspended from the cover structure when the saw device is in the transport orientation. Silva discloses the claimed invention except wherein the coupling structure is an internal coupling structure. Attention is directed to the Dreher case which discloses another machine tool case with a lid that connects to a base. Dreher discloses the use of rotary knobs that are recessed internal to the outer surface of the lid. The knobs 70 rotate to engage with the half moon shaped collars 110 which are then disposed internally to the knobs 70 when in the locked configuration. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have replaced the latching mechanism of Silva to be recessed rotary knobs as taught by Dreher that were recessed within the outer surface and less prone to accidental engagement and that didn’t protrude beyond the side of the casing or lid.
In regards to claim 12, the modified device of Silva discloses wherein the cover structure (11) comprises a carrying handle (17) arranged in the area of the inner coupling structure on the outside of the cover structure.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 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