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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3-20-2026 has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
the “Control module” (Claims 1, 10-12, 16, and 18),
“Computing device” (Claims 1, 16, and 18),
“Sliding member” (claims 1-2, 4-5, 7, 9-10, 14, and 16 - 20) and
“Cutting element”, (Claims 1, 16, 18).
With regard to the term “Control module”:
first, the term “module” is a generic placeholder for “means”; second, the generic placeholder is modified by the functional language “Control”; third, the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure for performing the claimed function – e.g., the term “Control” preceding the generic placeholder describes the function, not the structure, of the Control module.
With regard to the term “Computing device”:
first, the term “device” is a generic placeholder for “means”; second, the generic placeholder is modified by the functional language “Computing”; third, the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure for performing the claimed function – e.g., the term “Computing” preceding the generic placeholder describes the function, not the structure, of the Computing device.
With regard to the term “Sliding member”:
first, the term “member” is a generic placeholder for “means”; second, the generic placeholder is modified by the functional language “Sliding”; third, the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure for performing the claimed function – e.g., the term “Sliding” preceding the generic placeholder describes the function, not the structure, of the Sliding member.
With regard to the term “Cutting element”:
first, the term “element” is a generic placeholder for “means”; second, the generic placeholder is modified by the functional language “Cutting”; third, the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure for performing the claimed function – e.g., the term “Cutting” preceding the generic placeholder describes the function, not the structure, of the Cutting element.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim 7-8 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
The limitation of Claim 7, reading: “wherein the saw stop further comprises a storage member coupled with the first housing and configured to force a stored portion of the sliding member into a coiled configuration after the stored portion exits the second portion” is indefinite. The claim appears to delimit that the saw stop (315 and 310, par. 0073) comprises storage member 340, and is configured to force a stored portion of the sliding member 300. However, the storage member 340 appears to be comprised by the “saw stop system” 100 (fig 3), not the saw stop 300/315. For purposes of advancing prosecution, this is how said limitation will be interpreted, as best understood in light of the specification.
The limitation of Claim 8, reading: “wherein the one or more trackways comprise multiple non-overlapping linear trackways releasably coupled together”, is indefinite. Looking at fig. 3, the trackways 110 appear to overlap at least to an extent. This limitation will be interpreted to mean that the trackways may be parallel to each other or overlap with one another in some planes, as best understood in view of the specification.
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 of this title, 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 1-2, 4, 7, 10, 13-14, 16, and 18-19, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPGPUB 20080282862, Wise in view of USPGPUB 20100107833, Caputo.
Regarding Claim 1, Wise discloses a saw stop system, comprising: a first housing (80) configured to be coupled with a saw (20, see fig. 1);
a control module (combination of elements 112, 116 and 117) coupled with the first housing (see fig. 3) and comprising a processor (logic circuit element 117 par. 0028), having at least one user interface (88).
one or more trackways (combination of edges of part 160 and crescent-shaped slots 114 of device 112, par. 0027) coupled with the first housing (fig. 1), wherein a first portion (crescent shaped outline) of the one or more trackways prevents bending of the sliding member within the first portion (at least at the area where the slide 58 is in contact with the slots 114 since the corresponding shape of the slots inherently prevents the slide from deviating, and thus bending to a shape that does not correspond to the shape of the slots while contacting therewith);
a sliding member 58 slidably coupled within the one or more trackways (fig. 3 and par. 0028);
a stop (100) coupled with the sliding member (fig. 4) and configured to contact an end of an item to be cut to facilitate positioning of the end of the item (par. 0024) relative to a cutting element (par. 0024) of the saw, at a determined distance corresponding with a length received through the at least one user interface (par. 0031);
and a motor (120) coupled with the sliding member and controlled by the control module, the motor configured to automatically position the sliding member so that the stop is at the determined distance (par. 0031).
Wise lacks the control module configured to wirelessly communicatively couple with a computing device.
Caputo discloses a saw stop and control device (abstract), in the same field of endeavor as the saw stop and control device tool of the present invention and discloses that such a system includes a control module (100) (par 0049-0050), which controls the workpiece positioning device of the system, (par 0048-0051), where the control module 100 is configured to wirelessly communicatively couple (par 0050, via wireless network 108, and adaptors 106) with a computing device (fixed medium 110; par. 0050), and a user interface, 112, in order to allow a user to input data to control the system and allow the system to display information to the user, and to connect the system to a corporate intranet (par 0050).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wise by having the control module configured to wirelessly communicatively couple with a computing device (and with the interface of Wise) in order to allow a user to input data to control the system and allow the system to display information to the user, and to connect the system to a corporate intranet, as taught by Caputo.
Regarding Claim 2, in Wise the device comprises a storage member (combination of drive reel 60 and lower house 96 and arm 30) coupled with the first housing (fig. 3) and configured to force a stored portion of the sliding member 58 into a coiled configuration (fig. 3, par 0020-0022), and to fully restore the stored portion within the storage member (since the tape is retractable, and fig 7 showing that the tape 58 remains within the storage member).
Regarding Claim 4, in Wise an extended portion of the sliding member comprises a curvature transverse to a longest length of the extended portion. (see annotated fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
602
588
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 7, in Wise a second portion (114 and 112) of the one or more trackways bends the sliding member (58) 90-degrees within the second portion (see annotated fig 3 below), and wherein the saw stop (system)(30 and 60 and 58) further comprises a storage member (60 and 96) coupled with the first housing (fig 3 and 1) and configured to force a stored portion of the sliding member into a coiled configuration after the stored portion exits the second portion (since the tape is retractable, and fig 7 showing that the tape 58 remains within the storage member).
PNG
media_image2.png
562
755
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 10, in Wise the sliding member comprises one or more length indicators (combination of 62 and 64; See: par. 0028), wherein the control module comprises one or more visual sensors (“photo detectors, par. 0028) configured to sense the one or more length indicators, and wherein the control module controls the motor to position the stop at the determined distance using the sensed one or more length indicators (par. 0028).
Regarding Claim 13, in Wise the sliding member is configured to slide beyond a terminal end of one of the one or more trackways such that the stop is positioned beyond, and not partially within, the trackway. (fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 14, in Wise, the device further comprises a guide 102 coupled with the one or more trackways (operatively connected) (figs 1 and 3), the guide configured to support the item to prevent drooping of the item (since the portion 102 will prevent drooping at least in a vertical orientation).
Regarding Claim 16, Wise discloses a method of use of a saw stop system, comprising: coupling a first housing 80 of a saw stop system with a saw 20, wherein the saw stop system comprises: a control module (electronic mensuration device 112, par. 0028) coupled with the first housing (fig 2, par 0028) and including a processor (see par. 0028), the control module having at least one user interface (par 0026-0028);
one or more trackways (combination of crescent-shaped slots 114, and supporting portions of part 160 which support the part 58 par. 0027) coupled with the first housing (see fig 1-6);
a sliding member 58 slidably coupled at least partially within the one or more trackways (fig. 1-5), wherein a first portion of the one or more trackways prevents bending of the sliding member within the first portion (at least at the area where the slide 58 is in contact with the slots 114 since the corresponding shape of the slots inherently prevents the slide from deviating, and thus bending to a shape that does not correspond to the shape of the slots while contacting therewith);
a stop (100) coupled with the sliding member (fig 4);
and a motor coupled with the sliding member and controlled by the control module; using the motor 120, automatically positioning the sliding member so that the stop is at a determined distance relative to a cutting element of the saw (par. 0023-0028), wherein the determined distance corresponds with a length received through the at least one user interface; and coupling, to the stop, an end of an item to be cut (par. 0031).
Wise lacks the control module configured to wirelessly communicatively couple with a computing device.
Caputo discloses a saw stop and control device (abstract), in the same field of endeavor as the saw stop and control device tool of the present invention and discloses that such a system includes a control module (100) (par 0049-0050), which controls the workpiece positioning device of the system, (par 0048-0051), where the control module 100 is configured to wirelessly communicatively couple (par 0050, via wireless network 108, and adaptors 106) with a computing device (fixed medium 110; par. 0050), and a user interface, 112, in order to allow a user to input data to control the system and allow the system to display information to the user, and to connect the system to a corporate intranet (par 0050).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wise by having the control module configured to wirelessly communicatively couple with a computing device (and with the interface of Wise) in order to allow a user to input data to control the system and allow the system to display information to the user, and to connect the system to a corporate intranet, as taught by Caputo.
Regarding Claim 18, Wise discloses A measurement system (combination of 58, 112 and 100), comprising: a first housing (80);
a control module (electronic mensuration device 112, par. 0028) coupled with the first housing and comprising a processor (‘microprocessor’ par. 0028), the control module having at least one user interface (88; par 0027);
one or more trackways (combination of parts 114 and 112 and 160) coupled with the first housing (fig 1-3);
a sliding member 58 slidably coupled at least partially within the one or more trackways (see fig 3), wherein a first portion of the one or more trackways prevents bending of the sliding member within the first portion (at least at the area where the slide 58 is in contact with the slots 114 since the corresponding shape of the slots inherently prevents the slide from deviating, and thus bending to a shape that does not correspond to the shape of the slots while contacting therewith);
a stop 100 coupled with the sliding member (see: fig. 4) and configured to couple with an end of a first item to facilitate positioning of an end of the first item (item to be cut) (par 0027), relative to a second item (e.g. saw), at a determined distance corresponding with a length received through the at least one user interface (par. 0024 and par. 0027);
and a motor 120 coupled with the sliding member and controlled by the control module, the motor configured to automatically position the sliding member so that the stop is at the determined distance (par 0027 / 0031).
Wise lacks the control module configured to wirelessly communicatively couple with a computing device.
Caputo discloses a saw stop and control device (abstract), in the same field of endeavor as the saw stop and control device tool of the present invention and discloses that such a system includes a control module (100) (par 0049-0050), which controls the workpiece positioning device of the system, (par 0048-0051), where the control module 100 is configured to wirelessly communicatively couple (par 0050, via wireless network 108, and adaptors 106) with a computing device (fixed medium 110; par. 0050), and a user interface, 112, in order to allow a user to input data to control the system and allow the system to display information to the user, and to connect the system to a corporate intranet (par 0050).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wise by having the control module configured to wirelessly communicatively couple with a computing device (and with the interface of Wise) in order to allow a user to input data to control the system and allow the system to display information to the user, and to connect the system to a corporate intranet, as taught by Caputo.
Regarding Claim 19, in Wise the measurement system further comprises a storage member 60 coupled with the first housing and configured to force a stored portion of the sliding member into a coiled configuration (par 0022- par. 0023).
PNG
media_image2.png
562
755
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claims 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wise in view of Caputo, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20150298273, Suhling.
Regarding Claim 6, Wise as modified by Caputo lacks, the saw stop system of claim 1, further comprising an extender configured to couple between the item and the stop, and wherein the determined distance comprises the received length added to a length of the extender.
Suhling discloses a work stop abutment, in the same field of endeavor as the work stop abutment tool of the present invention and discloses that such a system includes an indexable extender 3 (par 0028) configured to couple between an item to be cut (work piece) and a stop mechanism (2), in order to allow the block to be indexed to account for workpieces of different lengths (par. 0014).
In making the modification above in view of Suhling, a user would also be motivated to have the determined distance of Wise comprise the received length added to an indexed length of the extender incorporate the repeatable nature of use disclosed by Suhling par. 0014.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wise by further comprising an extender configured to couple between the item and the stop, and wherein the determined distance comprises the received length added to a length of the extender in order to allow the block to be indexed to account for workpieces of different lengths.
Claims 8 and 17, and 20, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wise and Caputo as applied to Claims 1, 16 and 18 above, and further in view of USPGPUB 20100224046 Osbourne.
Regarding Claims 8, 17 and 20, Wise lacks the apparatus having the one or more trackways comprise multiple non-overlapping linear trackways releasably coupled together, wherein each linear trackway is configured to retain the sliding member in a straight configuration (Claim 8), and the device which further has a second portion of the one or more trackways, wherein the sliding member enters the second portion in a first direction and exits the second portion in a second direction angled 90-degrees from the first direction (Claims 17 and 20).
Osbourne discloses a tape measure guide, in the same field of endeavor as the tape measure guide of the present invention and discloses that such a system includes multiple non-overlapping linear trackways (see annotated fig 13, below) releasably coupled together (fig 13, since the parts are not integral with each other), wherein each linear trackway is configured to retain the sliding member (taper 150) in a straight configuration (see annotated fig 13, below) in order to position the tape measure in several orientations (par 0100-0103), (Claim 8), and the device which further has a second portion (915) of the one or more trackways, wherein the sliding member 150 enters a second portion 915 in a first direction and exits the second portion in a second direction angled 90-degrees from the first direction (fig 13) (Claims 17 and 20) in order one step to see both the distance from the free end of the tape to the rearward end of the housing, and also the distance from the free end of the tape to the guide surface (see par. 0104).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wise by including the one or more trackways comprise multiple non-overlapping linear trackways releasably coupled together, wherein each linear trackway is configured to retain the sliding member in a straight configuration (Claim 8), and the device which further has a second portion of the one or more trackways, wherein the sliding member enters the second portion in a first direction and exits the second portion in a second direction angled 90-degrees from the first direction (Claims 17 and 20) in order to position the tape measure in several orientations, as taught by Osbourne.
PNG
media_image3.png
738
894
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 9, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wise in view of Caputo as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of US 4979093, to Laine
Regarding Claim 9, Wise discloses all of claim 1 as discussed above.
Wise lacks the apparatus having a drive wheel coupled with the motor and configured to rotate in response to a rotation of the motor, the drive wheel (fig. 2, 22) contacting a first face of the sliding member, and a pinch wheel contacting a second face of the sliding member, wherein the drive wheel and the pinch wheel are biased toward one another.
Laine discloses a resilient metallic tape drive assembly (where the metallic tape is a sliding member 2), in the same field of endeavor as the resilient metallic tape slide member drive assembly tool of the present invention and discloses that such a system includes a drive wheel 22 coupled with a motor (20) and configured to rotate in response to a rotation of the motor (col. 3, lines 10-25), the drive wheel contacting a first face of the sliding member (fig 2), and a pinch wheel (24) contacting a second face of the sliding member (see fig. 2), wherein the drive wheel and the pinch wheel are biased toward one another (col 3; 60-67) in order to maintain adequate traction for driving the sliding member in a controlled manner, col 3, 60-70).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wise by including a drive wheel coupled with the motor and configured to rotate in response to a rotation of the motor, the drive wheel contacting a first face of the sliding member, and a pinch wheel contacting a second face of the sliding member, wherein the drive wheel and the pinch wheel are biased toward one another in order to maintain adequate traction for driving the sliding member in a controlled manner as taught in Laine.
Claims 11 - 12, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wise in view of Caputo as applied to claim 10 above and further in view of US 20070017111, Hoback.
Regarding Claims 11 and 12, in Wise, the one or more length indicators include tick marks 62 and wherein the control module controls the motor to position the stop at the determined distance using the tick marks, see par0027 (claim 11) and the control module further controls the motor to position the stop at the determined distance using a determined position interpolated between two of the tick marks (par 0027) (claim 12).
Wise lacks the apparatus having numbers on the tape measure slide.
Hoback discloses a tape measure control device, in the same field of endeavor as the tape measure control device tool of the present invention and discloses that such a system includes numbers on the tape measure, which numbers are in addition to tick marks (par 0018) in order to provide for easy reading of the measure to an end user, par. 0018.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify wise by having the tape have numbers are in addition to tick marks in order to provide for easy reading of the measure to an end user, as disclosed in Hoback.
Claim 15, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wise in view of Caputo as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of USPN 2343243 Roemer.
Regarding Claim 15, Wise lacks a stand coupling the first housing with the saw, the stand configured to allow adjustment of the housing to multiple fixed positions relative to the saw along three axes, each of the axes orthogonal to the other two axes.
Roemer discloses an adjustable powered saw device (see abstract), in the same field of endeavor as the adjustable/ adjusting powered saw device tool of the present invention and discloses that such a system includes a stand (combination of parts 3, 4, 13, and 42) coupling a first housing 1 with a saw 83, the stand configured to allow adjustment of the housing to multiple fixed positions relative to the saw along three axes (the saw 83 is adjusted horizontally across the table 1 via adjustment screws 7; vertically via elevating screw 29, and lengthwise relative to table 1, via trackway 42), each of the axes orthogonal to the other two axes (since the height, horizontal and lengthwise axes are each perpendicular to one another), in order to allow the saw and work to be positioned in various positions relative to one another, pg 1, col 1, lines 30-35.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wise by including a stand coupling the first housing with the saw, the stand configured to allow adjustment of the housing to multiple fixed positions relative to the saw along three axes, each of the axes orthogonal to the other two axes in order to allow the saw and work to be positioned in various positions relative to one another as taught by Roemer.
Claim 21, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wise in view of Caputo as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of US 20190227528 Abbott.
Regarding Claim 21, Wise lacks the device further comprising wherein the computing device comprises a mobile phone.
Abbott discloses a power tool control device (see abstract), in the same field of endeavor as the Power tool control device tool of the present invention and discloses that such a system includes an external computing device (par 0010, and 0050) comprising a mobile phone (par 0050).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wise by including the wherein the computing device comprises a mobile phone in order to allow a user to control the tool remotely.
Claim 22, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wise in view of Caputo, as applied to Claim 10 above, and further in view of USPGPUB 6557446, Carlberg.
Regarding Claim 22, Wise discloses the one or more visual sensors sense the one or more length indicators (par. 0028).
Wise lacks the sensing of the indicators happening through an aperture in one of the one or more trackways.
Carlberg discloses a sensor device for sensing the position of indicators on a workpiece relative to a cutter, in the same field of endeavor as the sensor device for sensing the position of indicators on a workpiece relative to a cutter tool of the present invention and discloses that such a system includes the sensing of the indicators (17) via a visual sensor 127 happening through an aperture (space between floor 121 and side walls 122 of the guide 119) in one of the one or more trackways 119 (fig 1 and fig 2, and col. 7, 20-40) in order to operate the cutter in relation to the indicia on the workpiece being transported relative to the cutter, (col 7, lines 30-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wise by having the sensing of the indicators happening through an aperture in one of the one or more guiding portions of Wise in order to operate the cutter in relation to the indicia on the workpiece being transported relative to the cutter as taught by Carlberg.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 3/20/26 with respect to the rejections of the claims under 35 USC 102/103 (as the claims have now been amended) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the prior art rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Caputo.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. USPNs/USPGPUBs 2207277 5606803 3713603 20040123479 2207277 20260049804 4506446 and 20100224046 each disclose state of the art tape measure guiders; while USPNS/USPGPUBs 4300426 4076229 4076229 5105862 7926523 3759124 1956835 and 3302669 discloses stands for saws. Thus, each of these references disclose elements relevant to the present invention/application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FERNANDO A AYALA whose telephone number is (571)270-5336. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm Eastern standard.
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 on 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.
/FERNANDO A AYALA/Examiner, Art Unit 3724
/BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights