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
This office action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed 18 July 2026.
Drawings
Replacement drawings were received on 18 July 2026. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 8-9, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Timmons et al. (US 9,242,367).
Regarding claim 1, Timmons et al. discloses a drill press 10, comprising: a main housing 18 electrically connected to a power source 30 configured to drive an electric motor (DC motor, or AC motor if using AC voltage input from a wall outlet); a drill unit (working tool 26 and non-labeled tool chuck and spindle with non-labeled housing, see figure 1) supported by the main housing; a motor carriage 14 housing the electric motor which drives a drilling mechanism 26; and a base 34 coupled to the main housing, wherein the base includes a magnet assembly 42 to create a magnetic field for magnetically latching the base to a workpiece, wherein the magnet assembly has a magnet 54 having an engaged orientation (figure 5A) in which a magnetic field of the magnet assembly when in the engaged orientation magnetically engages a work surface preventing a user from removing the drill press from the work surface, and having a disengaged orientation (figure 5B) in which the magnetic field of the magnet assembly when in the disengaged orientation allows for the removal of the drill press from the work surface by a user, and wherein the drill unit is configured to move relative to the main housing (using non-labeled handle seen in figure 1).
Regarding claim 2, Timmons et al. discloses wherein the magnet assembly 42 is rotatably attached to the base 34 (drum 50 and magnets 54 rotate relative to the base).
Regarding claim 3, Timmons et al. discloses wherein the magnet assembly 42 comprises a shaft 50 and at least one permanent magnet 54 disposed on the shaft.
Regarding claim 4, Timmons et al. discloses wherein the shaft 50 is rotatable between a first position (figure 5B) where the base 34 would not magnetically engage the workpiece and a second position (figure 5A) where the base would engage the workpiece.
Regarding claim 8, Timmons et al. discloses wherein the drill unit (working tool 26 and non-labeled tool chuck and spindle with non-labeled housing, see figure 1) is powered by a power tool battery pack 30.
Regarding claim 9, Timmons et al. discloses wherein the power tool battery pack 30 is disposed on the main housing 18.
Regarding claim 20, Timmons et al. discloses a drill press 10, comprising: a main housing 18 configured to receive a power tool battery pack 30; a drill unit (working tool 26 and non-labeled tool chuck and spindle with non-labeled housing, see figure 1) having an electric motor (DC motor) configured to receive electric power from the power tool battery pack; a drilling mechanism 26 driven by said electric motor; a motor carriage 14 configured to selectively move the drill unit toward and away from a workpiece, and to selectively move the drill unit relative to the power tool battery pack when the power tool battery pack is received by the main housing; and a base 34 having a magnet assembly 42 to create a magnetic field for selectively magnetically latching the base to a workpiece, wherein the base is coupled to the main housing (see figure 1).
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Timmons et al. in view of Otsuka et al. (US 7,936,142).
Regarding claim 5, Timmons et al. discloses the invention substantially as claimed, except Timmons et al. does not disclose wherein the base further comprising a switch assembly for detecting the magnet assembly in at least one of the first and second positions. Otsuka et al. teaches the use of a drill press 1 that comprises a main housing 2, a drill unit 3, and a base 16 comprising a magnet 16 for generating a magnetic force, further comprising a switch 36 for providing power that is used in cooperation with a detector 20 and alarm that is used for detecting when the magnet is in a disconnected position. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have combined the drill press of Morton with the switch and detector/alarm assembly of Otsuka et al. in order to be able to automatically determine whether or not the magnetic assembly is in an off or on position.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Timmons et al. in view of Morton (US 2017/0232605 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Timmons et al. discloses wherein the shaft is connected to an input assembly (hexagonal body 102 and input knob 104 for rotating the magnet assembly). Timmons et al. does not disclose wherein the input assembly is a lever assembly. Morton teaches the use of a drill press (embodiment of figure 6) comprising a magnet assembly 12 with a shaft that is operatively connected to the magnet assembly by a lever assembly 74 for the purpose of rotating the magnet assembly between an engaged and disengaged position with a workpiece. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have replaced the knob assembly of Timmons et al. with the lever assembly of Morton in order to be able to use an alternative, well-known means for engaging and disengaging the magnet assembly.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Timmons et al. in view of Fujimori et al. (WO 2020/230454 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Timmons et al. discloses the invention substantially as claimed, except Timmons et al. does not disclose further comprising at least one LED disposed on the main housing and electrically powered by the power tool battery pack. Fujimori et al. teaches the use of a drill press 1 that comprises an LED 52 disposed on a main housing 10 and electrically powered by a power tool battery pack 14, and combined with magnetic sensors 48/50 for the purpose of detecting and displaying whether or not a magnet assembly 28/32 has sufficient magnetic attraction force to attach to a workpiece. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have combined the drill press of Timmons et al. with the magnetic sensors and LED of Fujimori et al. in order to automatically notify an operator if the magnet assembly does not have enough attractive force to properly attach the drill press to a workpiece.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 15-19 are allowed for including the indicated allowable subject matter set forth in the office action mailed 18 February 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6 and 8-10 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 ERIC ANDREW GATES whose telephone number is (571)272-5498. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 9-6, Alt Fr 9-5.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sunil Singh, can be reached on 571-272-3460. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ERIC A. GATES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722 10 August 2026
Prosecution Insights