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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 33-46, 50 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. The limitations drawn to a calculated torque curve render the claims indefinite since the means for calculating such torque curve has not been disclosed nor the particular circumstances have been detailed. Applicant has not disclosed any limits to said calculation. Clarification is required for further examination.
Claims 47 and 49 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. The limitations drawn to the flattening of the waverform render the claims indefinite since it is not clear how or by which means the waveform is being flattened. Clarification is required for further examination.
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 (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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 33, 34, 37, 38, 44 and 47-50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yoshinari et al. [US 2018/0071843].
Claim 33, Yoshinari discloses a power tool [100] with a tool [4], an electric motor [1] for driving the tool and a control unit [9] for controlling the electric motor [figure 3], wherein the power tool is designed to be connected to a mains voltage [provided by power source 300] and comprises a rectifier arrangement [91] with an intermediate circuit [92] for providing an intermediate circuit voltage on the basis of the mains voltage, wherein the intermediate circuit voltage has a plurality of successive voltage half-waves [as shown in figure 5A], the control unit being configured to calculate a torque curve [figure 5B, wherein a change in voltage is an indication of torque variation and graphing such results require calculation] for driving the electric motor, the calculated torque curve comprising a respective torque half-wave for each voltage half-wave [figures 5A and 5B], and the control unit being configured to determine a countervoltage [V1] induced in the electric motor and, in response to the countervoltage [V1] being greater than or equal to the intermediate circuit voltage [V], to reduce a current torque value of the calculated torque curve [as shown in figure 5B, during T2, when V1 is greater than V, no current and therefore no torque are provided to the motor].
Claim 34, Yoshinari discloses the power tool according to claim 33, wherein the control unit [9], in response to the countervoltage [V1] being greater than or equal to the intermediate circuit voltage [V at T2; figure 5B], is adapted to set the current torque value of the calculated torque curve to zero [current is set to zero; figure 5B].
Claim 37, Yoshinari discloses the power tool according to claim 33, wherein the control unit [9] is configured, when the countervoltage [V1] is greater than or equal to the intermediate circuit voltage [V], to maintain an electrical connection leading to the electric motor, which electrical connection serves to drive the electric motor [figures 3 and 5A].
Claim 38, Yoshinari discloses the power tool according to claim 33, wherein the control unit is configured to determine the induced countervoltage on the basis of a rotational speed of the electric motor [paragraph 060; Hall effect sensors 13 detect the rotated position of the rotor 11 and output a position signal to the control unit 9].
Claim 44, Yoshinari discloses the power tool according to claim 33, wherein the control unit [9] is configured to energize the electric motor [1] in accordance with the torque half-wave [figures 5A and 5B].
Claims 47 and 49, a method of operating a power tool with a tool, an electric motor for driving the tool and a control unit for controlling the electric motor is inherent in the product structure as outlined in claims 33 and 34 above by Yoshinari.
Claim 50, Yoshinari discloses the power tool according to claim 33, wherein the power tool [100] is a hand-held power tool [electric circular saw; paragraph 0050; figure 1].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 35, 36, 39-43, 45 and 46 are 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.
Claim 48 is allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the prior art of record does not teach the claimed calculated torque curve however, the reference teaches a showing of change in output voltage which indicates a change in torque, as generated by said voltage and as such the toque can be calculated. Additionally, this limitation is indefinite as per the rejection above.
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 Bernard Rojas whose telephone number is (571)272-1998. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. thru Fri. 7:00 am - 4:00 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, Shawki S Ismail can be reached at (571) 272-3985. 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.
/BERNARD ROJAS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837