DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 25-37 are presented for examination.
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/4/24 was considered by the examiner. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
Claim Objections
Claim 26 objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3, “device characteristic,” should be -- device characteristic. --. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
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.
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
7. Claim 26 is 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 preAIA
35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 26 is indefinite for the limitation "characteristic or a power tool”. it should be replaced with -- characteristic of a power tool --.
8. Claim 36 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 25 is method for operating power tool. Claim 36 depending on claim 25 for again stating “a power tool for carrying the method of claim 25” does not further limit subject matter for claim it depends from. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
9. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
10. Claims 25 and 27-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101. Specifically, independent claims 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Regarding Claim 25:
Step 1: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Yes, the claim is directed to a method.
Step 2A Prong 1: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
The limitations “selecting an application-optimized device characteristic
by a user of the power tool”, etc. The limitations above, as drafted, is a process or function that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. This process is a mental process as described in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III), because the recited processing is simple enough to be practically performed in the human mind.
Step 2A Prong 2: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
The claim further recites “the application-optimized device characteristic lying in a qualified operating range of the power tool” which are directed to insignificant extra‐solution activities, specifically mere data processing, and necessary outputting. These additional elements are recited at a high level of generality and are thus insignificant extra‐solution activities. When viewed individually or on combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: Do the limitations add elements amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception?
No, the limitations do not add elements amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. As recited above, the additional elements “the device characteristic having a spread value S lying in a range from 0.2 to 0.6” amount to insignificant extra‐solution activities, specifically mere data processing, and necessary outputting. These additional elements, when considered separately or in combination, are well‐understood, routine and conventional activities in the field (as shown in the court case, mere data gathering is considered routine and conventional activities. See In re Meyers, 688 F.2d 789, 794; 215 USPQ 193, 196‐97 (CCPA 1982)) and do not add inventive concept into the claim.
Therefore, claim 25 is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more, and is not patent eligible.
Regarding Claims 27-37:
Dependent claims 27-37 do not contain additional limitations that integrate the exception into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the exception.
11. Examiner's note: To qualify as a § 101 statutory process, the claim should positively recite the particular machine to which it is tied, for example by identifying the apparatus that accomplishes the method steps, or positively recite the subject matter that is being transformed, for example by identifying the material that is being changed to a different state.
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.
12. 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.
(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.
13. Claims 25-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Dietl et al. (Dietl), US publication no. 2012/0223663.
As per claim 25, Dietl teaches a method for operating a power tool [figure 14], the method comprising:
selecting an application-optimized device characteristic by a user of the power tool [figures 2, 3, 4, 8; para 16], the application-optimized device characteristic lying in a qualified operating range of the power tool, the device characteristic having a spread value S [a rotation-speed/torque profile] lying in a range from 0.2 to 0.6 [rotation-speed/
torque characteristic can be achieved which is designed] [para 16-18, 32, 33, 84, 85; claim 18].
Dietl teaches:
[0016] The permanently effective control circuit allows the motor to be optimally matched for different operating states. Depending on the configuration of the motor and depending on the configuration of the permanently effective control circuit, this makes it possible to produce rotation-speed/ torque characteristics which are matched to specific nominal characteristics during operation. By way of example, a suitable design makes it possible to achieve a steeper rotation-speed/ torque profile than in the case of a conventional direct current motor which is otherwise of the same type.
[0017] Alternatively or additionally, a rotation-speed/torque characteristic can be achieved which is designed for greater use in a high rotation-speed range and which, furthermore, is also suitable for operation with a higher torque in a lower rotation-speed range.
[0018] In this case, depending on the design of the motor and of the permanently effective control circuit, the rotation-speed/torque characteristic can be matched to numerous nominal profiles, in which case it is also possible to implement the typical behaviour of a motor which is provided with a two-gear or multi-gear gearbox.
18. A direct-current motor having a specific rotation-speed/torque characteristic during rated operation, said motor comprising a matching arrangement for varying at least one
parameter selected from the group consisting of rotation speed and torque, and having a permanently effective control circuit for controlling said motor, said control circuit being programmed such that the rotation-speed/torque characteristic is permanently varied with respect to said specific rotation-speed/torque characteristic during rated operation or with respect to operation with said matching arrangement, wherein said motor is configured such that it operates in a thermally impermissible range during continuous operation, at least in sub-areas of its rotation-speed/torque characteristic,
and wherein said control circuit is programmed such that the motor is operated in a thermally permissible range during continuous operation, wherein a sensor is provided for detecting a time-dependent rise in a load on said motor, said sensor being coupled to said control circuit for initiating an increase in output power of the motor, over a limited time, if a predetermined threshold value is exceeded.
As per claim 26, Dietl teaches a) configuring the application-optimized device characteristic [para 15-18] or a power tool [para 116] and b) operating the power tool with the application-optimized device characteristic [para 16-18].
As per claim 27, Dietl teaches the device characteristic is selected on the power tool itself [para 15-17, 38] or using an input device [para 116].
As per claim 28, Dietl teaches the device characteristic is determined by characteristic points [figures 2, 3, 4, 8; para 15-16, 87].
As per claim 29, Dietl teaches the device characteristic comprises i characteristic points and (i-1) subportions [figures 2, 3, 4, 8; para 15-16, 87].
As per claim 30, Dietl teaches each of the characteristic points is formed by a torque value M and a speed value n [figures 2, 3, 4, 8; para 15-16, 87].
As per claim 31, Dietl teaches the characteristic points are determined by inputting the characteristic points into the power tool itself [para 15-18, 38] or on an input device [para 116].
As per claim 32, Dietl teaches the device characteristic is assigned to an application field of the power tool [figure 14; para 15, 16, 116].
As per claim 33, Dietl teaches the spread value S lies in a range from 0.3 to 0.5 [para 16, 17, 85].
As per claim 34, Dietl teaches the spread value S lies in a range from 0.33 to 0.4. [para 16, 17, 85].
As per claim 35, Dietl teaches the spread value S lies at 0.36 [para 16, 17, 85].
As to claims 36 and 37, basically are the corresponding elements that are carried out the method of operating step in claims 25 and 28. Accordingly, claims 36 and 37 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claims 25 and 28.
14. Examiner's note: Examiner has cited particular paragraphs and columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. MPEP 2141.02 VI: “PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS."
15. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Sattler et al., US publication no. 2024/0123593, teaches a method for operating a power tool, the method comprising: implementing in the power tool a rotational speed graduation of an electronic form, a circumferential speed at the tool of the power tool remaining constant during the rotational speed graduation, a rotational speed spread
DELTA_n of greater than 2 being achieved by design.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUN CAO whose telephone number is (571)272-3664. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:00 am-3:30 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kamini Shah can be reached on 571-272-9. 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).
/CHUN CAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115