DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 4/06/2026 has been entered. Claims 1 and 3-14 remain pending in the application. Claim 2 was cancelled.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 3 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, last 2 lines, “edge. wherein” should be “edge. Wherein” for clarity.
Regarding claim 3, “an inner groove end proximal the thickness center of the corresponding cutting edge and an outer groove end distal the thickness center of the corresponding cutting edge, wherein the inner groove end and the outer groove end intersect with the corresponding cutting edge; an inclined surface between the inner groove end and the corresponding groove bottom or between the outer groove end and the corresponding groove bottom, wherein the inclined surface is oriented at a groove end angle with respect to the corresponding cutting edge” should be delete, as the limitation was already added to claim 1 and to avoid lack of antecedent basis issues.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toshitaka (JP2007347421 A).
Regarding claim 10, Toshitaka teaches a tipped circular saw blade configured to rotate about a central axis of rotation in a rotational cutting direction (See Figure 1-2), the tipped circular saw blade comprising a plurality of tips arranged alternatively along an outer circumference of a base metal and projecting radially outward from the outer circumference of the base metal (see Figure 1-2), wherein each of the plurality of tips comprises:
a rake face positioned on a leading side of the tip relative to the rotational cutting direction of the tipped circular saw blade (see Figures 2), a flank positioned radially outward of the base metal, a cutting edge formed between the rake face and the flank, wherein the cutting edge has a pair of chamfers at both ends of the cutting edge (see Figures 2-3),
a groove (5) formed in the flank and extending from the cutting edge in the circumferential direction, wherein the groove comprises: a pair of groove ends that intersect the cutting edge (paragraph 0021 and see Figures 2-6); and an inclined surface positioned between one of the pair of groove ends and a groove bottom of the groove (see Figures 2-3).
Toshitaka fails to teach a groove end angle is greater than 60° and less than or equal to 85°.
Furthermore, with respect to the specific size of the groove end angle is greater than 60° and less than or equal to 85°, the courts have held that where the general conditions of the invention are met, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art., In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Therefore, it would have been obvious to further modify the groove of Toshitaka to have the specific sum set forth in the claim in order to get the end users desired shape of kerf.
Claims 1, 3-9 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toshitaka (JP2007347421 A) in view of Nakano (US 20200047267 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Toshitaka teaches a tipped circular saw blade configured to rotate about a central axis of rotation in a rotational cutting direction (see Figure 1), the tipped circular saw blade comprising:
a disc-shaped base metal having an outer diameter of about unknown value (see Figure 1);
a blade thickness of about unknown value (see Figure 1); and
a plurality of first tips and a plurality of second tips arranged alternately along an outer circumference of the disc-shaped base metal (tips 4, see Figure 1AB) and projecting radially outward from the outer circumference of the disc-shaped base metal (tips 4, see Figure 1AB);
wherein each of the plurality of first tips and each of the plurality of second tips includes;
a rake face (right face in Figure 1) positioned on a leading side of the corresponding tip relative to the rotational cutting direction of the tipped circular saw blade (see Figure 1AB),
a flank positioned radially outward of the disc-shaped base metal (see Figure 1AB),
a cutting edge formed between the rake face and the flank (between 8 and 9, see Figure 2),
a pair of chamfers formed at both ends of the cutting edge (10, see Figure 3), and
a groove formed in the flank and extending circumferentially from the cutting edge (4, see Figure 1B),
wherein the groove of the each of the plurality of first tips has a first groove bottom that is deepest in a radial direction and positioned at a first distance from a thickness center of the cutting edge of the corresponding first tip in a first thickness direction (a first distance from Po to O, see Figure 3),
wherein the groove of the each of the plurality of second tips has a second groove bottom that is deepest in the radial direction and positioned at a second distance from a thickness center of the cutting edge of the second tips in a second thickness direction that is opposite to the first thickness direction (a second distance from Po to O, see Figure 3), and
wherein a sum of the first distance and the second distance is an unknown value (see Figure 3).
wherein each groove comprises: an inner groove end proximal the thickness center of the corresponding cutting edge and an outer groove end distal the thickness center of the corresponding cutting edge, wherein the inner groove end and the outer groove end intersect with the corresponding cutting edge: and an inclined surface between the inner groove end and the corresponding groove bottom or between the outer groove end and the corresponding groove bottom (see Figure 3), wherein the inclined surface is oriented at a groove end angle with respect to the corresponding cutting edge. wherein the groove end angle is than 45° (see paragraph 0011 of translation).
Toshitaka fails to teach an outer diameter of about 200 mm to 500 mm, a blade thickness of about 0.8 mm to 2.0 mm, the sum is about 0.35 mm or less, the groove end angle is greater than 60° and less than or equal to 85°.
Nakano teaches a tipped circular saw blade configured to rotate about a central axis of rotation in a rotational cutting direction (see Figure 1), the tipped circular saw blade comprising: a disc-shaped base metal having an outer diameter of about 200 mm to 500 mm (within range of 280-500mm, paragraph 0005); a blade thickness of about 0.8 mm to 2.0 mm (within range of 0.8-1.1 mm, paragraph 0005).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Toshitaka to change the dimension of saw blade, as taught by Nakano, in order to provide a set of dimension for the saw blade (paragraph 0005 of Nakano).
Furthermore, with respect to the specific size of the sum of the first distance and the second distance is about 0.35 mm or less, the courts have held that where the general conditions of the invention are met, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art., In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Therefore, it would have been obvious to further modify the teeth of Toshitaka to have the specific sum set forth in the claim in order to get the end users desired shape of kerf.
Furthermore, with respect to the specific size of the groove end angle is greater than 60° and less than or equal to 85°, the courts have held that where the general conditions of the invention are met, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art., In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Therefore, it would have been obvious to further modify the groove of Toshitaka to have the specific sum set forth in the claim in order to get the end users desired shape of kerf.
Regarding claim 3, modified Toshitaka further teaches an inner groove end proximal the thickness center of the corresponding cutting edge and an outer groove end distal the thickness center of the corresponding cutting edge (see Figure 3 of Toshitaka), wherein the inner groove end and the outer groove end intersect with the corresponding cutting edge (see Figure 3 of Toshitaka); an inclined surface between the inner groove end and the corresponding groove bottom or between the outer groove end and the corresponding groove bottom (see Figure 3 of Toshitaka), wherein the inclined surface is oriented at a groove end angle with respect to the corresponding cutting edge (angle of 5, which is modified to be greater than 60 and less than 85 degrees, see Figure 3 of Toshitaka), wherein each chamfer is oriented at an angle relative to the corresponding cutting edge (angle of at 10, which is 45 degrees, see Figure 3 of Toshitaka), wherein the groove end angle is greater than the angle of each of the corresponding pair of chamfers (as modified, see Figure 3 of Toshitaka)
Regarding claim 4, modified Toshitaka further teaches each groove of the plurality of first tips has an inner edge proximal the measured from the thickness center of the corresponding cutting edge and is disposed at first inner distance measured from the thickness center of the corresponding cutting edge to the inner edge of the groove (see Figure 3 of Toshitaka wherein each groove of the plurality of second tip has an inner edge proximal the thickness center of the corresponding cutting edge and is disposed at second inner distance measured from the thickness center of the corresponding cutting edge to the inner edge of the groove (see Figure 3 of Toshitaka).
Modified Toshitaka fails to teach wherein a sum of the first inner distance and the second inner distance is less than an opening width of each groove of the plurality of first tips in the corresponding cutting edge and less than an opening width of each groove of the plurality of second tips in the corresponding cutting edge.
Furthermore, with respect to the specific sum of the first inner distance and the second inner distance is less than an opening width of each groove of the plurality of first tips in the corresponding cutting edge and less than an opening width of each groove of the plurality of second tips in the corresponding cutting edge, the courts have held that where the general conditions of the invention are met, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art., In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Therefore, it would have been obvious to further modify the teeth of Toshitaka to have the specific sum set forth in the claim in order to get the end users desired shape of kerf.
Regarding claim 5, modified Toshitaka teaches all elements of the current invention as set forth in claim 4 above.
Modified Toshitaka fails to teach the sum of the first inner distance and the second inner distance is less than half of the opening width of each groove of the plurality of first tips and less than half of the opening width of each of the plurality of second tips.
Furthermore, with respect to the specific sum of the first inner distance and the second inner distance is less than half of the opening width of each groove of the plurality of first tips and less than half of the opening width of each of the plurality of second tips, the courts have held that where the general conditions of the invention are met, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art., In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Therefore, it would have been obvious to further modify the teeth of Toshitaka to have the specific sum set forth in the claim in order to get the end users desired shape of kerf.
Regarding claim 6, modified Toshitaka further teaches each groove of the plurality of first tips has a first depth measured racially from the corresponding cutting edge (see Figure 3 of Toshitaka); a wherein each groove of the plurality of second tips has a second depth measured radially from the corresponding cutting edge (see Figure 3 of Toshitaka).
Modified Toshitaka fails to teach the first depth and the second depth are both at least two times a depth in the radial direction of each of the pair of chamfers of the corresponding cutting edge; wherein the first depth and the second depth are both no more than five times the depth of each of the pair of chamfers of the corresponding cutting edge.
Furthermore, with respect to the specific ratio of the first depth and the second depth are both at least two times a depth in the radial direction of each of the pair of chamfers of the corresponding cutting edge; wherein the first depth and the second depth are both no more than five times the depth of each of the pair of chamfers of the corresponding cutting edge, the courts have held that where the general conditions of the invention are met, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art., In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Therefore, it would have been obvious to further modify the teeth of Toshitaka to have the specific ratio set forth in the claim in order to get the end users desired shape of kerf.
Regarding claim 7, modified Toshitaka further teaches intersections between each cutting edge and the corresponding pair of chamfers are obtuse angular- shaped (the chamfer angle is about 45 degrees, intersecting with the cutting edge makes the angle to be 135 degrees which meets the limitation, see Figure 3 of Toshitaka).
Regarding claim 8, modified Toshitaka further teaches the groove end angle is configured to be about 85° or less for providing an angular-shaped groove end with an obtuse angle (as modified by claim 1, at least greater than 60 degree and less than 85 makes the other side of the angle to be 15-30 degrees and adding 90 degrees make the end with angle between 95-120, which meets the limitation, see Figure 3 of Toshitaka).
Regarding claim 9, modified Toshitaka further teaches the groove end angle is configured to be about 60° or more for reducing the sum of the first distance and the second distance and for preventing a lateral displacement of the each of the plurality of first tips and the each of the plurality of second tips (as modified by claim 1, at least greater than 60 degree and less than 85, which meets the limitation, see Figure 3 of Toshitaka).
Regarding claim 11, Toshitaka further teaches the base metal is disc-shaped having an outer diameter of an unknown value (see Figure 3).
Toshitaka fails to teach an outer diameter of about 200 mm to 500 mm.
Nakano teaches a tipped circular saw blade configured to rotate about a central axis of rotation in a rotational cutting direction (see Figure 1), the tipped circular saw blade comprising: a disc-shaped base metal having an outer diameter of about 200 mm to 500 mm (within range of 280-500mm, paragraph 0005); a blade thickness of about 0.8 mm to 2.0 mm (within range of 0.8-1.1 mm, paragraph 0005).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Toshitaka to change the dimension of saw blade, as taught by Nakano, in order to provide a set of dimension for the saw blade (paragraph 0005 of Nakano).
Regarding claim 12, Toshitaka further teaches the tipped circular saw blade has a blade thickness of an unknown value (see Figure 3).
Toshitaka fails to teach a blade thickness of about 0.8 mm to 2.0 mm.
Nakano teaches a tipped circular saw blade configured to rotate about a central axis of rotation in a rotational cutting direction (see Figure 1), the tipped circular saw blade comprising: a disc-shaped base metal having an outer diameter of about 200 mm to 500 mm (within range of 280-500mm, paragraph 0005); a blade thickness of about 0.8 mm to 2.0 mm (within range of 0.8-1.1 mm, paragraph 0005).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Toshitaka to change the dimension of saw blade, as taught by Nakano, in order to provide a set of dimension for the saw blade (paragraph 0005 of Nakano).
Regarding claim 13, modified Toshitaka further teaches the plurality of tips comprises a plurality of first tips and a plurality of second tips (4, see Figure 3 of Toshitaka), wherein the groove of each of the plurality of first tips has a first groove bottom that is deepest in a radial direction at a location disposed at a first distance in a first thickness direction from a thickness center of the corresponding cutting edge (see Figure 3 of Toshitaka), wherein the groove of each of the plurality of second tips has a second groove bottom that is deepest in the radial direction at a location disposed at a second distance in a second thickness direction opposite to the first thickness direction from a thickness center of the corresponding cutting edge (see Figure 3 of Toshitaka), wherein a sum of the first distance and the second distance is an unknown value (see Figure 3 of Toshitaka).
Toshitaka fails to teach the sum is about 0.35 mm or less.
Furthermore, with respect to the specific size of the sum of the first distance and the second distance is about 0.35 mm or less, the courts have held that where the general conditions of the invention are met, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art., In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Therefore, it would have been obvious to further modify the teeth of Toshitaka to have the specific sum set forth in the claim in order to get the end users desired shape of kerf.
Regarding claim 14, modified Toshitaka further teaches wherein a groove end angle is greater than the angle of each of the corresponding pair of chamfers (as modified, see Figure 3 of Toshitaka).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 3-14 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 LIANG DONG whose telephone number is (571)270-0479. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8 AM-6 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, Ashley Boyer 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.
/LIANG DONG/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 5/14/2026
Prosecution Insights