DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to papers filed on 25 October 2023.
Claims 1-14 and 16-20 are pending and presented for examination. Claim 15 has been cancelled.
Applicant's submission of references on form PTO-1449, filed on October 25, 2023 and January 29, 2026, have been considered. A signed copy of each form is attached.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show items 46 - a lens holder, 50 - protective glass, and 39 - housing, to name a few as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Independent claims 1 and 13 contain the term “measuring chamber”. It is not clear as the what it is and how it’s used in the instant invention. Throughout the specification the term is described but only as to how it is configured, An explanation of what is measured and how the measurements are taken is not expressed to allow one of ordinary skill to operate the machine as claimed without undue experimentation. A thorough explanation with regard to the how’s and what’s needs to be provided without including any new matter so as the supplement the configuration information in the instant specification.
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)(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.
Claims 1-5, 7-14,16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Publication No. US 2022/0080546 A1 to Cambruzzi et al..
The published invention of prior art to Cambruzzi et al. (herein after “Cambruzzi”) teaches of a mounting device for the automated drilling of holes in building walls having a drilling device with a drill. In doing so, the published invention teaches the elements of the instant claims as follows.
Regarding independent claims 1 and 13 A method for using a tool and the tool itself, with a mobile power tool, wherein the mobile power tool has a measuring chamber in which the tool can be at least partially held in order to determine at least one property, the method comprising determining the at least one property of the tool by the mobile power tool. The use of a mobile power tool and a tool is taught in paragraph [0006] where the use of a drilling device and a drill is stated. Followed by paragraph [0064] where the device and tool are stated as assessing conditions of the drill.
With claim 2 the method according to claim 1, comprising determining a tool type, a size and/or an amount of wear is determined as [a] the at least one property. This element is taught in paragraph [0021] where the wear of the tool is reassessed at regular or irregular intervals to determine the condition is explained.
As per claim 3, the method as claimed in claim 1, comprising recording an image of the tool is by an image recording unit to determine the at least one property. This feature of the instant invention is taught in paragraph [0017] where an optical detection device is introduced as being able to detect different optical properties of the drill and store them in a digital image is described.
Claim 4 recites the method as claimed in claim 1, comprising recording an image of a working section of the tool. Cambruzzi teaches that “information about the optical properties of the drill in digital form, … can be evaluated with a control device”.
With claim 5, the method as claimed in claim 1, comprising measuring a working parameter during working operation of the mobile power tool to determine the at least one property. Paragraph [0021] of the reference of prior art states that the control device measures working parameters at regular or irregular intervals to determine the condition on the working tool.
Regarding claim 7 the method as claimed in claim 1, comprising using a trainable filter to determine the at least one property. In paragraph [0022], Cambruzzi explains that “assessing a condition of the drill is that of detecting a condition of the drill”, and in paragraph [0013] the prior art teaches the use of a program by the control device which is commensurate with the “using a trainable filter” as claimed.
In claim 8 the method as claimed in claim 1, comprising training the trainable filter with data from fully functional, worn out and damaged tools. As described in paragraph [0021], the control device is able to identify how much the tool is worn out, damaged or fully functional and then decide what to do with the tool. Having the control device operate according to software allows for the data to be trained.
As per claim 9 the method as claimed in claim 1, comprising determining the at least one property of the tool on a construction site. In paragraph [0009] states the device being used in an elevator shaft or building wall establishing a construction site.
With claim 10, the method as claimed in claim 1, comprising measuring a working parameter during working operation of the mobile power tool to determine a first property and recording an image of the tool by the image recording unit to determine a second property. This element is taught in paragraph [0020] wherein it is stated “to evaluate the digital image and … to assess a condition of the drill”.
In claim 11 the method as claimed in claim 10, comprising determining the second property when the first property reaches or is in a critical value range. Cambruzzi teaches in paragraph [0020] about evaluations of the tool and device and continues to state “in addition to the aforementioned conditions, there can be further conditions such as “ok with reservations”.”
Claim 12 is directed to the method of claim 10, comprising checking a drilling tool using the image recording unit as soon as an excessively low drilling speed is established. This aspect of the instant invention is explained in paragraphs [0022]-[0023].
In claim 14, the mobile power tool as claimed in clam 13, wherein the mobile power tool has at least one image recording unit (40). Paragraph [0007] describes “a digital image of at least a part of the drill of the drilling device is detected by means of an optical detection device arranged on the mounting device. The drilling device and the optical detection device are controlled by a control device. The control device evaluates the aforementioned digital image and, in doing so, assesses a condition of the drill.”
Regarding claim 16 the mobile power tool as claimed in claim 13 wherein the image recording unit is arranged in the measuring chamber and/or adjacent to the measuring chamber. The placement of the image recording unit or camera is taught in paragraph [0063].
As per claim 18, the mobile power tool as claimed in claim 13, wherein the mobile power tool is configured to automatically set an operating parameter, for example a rotation speed and/or an impact energy, depending on the detected type and/or depending on the detected state. This is taught in paragraph [0013] where the program is described.
With regard to claim 20 the mobile power tool as claimed in claim 13, wherein the mobile power tool is a construction robot, The power tool being a robot is taught in paragraph [0015] where “in the form of an industrial robot” is stated.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Publication No. US 2022/0080546 A1 to Cambruzzi et al. as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of US Patent Publication No. US 2016/0151934 A1 to Pfeifer et al..
The teachings of Cambruzzi are aforementioned.
Regarding claims 6 and 17, the method and mobile power tool as claimed in
claims 1 and 13, comprising determining the at least one property, using an acceleration sensor, a force sensor and/or a position detection unit is claimed. Although the prior art of Cambruzzi mentions the use of sensors, the reference does not specifically teach the use of an acceleration sensor as claimed. For this reason, the reference of prior art to Pfeifer et al. (herein after “Pfeifer”) is introduced. As Pfeifer states in paragraph [0030] “the power tool 1 is configured in the form of a core drilling machine and it comprises a drive 10, a drive shaft 20, a tool 30 in the form of a drill bit, an acceleration sensor 40, a control unit 50 and a filter 60.” The use of the acceleration sensor allows the control unit to measure acceleration values so that it becomes possible to detect vibrations. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the above mentioned invention of Cambruzzi with that of Pfeifer so as to allow for the determination of parameters or properties based upon the operational or working limitations for increased productivity.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Publication No. US 2022/0080546 A1 to Cambruzzi et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent Publication No. US 2022/0241876 A1 to Hartvigsen et al..
The teachings of Cambruzzi are aforementioned.
In claim 19 the mobile power tool as claimed in claim 13, wherein the mobile power tool has a tool cleaning apparatus. While Cambruzzi is silent on teaching a tool cleaning apparatus, the prior art of Hartvigsen et al. (herein after “Hartvigsen”) teaches the use of “an adaptor for a vacuum cleaner so that when a vacuum cleaner is mounted it facilitates sucking dust from the cutting operations” in paragraph [0386]. Thereby allowing for cleaning up after the device and tool have been used to perform their operations. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the above mentioned invention of Cambruzzi with that of Pfeifer so as to allow an extraction device to be understood to be “an exhaust hose, vacuum cleaner, blower, fan or other type of device for directing the chips, flakes or dust from the cutting process away from the cutting area.”
For the reasons stated above, the limitations of the instant invention are taught and/or fairly suggested by the prior arts of record; thereby, rendering the instant claims unpatentable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent Publication No. US 2022/0181096 A1 Storbjork et al.
Relates to the control of powered devices and the method of controlling an operation of the powered device
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sheela Rao whose telephone number is (571) 272- 3751. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Wednesday from 7:00 am to 1:00 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, Mohammad Ali, can be reached on (571) 272-4105. The fax number for the organization where this application or any proceeding papers has been 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. It should be noted that 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 any questions arise regarding 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.
/Sheela Rao/Examiner, Art Unit 2119 June 16, 2026
/MOHAMMAD ALI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights