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 .
Election/Restrictions
In response to the election requirement, Applicant has elected Species I with traverse in the reply filed on 09/22/2025. Claims 11-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species II.
Claims 1-10 are pending and under examination.
Applicant traverses on the ground that the two species at issue are not patentably distinct. Applicant asserts the friction rings discloses in Species I and II are essentially identical. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The friction rings in Species II comprise a plurality of columns disposed at intervals. While function of the friction ring is to stop rotation of the tool holder and the sanding pad by a friction force, specification of the instant application states the friction force is determined by setting a contact area between the surfaces of the plurality of columns and an eccentric block (p. 18:14-19:10). Therefore, a friction ring with a plurality of columns exercises different dynamics compared with a friction ring without a plurality of columns.
The Species I and II are independent or distinct because they possess mutually exclusive characteristics, and the restriction requirement was proper.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/07/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings submitted on 06/07/2023 are being considered by the examiner.
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 1-10 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.
In claim 1, lines 9-11, the phrase “the friction ring stops rotation of the tool holder and the sanding pad by a friction force exerting on the surface of the eccentric block” renders claim vague and indefinite. While specification does not provide any further explanation, figs. 1-3 of the instant application shows the friction ring 37 makes contact not only with the eccentric block 33 but also with a tool holder 34 including bearings 341 and a sanding pad connector 342. Because all components are connected together and touched by the friction ring, it is not clear how the friction force is exerted only to the surface of the eccentric block. The friction force of the friction ring should also be exerted to the tool holder 34 to stop the rotation. The sanding pad would be a component to be stopped not by the direct friction force exerted by the friction ring because the sanding pad is coupled to the friction ring through the tool holder. For examination purpose the examiner has interpreted the friction force of the friction ring is exerted to the surface of the eccentric block and the tool holder, and a friction force exerting on the tool holder can stop rotation of the eccentric block in addition to the friction force exerting on the surface of the eccentric block.
Claims 2-10 inherit the above deficiency by nature of their dependency.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Howard, Jr. et al. (US 5392568, cited on 06/07/2023 IDS, hereinafter Howard), in view of Nace et al. (US 2022/0063047, hereinafter Nace) and Walker (US 2003/0017795).
Regarding claim 1, Howard discloses, in figs. 1 and 2, a random orbital sanding tool (random orbit sander 10), comprising a power motor (motor 30), a driving spindle (drive spindle 34) connected to the power motor, an eccentric block (retainer 40) connected to the driving spindle, a tool holder disposed on the eccentric block, and a sanding pad (sand paper 19) connected to the tool holder and indirectly driven by the power motor, wherein the random orbital sanding tool comprises a friction ring (braking member 48) disposed on the tool holder, the friction ring contacts a surface of the eccentric block facing the sanding pad, the friction ring controls rotation of the tool holder and the sanding pad by a friction force exerting on the surface of the eccentric block; the friction ring comprises a base part protruding into a gap between the tool holder and the eccentric block, a sleeve part diverged and extended from the base part, and a friction part connected to the base part (fig. 1, annotated Howard figs. 2 and 3 below, col. 4:25-6:17, the drive spindle 34 is connected to the motor 30. The retainer 40 [corresponds to the recited eccentric block] includes an eccentric arbor 36c. The recited tool holder includes a bearing 42, which is eccentrically disposed to the drive spindle 34, a platen 18, and threaded screws 38, 44. The components of the tool holder are disposed on the retainer 40 and the sand paper 19. The braking member 48 [corresponds to the recited friction ring] disposed on the platen 18 and is coupled to the retainer 40 through the components of the tool holder. The sand paper 19 rotates because it is attached to the platen 19, which is driven by the motor 30. The braking member 48 prevents the platen 18 from rotating exceeding a certain rpm when the platen is lifted off a work surface. A recited base part of the braking member 48 protrudes into a gap between the platen 18 and the retainer 40. The braking member 48 frictionally rides and exerts spring force to the platen to limit the rotational speed. Because the braking member is coupled to the retainer 40, it controls the speed the rotational speed of the retainer 40. As discussed in 112(b) rejection, the braking member 48 effectively controls the rotating speed of the retainer 40 by exerting frictional force to the platen 18), but does not disclose the friction part is constantly in contact with the surface of the eccentric block. The braking member of Howard is coupled to the retainer 40 through the tool holder, but does not make a direct contact with the surface of the retainer 40.
Nace teaches, in an analogous power tool field of endeavor, the friction part is constantly in contact with the surface of the eccentric block (¶ 0038, Nace discloses a power tool which can be a sander; fig. 2 and ¶ 0046 Nace discloses a conventional wheel retention mechanism comprising a spring member 130 [corresponds to the recited friction ring] which constantly makes a contact with a surface of a bearing 122 through a spacer 132. The eccentric block of Howard includes the bearing, thus by combining Nace with Howard, the braking member of Howard can be modified such that the spring member/friction ring extends to make a contact with a surface of the eccentric block).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the friction ring of Howard to make it contact with the eccentric block as taught by Nace so that increased friction can be applied for braking the rotation of an accessory wheel off an output spindle (Nace ¶ 0045).
Howard as modified by Nace does not disclose the rotation control of the friction ring is stopping rotation of the tool holder and the sanding pad when the power motor stops operation. The braking member of Howard limits the rotation speed. Because the speed limiting is done by applying friction force, the platen could be stopped eventually when the power motor stops, but Howard does not disclose it explicitly.
Walker teaches, in an analogous random orbit sander field of endeavor, the friction ring stops rotation of the tool holder and the sanding pad when the power motor stops operation (fig. 1 and ¶ 0032, a sander comprises a brake pad 99 including a resilient ring 52. The brake not only limits the speed but also stops the rotation of the tool in a very reduced time when the tool is switched off).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the random orbital sanding tool of Howard as modified by Nace to make the friction ring to stop the rotation when the power motor stops as taught by Walker so that it provides safety to a user because there is no rotating component soon after the motor stops.
PNG
media_image1.png
893
1012
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Howard Fig. 2
PNG
media_image2.png
566
838
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Howard Fig. 3
Regarding claim 2, Howard as modified by Nace and Walker teaches the random orbital sanding tool as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the eccentric block comprises an accommodating slot provided for disposal of the tool holder therein, and the friction part is in constant contact with an edge of a slot opening of the accommodating slot (annotated Howard fig. 2 above, the retainer 40 [corresponds to the recited eccentric block] comprises an accommodating slot to hold the eccentric bearing 42 and the threaded screws 38, 44 of the recited tool holder; Nace fig. 2, the spring member 130 [corresponds to the recited friction ring] contacts an edge of a slot opening of a cover 114b [corresponds to the recited eccentric block] which holds the bearing 122. The recited friction part of the Howard’s braking member 48 does not extend to an opening of the retainer 40, thus Howard can be combined with Nace to modify a configuration of the braking member 48 to extend it so that the friction part makes a constant contact with an edge of a slot opening of the accommodation slot of the retainer 40 [corresponds to the recited eccentric block]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the tool of Howard as modified by Nace and Walker to provide the friction part to contact the edge of the slot opening as taught by Nace so that increased friction can be applied for braking the rotation of an accessory wheel off an output spindle (Nace ¶ 0045).
Regarding claim 3, Howard as modified by Nace and Walker teaches the random orbital sanding tool as in the rejection of claim 2, wherein a level height of the friction part in a free state is higher than that of the base part (see annotated Howard fig. 3 above, the friction part of the braking member 48 [corresponds to the recited friction ring] is positioned higher than the base part. The braking member 48 shown in fig. 3 is does not show deformation, thus it is a free state configuration).
Regarding claim 4, Howard as modified by Nace and Walker teaches the random orbital sanding tool as in the rejection of claim 3, wherein the friction part extends obliquely toward the eccentric block (see annotated Howard figs. 2 and 3 above, the friction part of the braking member 48 [corresponds to the recited friction ring] extends obliquely toward the retainer 40 [corresponds to the recited eccentric block]).
Regarding claims 5 and 10, Howard as modified by Nace and Walker teaches the random orbital sanding tool as in the rejection of claims 4 and 1 respectively, wherein a level height of a bottom edge of the friction ring is higher than that of the tool holder (see annotated Howard figs. 2 and 3 above, a bottom edge of the braking member 48 [corresponds to the recited friction ring] is positioned higher than the threaded screw 38 and the platen 18, which form the recited tool holder).
Regarding claim 6, Howard as modified by Nace and Walker teaches the random orbital sanding tool as in the rejection of claim 4, wherein the friction ring is made of rubber (Walker ¶ 0032, the resilient ring 52 of the brake pad 99 is formed from a synthetic rubber resilient material. By combining Howard with Walker, the braking member of Howard can be made of rubber).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the friction ring of Howard as modified by Nace and Walker to be made of rubber as taught by Walker. The rubber material provides resilience so that the brake pad can perform its function repeatedly (Walker ¶ 0013).
Regarding claim 7, Howard as modified by Nace and Walker teaches the random orbital sanding tool as in the rejection of claim 3, wherein the friction part is disc-shaped (annotated Howard fig. 3 above, the figure shows a cross-sectional view of the friction part of the braking member 48 [corresponds to the friction ring]. A circular form of the friction part would be disc-shaped).
Regarding claim 8, Howard as modified by Nace and Walker teaches the random orbital sanding tool as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the friction ring is recessed at a junction between the base part and the friction part (see annotated Howard fig. 3 above for the recited recess).
Regarding claim 9, Howard as modified by Nace and Walker teaches the random orbital sanding tool as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the friction ring comprises a ring inner space, and a shape of the ring inner space in the base part is different from that in the sleeve part (annotated Howard fig. 3, above, the figure shows a cross-sectional view of the braking member 48 [corresponds to the friction ring]. A circular form of the base part and the sleeve part would form different configuration of a ring inner space because they have different cross-sectional configuration).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Siedler et al. (WO 0115857A1) discloses a portable eccentric or orbital sander comprising a motor, a spindle, a sanding pad, and a friction ring.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUKWOO JAMES CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7402. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00a-5:00p.
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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
/SUKWOO JAMES CHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3723