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 because there are 3 references “18”; it is unclear what the top reference “18” is pointing to. 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.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because line 1 “a glass slit cutter may include…” is suggested to be –A glass slit cutter includes…--, since a first letter is needed to capital and the language “may” is needed to delete for avoiding confusing whether following structures are positively disclosed or not. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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, 3-20 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.
Claim 1 recites “a solenoid that powers the cutting power wheel” is new matter because the original specification does not support for it. Reading at Applicant’s paras. 44-45 of the original specification and looking at Figures 4 and 6 appear that the solenoid is configured to power the force applicator to rotate the cutting wheel cantilever 36, not rotate the cutting wheel. Also, there is no “cutting power wheel” mentioned in the original specification. Claim 14 has the same issue.
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, 3-20 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.
Claim 1, the phrase “a solenoid that powers the cutting power wheel” renders indefinite. See the discussion 112a above; the solenoid is configured to power the force applicator to rotate the cutting wheel cantilever 36, not the cutting wheel. See https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wheel that is a circular frame of hard material. and the “power” cutting wheel lacks of antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. This recitation is indefinite because it is unclear whether it refers a new power cutting wheel or inherently refers to previously introduced cutting wheel. As results, it is clear what interpretation to give this phrase. Claim 14 has the same issue.
Claim 1, the last paragraph “wherein the solenoid is further configured to rotate at least one of the cutting wheel or the reference wheel to facilitate synchronous rotation of the cutting wheel and reference wheel” is confusing. See the issue above, the solenoid is configured to rotate the cutting wheel cantilever 36, not the cutting wheel (not rotate the wheel). As the last paragraph is written, it appears the solenoid rotates the at least one of the cutting wheel or the reference wheel which is confusing and conflicting the disclosure. Also “to facilitate synchronous rotation of the cutting wheel and reference wheel” is confusing whether both the cutting wheel and reference wheel are configured to rotate the same time or both reference and cutting wheel cantilevers rotate the same time. Claim 14 has the same issue. Please note that during cutting glass, both the cutting wheel and the reference wheel are rotated on the glass at the same time.
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.
Claims 1, 3-12, 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pinel (US 3518907).
Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Pinel shows a glass slit cutter (Figure 1) comprising:
a body (1, 2, Figures 1 and 3);
a cutting wheel (27) extending from the body and configured to cut a slit in a pane of glass (see the title);
a reference wheel (29) extending from the body and configured to guide the cutting wheel along the pane of glass;
a solenoid (as it is written, it is unclear what type of the solenoid, therefore, the electromagnet 22/21 is one type of solenoids and meets this limitation. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solenoid) that powers a cantilever (arms 5/7) of the cutting wheel; and
a ball bearing axle (3-4, 6, Figure 3) extending through the body, wherein the cutting wheel and the reference wheel rotate about a common axis the ball bearing axle within the body (Figures 1-3), and
wherein the solenoid is further configured to rotate at least one of the cutting wheel or the reference wheel to facilitate synchronous rotation of the cutting wheel and reference wheel (see both the cutting and reference wheels pivoted by actuating a core 21 od an electromagnet 22).
Regarding claim 3, Pinel shows that the body comprises a first portion (a left portion 2, Figure 3) and a second portion (a right portion 2, Figure 3) defining an operating channel therebetween (for receiving arm 7, Figure 3), and wherein the cutting wheel extends from the first portion (see figure 3, the lever 5 extends from the left portion 2), and the cutting wheel extends from the body within the operating channel (see Figure 3, the arm 5 extends from the frame 1 and the yoke 2).
Regarding claim 4, Pinel shows that the ball bearing axle extends through the first portion of the body, the operating channel, and the second portion of the body (Figure 3).
Regarding claim 5, Pinel shows the ball bearing axle extends through at least a portion of the solenoid so that the solenoid rotates about the ball bearing axle (see Figure 2 the axle 3 extends through at least a portion of the solenoid (arm 16 that connects the link-arm 17).
Regarding claim 6, Pinel shows a force applicator (13, 33) configured to apply a force to the cutting wheel via power received from the solenoid (as it is written, it is unclear what type of power is, therefore, looking at Figures 2 and 5, the electromagnet 22 extends or retracts an arm 17 that causes movement of the lever 5 and bracket 7 and provides some power to the springs 13, 33 as seen in Figure 2).
Regarding claim 7, Pinel shows that the force applicator is an air spring (see springs 13, 33).
Regarding claim 8, Pinel shows a bracket (76, 78, Figures 5-6 of John), wherein a first end of the bracket (a left side of a yoke 9, Figure 3) is connected to the cutting wheel (all parts are connected tother as a glass cutter), and a second end of the bracket (the right side of the yoke 9) is connected to the reference wheel (all parts are connected tother as a glass cutter) such that rotation of the cutting wheel is synchronous with the rotation of the reference wheel (see the discussion in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 9, Pinel shows a cutting wheel cantilever (5, Figure 1), wherein a first end of the cutting wheel cantilever is mounted to the ball bearing axle (Figures 2-3), wherein the cutting wheel extends proximate a second end of the cutting wheel cantilever (Figure 2), and wherein the cutting wheel cantilever and the cutting wheel are rotatable about the ball bearing axle (see the discussion in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 10, Pinel shows a force applicator (13, 33) configured to apply a force to the cutting wheel, wherein the force applicator is mounted to the cutting wheel cantilever on a side opposing the cutting wheel (Figure 2).
Regarding claim 11, Pinel shows a reference wheel cantilever (5), wherein a first end of the reference wheel cantilever is mounted to the ball bearing axle (Figures 2-3), wherein the reference wheel is mounted to a second end of the reference wheel cantilever (Figure 2), and wherein the reference wheel cantilever and the reference wheel are rotatable about the ball bearing axle (see the discussion in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 12, Pinel shows an arm (17) extending from the body, the arm being mounted to the second end of the reference wheel cantilever such that the arm is retractable within the body in order to rotate the reference wheel cantilever about the ball bearing axle (Figure 2).
Regarding claim 14, Pinel shows all of limitations as stated in claims 1, 3-4, 8-12 above including
“a body comprising
a first portion and a second portion,
the first portion and the second portion defining an operating channel therebetween;
a reference wheel mounted to the first portion of the body, the reference wheel being retractable within the first portion of the body;
a cutting wheel mounted to the body, at least partially extending through the operating channel, and
being retractable within the operating channel; and
a ball bearing axle extending through the body such that the reference wheel and the cutting wheel are rotatable about the ball bearing axle”, and
a solenoid that powers the cutting wheel and is configured to rotate at least one of the cutting wheel or the reference wheel to facilitate synchronous rotation of the cutting wheel and reference wheel (see the discussion in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 15, Pinel shows all limitations as in claim 8 above.
Regarding claim 16, Pinel shows all limitations as in claim 10 above.
Regarding claim 17, Pinel shows the solenoid provides power to the force applicator (as it is written, it is unclear what type of power is, therefore, looking at Figure 5, the electromagnet 22 extends or retracts an arm 17 that causes movement of the lever 5 and bracket 7 and provides some power to the springs 13, 33 as seen in Figure 2) .
Regarding claim 18, Pinel shows that the solenoid is connected to the ball bearing axle (all parts are connected as a glass cutter).
Regarding claim 19, Pinel shows the solenoid is mounted to the second portion of the body (Figure 2, the electromagnet 22 is on the second “portion” of the body).
Regarding claim 20, Pinel shows all limitations as in claims 9-11 above.
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 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinel in view of John (US 4204445).
Regarding claim 13, Pinel shows all of the limitations as stated above including the arm (7) having springs (13 and 33), however, the springs are not an air cylinder for retracting and extending the arm within the body.
John shows a glass cutter (Figure 3) having an air cylinder (90).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the cutter of Pinel to have an air cylinder, as taught by John, in order to allow to lower or raise a carriage of reference and cutting wheels (Col. 3, lines 25-34 of John, Figure 3).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. See the new ground rejections with new art.
However, if Applicant still believes that the claimed invention’s apparatus/method different from the prior art’s apparatus/method or needs to discuss the rejections above or suggestion amendments that can be overcome the current rejections, Applicant should feel free to call the Examiner to schedule an interview.
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 NHAT CHIEU Q DO whose telephone number is (571)270-1522. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-5PM EST.
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, Boyer Ashley 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.
/NHAT CHIEU Q DO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724 1/22/2026