Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/444,764

ANGLE ADJUSTABLE SAW

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Feb 19, 2024
Examiner
ALIE, GHASSEM
Art Unit
3724
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
878 granted / 1275 resolved
-1.1% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+33.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
58 currently pending
Career history
1333
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
39.0%
-1.0% vs TC avg
§102
30.6%
-9.4% vs TC avg
§112
23.6%
-16.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1275 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 1. 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. 2. Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (2003,0000092 A1) in view of Lofgren (2003/0115761 A1) and Scott et al. (2010/0319201 A1), hereinafter Scott, and in further view of Umstead et al. (2002/0069535 A1), hereinafter Umstead. Regarding claim 1, Liu teaches an angle adjustable saw comprising: a handle 10 comprising a first cover body (defined by the section of the handle on one side of the slit 11; Fig. 1), a second cover body (defined by the section of the handle on the other side of the slit 11) and a grip body (Fig. 11), one of two ends of the handle 10 including an opening (defined by the opening at the ends where the blade 20 is inserted; Fig. 1), each of the first cover body and the second cover body including a first pivot hole 12 and an adjustment hole 13 defined through therethrough, a space 11 formed in the handle 10 and communicating with the opening, the first pivot hole 12 and the adjustment hole 13; a blade 20 including a clamping portion (defined by the portion having the recesses 22 and protrusions 23; Fig. 1) which is inserted into the space 11 of the handle 10 through the opening, the clamping portion having a second pivot hole 21 corresponding to the first pivot hole 12, multiple protrusions 23 formed on a distal end of the clamping portion, multiple recesses 22 formed between the protrusions 23, the blade 20 having a first tooth portion (Fig. 1) on one side thereof, and a control assembly including a pivot component 31, an elastic button 331, a limiting component 332 and a connecting component 35, the pivot component 31 passing through the first pivot hole 12 and the second pivot hole 21 to pivotably connect the blade 20 which is pivotable and foldable relative to the opening of the handle 10, the elastic button 331 and the limiting component 332 respectively connected to the adjustment holes 13 of the handle 10, the connecting component 35 connecting the elastic button 331 and the limiting component 332, the limiting component 332 having a block 334 extending radially therefrom so that the block 334 is engaged with one of the recesses 22 of the clamping portion. See Figs. 1-4 in Liu. Liu does not explicitly teach that the first cover body having a first fitting member, the second cover body having a second fitting member into which the first fitting member is inserted, the grip body enveloped on surfaces of the first cover body and the second cover body to form an integral structure; and the other side of the blade includes a second tooth portion. However, Lofgren teaches a saw comprising: a handle (1, 2) comprising a first cover body 2 and a second cover body 1, the first cover body 2 having a first fitting member 6, the second cover body 1 having a second fitting member 4 into which the first fitting member 6 is inserted. See Figs. 1-3 in Lofgren. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide Liu’s handle with the first cover body and the second cover and fitting members, as taught by Lofgren, in order to simplify manufacturing of the saw and reduce the coast of the manufacturing. See paragraph [0005] in Lofgren. Scott teaches a saw 10 including a handle 12 having a first cover body 42, a second cover body 44 and a grip body (defined as ridges on surfaces of the handle parts 42, 44, shown but numbered; Figs. 1-2), the grip body enveloped on surfaces of the first cover body 42 and the second cover body 44 to form an integral structure. See Figs. 1-5 in Scott. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide Liu’s handle, as modified by Lofgren, with the grip body, as taught by Scott, in order to enhance the grip of the handle. Umstead teaches a saw blade 2 including a first tooth portion 3 and a second tooth portion 4. See Fig. 1 in Umstead. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide the blade of Liu’s saw, as modified by Lofgren and Scott, with the second tooth portion, as taught by Umstead, in order to cut by both sides of the blade. Regarding claim 2, Liu, as modified by Lofgren, teaches everything noted above including that the first fitting member 6 and the second fitting member 4 have corresponding positioning portions (7, 5). See Figs. 1-3 in Lofgren. 3. Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Scott or Korb et al. (4,918,820), hereinafter Korb, and in further view of Umstead. Regarding claim 1, Liu teaches an angle adjustable saw comprising: a handle 10 comprising a first cover body (defined by the section of the handle on one side of the slit 11; Fig. 1), a second cover body (defined by the section of the handle on the other side of the slit 11) and a grip body (Fig. 11), one of two ends of the handle 10 including an opening (defined by the opening at the ends where the blade 20 is inserted; Fig. 1), each of the first cover body and the second cover body including a first pivot hole 12 and an adjustment hole 13 defined through therethrough, a space 11 formed in the handle 10 and communicating with the opening, the first pivot hole 12 and the adjustment hole 13; a blade 20 including a clamping portion (defined by the portion having the recesses 22 and protrusions 23; Fig. 1) which is inserted into the space 11 of the handle 10 through the opening, the clamping portion having a second pivot hole 21 corresponding to the first pivot hole 12, multiple protrusions 23 formed on a distal end of the clamping portion, multiple recesses 22 formed between the protrusions 23, the blade 20 having a first tooth portion (Fig. 1) on one side thereof, and a control assembly including a pivot component 31, an elastic button 331, a limiting component 332 and a connecting component 35, the pivot component 31 passing through the first pivot hole 12 and the second pivot hole 21 to pivotably connect the blade 20 which is pivotable and foldable relative to the opening of the handle 10, the elastic button 331 and the limiting component 332 respectively connected to the adjustment holes 13 of the handle 10, the connecting component 35 connecting the elastic button 331 and the limiting component 332, the limiting component 332 having a block 334 extending radially therefrom so that the block 334 is engaged with one of the recesses 22 of the clamping portion. See Figs. 1-4 in Liu. Liu does not explicitly teach that the first cover body having a first fitting member, the second cover body having a second fitting member into which the first fitting member is inserted, the grip body enveloped on surfaces of the first cover body and the second cover body to form an integral structure; and the other side of the blade includes a second tooth portion. However, Scott teaches an angle adjustable saw 10 comprising: a handle 12 comprising a first cover body 42, a second cover body 44 and a grip body (defined as ridges on surfaces of the handle parts 42, 44, shown but numbered; Figs. 1-2), the first cover body 42 having a first fitting member (defined by the aperture 48 and screw 50), the second cover body 44 having a second fitting member (54, 56) into which the first fitting member (48, 50) is inserted, the grip body enveloped on surfaces of the first cover body 42 and the second cover body 44 to form an integral structure. See Figs. 1-5 in Scott. Korb also teaches an angle adjustable saw comprising: a handle 10 comprising a first cover body 20, a second cover body 22 and a grip body (defined as the surface of the covers 20, 22 that could be grippe by a user; Figs. 2-3), the first cover body 20 having a first fitting member (50, 52), the second cover body 22 having a second fitting member (53, 56) into which the first fitting member (50, 52) is inserted, the grip body enveloped on surfaces of the first cover body and the second cover body to form an integral structure. See Figs. 1-9 in Korb. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide Liu’s handle with the first cover body and the second cover and fitting members, as taught by Scott or Korb, since both integral handle and separate handle parts are art-recognized equivalents perform the same function. Umstead teaches a saw blade 2 including a first tooth portion 3 and a second tooth portion 4. See Fig. 1 in Umstead. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide the blade of Liu’s saw, as modified by Scott or Korb, with the second tooth portion, as taught by Umstead, in order to cut by both sides of the blade. Regarding claim 2, Liu, as modified by Scott, teaches everything noted above including that the first fitting member (48, 50) and the second fitting member (54, 56) have corresponding positioning portions (48, 56). See Figs. 1-5 in Scott. It should be noted that the apertures 48 and 56 are defined as corresponding positioning portions. Response to Arguments 4. Applicant’s argument that “Examiner provide no credible motivation as why a skilled artisan would modify Liu’s functional pivoting mechanism by incorporating Lofgren’s snap-element handle construction” is not persuasive. As described above, Lofgren teaches a saw comprising: a handle (1, 2) comprising a first cover body 2 and a second cover body 1, the first cover body 2 having a first fitting member 6, the second cover body 1 having a second fitting member 4 into which the first fitting member 6 is inserted. See Figs. 1-3 in Lofgren. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide Liu’s handle with the first cover body and the second cover and fitting members, as taught by Lofgren, in order to simplify manufacturing of the saw and reduce the coast of the manufacturing. See paragraph [0005] in Lofgren. Lofgren provides a motivation for providing a hand saw, similar to the hand saw disclosed by Liu, with snap-element handle. Lofgren discloses that the two halves arrangement of the handle provides “a handsaw that can offer possibilities for a simplified and less expensive method which respect to its manufacture as well as its assembly, and therewith provide a less expensive saw that, nevertheless, has sawing properties that are equally as good as those of known saws.” See paragraph [0005] in Lofgren. In this case, the handle in Lui’s could be provided with two halves which are snaped together, as taught by Lofgren. The two halves handle arrangement is merely an alternatively arrangement for the handle which cost less and easy to manufacture, as set forth in Lofgren. Applicant’s argument that Lofgren’s snap-element system interferes with pivoting mechanism of Lui’s saw is not persuasive. The pivoting mechanism of Lui’s saw has nothing to do with the snap-element system of Lofgren. The snap-element system of Lofgren is merely applied to Lui’s handle in a manner that handle can be snaped together as two handle halves. The connection of the saw blade with the handle in Lui would not be changed. Lui’s handle merely would be changed to be constructed from wo halves which are snapped together by their snap elements, as taught by Lofgren. Applicant’s argument that Scott’s hand saw has completely different blade attachment mechanism is not persuasive. Scott merely teaches that the handle of the hand saw could be formed from two halves and also could have a grip body (defined as ridges on surfaces of the handle parts 42, 44, shown but numbered; Figs. 1-2). The grip body enveloped on surfaces of the first cover body 42 and the second cover body 44 to form an integral structure. See Figs. 1-5 in Scott. Scott is merely utilized to provide Lui’s handle with a grip body. The attachment of the handle with the saw blade has nothing to do with the grip body which merely enhance the grip and handling of the hand saw. Applicant’s argument that Umstead’s blade mechanism would conflict with the present invention’s pivoting system is not understood. Umstead merely teaches that the blade can have two cutting teeth on opposite edges of the blade in order to utilize the saw blade to cut workpieces with its both sides. The form of the handle and the pivoting mechanism of the saw blade have nothing to do with the cutting edges of the saw blade. Umstead teaching has been merely utilized to provide Lui’s blade with a second cutting teeth in order to enable the user to cut workpieces by both sides of the saw blade. Applicant’s argument that Korb teaches away from present invention by having a simple detent mechanism instead of sophisticated control assembly set forth in the invention is not persuasive. It should be noted that the Korb, similar to scott, has merely used for providing Lui’s handle with grip body. In this case, Korb teaches an angle adjustable saw comprising: a handle 10 comprising a first cover body 20, a second cover body 22 and a grip body (defined as the surface of the covers 20, 22 that could be grippe by a user; Figs. 2-3), the first cover body 20 having a first fitting member (50, 52), the second cover body 22 having a second fitting member (53, 56) into which the first fitting member (50, 52) is inserted, the grip body enveloped on surfaces of the first cover body and the second cover body to form an integral structure. See Figs. 1-9 in Korb. Conclusion 5. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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. 6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GHASSEM ALIE whose telephone number is (571) 272-4501. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 am-5:00 pm 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, Adam Eiseman can be reached on (571) 270-3818. 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. /GHASSEM ALIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724 September 30, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 19, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 04, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 02, 2025
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592452
SEPARATOR CUTTING DEVICE AND SEPARATOR CUTTING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589518
HAND-HELD PLANING TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583139
DEVICE, SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SLICING FILM MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583135
CUTTING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12557839
CIGAR CUTTING DEVICE AND METHODS OF CUTTING CIGARS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+33.5%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1275 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month