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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6-15 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pham (US 2024/0284813) in view of Crady (USPN 6595298).
Regarding claim 1, Pham discloses an electric weeder (Figure 7), comprising: a body comprising a housing (302) for connecting a power supply (battery) and a drive mechanism at least partly accommodated in the housing; and a working head (pointed to by indicator 110 of figure 7) driven by the body and movably connected to the body (via shaft 104), wherein the drive mechanism comprises a motor for driving the working head to rotate around a first axis (an electric motor is understood to be within the housing), the drive mechanism has a first working mode in which the drive mechanism drives the working head to screw into a workplane and a second working mode in which the drive mechanism drives the working head to screw out of the workplane (¶0043 discloses two directions of rotation), a direction of rotation of the working head when the drive mechanism is in the first working mode is different from a direction of rotation of the working head when the drive mechanism is in the second working mode, and an output rotational speed of the working head is less than or equal to 400 RPM in the first working mode (¶0040).
Pham is lacking a greater speed in the second mode of operation.
Crady discloses a powered weeder and teaches the use of reverse control via a switch (15) and variable speed control via a dial (11, column 3 lines 50-61).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Pham by adding speed control to the drill as taught by Crady for the purpose of allowing the operator to change the speed when desired for harder soil or tougher situations when more power is required.
In combination the operator is capable of adding higher speed/power to the reverse of the drill when needed to extract a weed when desired through the dial 11.
Regarding claim 6, Pham further discloses wherein the power supply comprises a battery pack for supplying power to the motor (¶0041).
Regarding claim 7, Pham further discloses the use of a rechargeable battery however is lacking specific mention of it being detachable and usable with other tools.
Examiner takes official notice that in the art of rechargeable battery powered tools it is notoriously old and well known for a battery pack to be removable for recharging on a charging port and also to be useable with other tools. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have used a removable battery for the purpose of swapping out with other charged batteries and for the purpose of dual use with other tools.
Regarding claim 8, Pham further discloses wherein a nominal voltage of the battery pack is greater than or equal to 4 V and less than or equal to 80 V (18volts).
Regarding claim 9, Pham further discloses wherein the working head comprises: a weeder head (figure 7 shows weeder head pointed to by indicator 110) located at an end of the working head and used for being screwed into the workplane and winding grass; a connection assembly (shaft 104) extending along the first axis and connecting the weeder head to the body; and a grass unloading assembly (pointed to by indicator 382) driven to clean the weeder head.
Regarding claim 10, Pham further discloses the same general structural conditions as applicant, however Pham is lacking a length of the tool.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the length of the tool greater than or equal to 700 mm and less than or equal to 1300 mm since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 11, Pham further discloses wherein the body further comprises a switching portion configured to set a working mode of the drive mechanism to the first working mode or the second working mode (As the disclosed weeder of Pham is capable of two different rotations, some form of switch is considered to be present to achieve the function, such as a typical reverse switch on a drill).
Regarding claim 12, Pham further discloses wherein the switching portion is at least partially disposed on the housing (The switch would be considered to be on the housing where the operator is gripping the drill body).
Regarding claim 13, Pham further discloses a grip mechanism (Two left and right grips are seen in figure 7) formed on or connected to the housing, wherein the grip mechanism comprises a first handle and a second handle, the first handle and the second handle are separately disposed on two sides of the first axis, an included angle α between an orthographic projection of an axis of the first handle along a length direction on a plane perpendicular to the first axis and an orthographic projection of an axis of the second handle along a length direction on the plane perpendicular to the first axis is greater than 90° and less than 180° (Figure 7 shows that the grips are not perfectly 90 degrees, also seen in other embodiments figures 5).
Regarding claim 14, Pham further discloses wherein the axis of the first handle along the length direction is basically perpendicular to the first axis, and the axis of the second handle along the length direction is basically perpendicular to the first axis (Figure 7 shows a basically perpendicular orientation of the grips).
Regarding claim 15, Pham further discloses wherein the power supply is disposed between the first handle and the second handle (Figure 7 shows a battery attached to the back side of the housing).
Regarding claim 21, Pham further discloses wherein in the second working mode, rotation of the working head in a direction opposite to that of the first working mode causes soil and grass roots wound around the working head to be dislodged (In the first mode Pham’s tool would be screwed into the ground to capture a weed, in the second direction element 114 would dislodge soil and grass).
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pham (US 2024/0284813) in view of Crady (USPN 6595298) in further view of LI (US 2018/0318988).
Regarding claims 3-5, Pham discloses multiple battery powered drill embodiments and is considered to comprise some form of transmission assembly however is lacking specific mention of the drill body’s transmission and details drawn to it.
LI discloses a power tool with a transmission that may be used in various electric power tools (¶0025) and teaches an electric motor (12) that is attached to a gearbox assembly (20) that comprises a transmission assembly for transmitting power outputted by the motor to the working head wherein the transmission assembly comprises a planet gear deceleration assembly with various torque ratios (¶s 0027-0035).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Pham by using a planetary gear deceleration transmission assembly as taught by LI for the purpose of selectively controlling the torque output of the motor to the rotating shaft. It is noted that the use of planetary gearing in electric rotary tools is old and well known and any known assembly could be reasonably utilized between an electric motor and rotating shaft.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pham (US 2024/0284813) in view of LI (US 2018/0318988) in further view of Shredl (USPN 356966).
Regarding claim 16, Pham discloses an electric weeder (Figure 7), comprising: a body comprising a housing (302) for connecting a power supply (battery) a grip (drill grips on housing 302) and a drive mechanism at least partly accommodated in the housing; and a working head (pointed to by indicator 110 of figure 7) driven by the body and movably connected to the body (via shaft 104), wherein the drive mechanism comprises a motor for driving the working head to rotate around a first axis (an electric motor is understood to be within the housing),
Pham discloses multiple battery powered drill embodiments and is considered to comprise some form of transmission assembly however is lacking specific mention of the drill body’s transmission and details drawn to it.
LI discloses a power tool with a transmission that may be used in various electric power tools (¶0025) and teaches an electric motor (12) that is attached to a gearbox assembly (20) that comprises a transmission assembly for transmitting power outputted by the motor to the working head wherein the transmission assembly comprises a planet gear deceleration assembly with various torque ratios (¶s 0027-0035).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Pham by using a planetary gear deceleration transmission assembly as taught by LI for the purpose of selectively controlling the torque output of the motor to the rotating shaft. It is noted that the use of planetary gearing in electric rotary tools is old and well known and any known assembly could be reasonably utilized between an electric motor and rotating shaft.
Pham further discloses the same general structural conditions as applicant, however Pham is lacking a length of the tool.
Shredl discloses a weeding tool with a handle and a weeding tool at the end (Abstract) and teaches a length of 36-40 inches so a user can remain standing while operating the tool.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Pham by making the tool a length of 36 inches or any length to allow an operator to remain standing as taught by Shredl. The length of 36 inches is within the claimed length range of applicants.
The combination teaches a length of the tool to fit the ergonomics of an operator to remain standing during operation. With respect to the exact ranges of 700mm- 1300mm and 780mm to 990 mm, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the lengths of the tools elements in relationship to one another within the claimed ranges since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Claim(s) 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pham (US 2024/0284813) in view of LI (US 2018/0318988) in further view of Crady (USPN 6595298).
Regarding claims 17-20, Pham discloses an electric weeder (Figure 7), comprising: a body comprising a housing (302) for connecting a power supply (battery pack attached to the back outer side wall of the housing) and a drive mechanism at least partly accommodated in the housing; and a working head (pointed to by indicator 110 of figure 7) driven by the body and movably connected to the body (via shaft 104), wherein the drive mechanism comprises a motor for driving the working head to rotate around a first axis (an electric motor is understood to be within the housing), the drive mechanism has a first working mode in which the drive mechanism drives the working head to screw into a workplane and a second working mode in which the drive mechanism drives the working head to screw out of the workplane (¶0043 discloses two directions of rotation into and out of the ground), and a maximum output rotational speed of the working head is less than or equal to 400 RPM in the first working mode (¶0040).
Pham discloses multiple battery powered drill embodiments and is considered to comprise some form of transmission assembly however is lacking specific mention of the drill body’s transmission and details drawn to it.
LI discloses a power tool with a transmission that may be used in various electric power tools (¶0025) and teaches an electric motor (12) that is attached to a gearbox assembly (20) that comprises a transmission assembly for transmitting power outputted by the motor to the working head wherein the transmission assembly comprises a planet gear deceleration assembly with various torque ratios (¶s 0027-0035).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Pham by using a planetary gear deceleration transmission assembly as taught by LI for the purpose of selectively controlling the torque output of the motor to the rotating shaft. It is noted that the use of planetary gearing in electric rotary tools is old and well known and any known assembly could be reasonably utilized between an electric motor and rotating shaft.
Pham discloses the general conditions of the invention with low speeds and gives examples of speeds, however does not expressly give an example of a speed between 150-400RPM. As Pham already discloses a lower speed the idea of adding more or less speed is routine optimization within the skill of the art.
For example, Crady discloses a powered weeder and teaches the use of reverse control via a switch (15) and variable speed control via a dial (11, column 3 lines 50-61).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Pham by adding speed control to the drill as taught by Crady for the purpose of allowing the operator to change the speed when desired for harder soil or tougher situations when more power is required. Harder soil and conditions would require more power and speed, therefore, in combination the operator would be considered capable of adding higher speed/power to the drill within 150-400RPM when needed to extract a weed when desired through the dial 11 as the idea of more speed and power to the unit of Pham is merely routine optimization for working in tougher conditions as taught by Crady.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection with additional prior art teachings.
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 ADAM J BEHRENS whose telephone number is (303)297-4336. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-2pm MST.
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, Joseph M. Rocca can be reached at (571) 272-8971. 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.
/ADAM J BEHRENS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights