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 .
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.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7-16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gehret et al. (9,833,924), hereinafter Gehret, in view of Cramer (5,251,142).
Regarding claim 1, Gehret teaches a bevel saw configured to form a bevel cut in a workpiece substantially as claimed except for the limitations in the bolded texts, the bevel saw comprising:
a workpiece support 56 that defines a workpiece support surface configured to support a first side of the workpiece;
a user-actuated assembly that includes a motor 88 including a motor shaft configured to rotate about a shaft rotational axis and an arbor operatively attached to the motor shaft and configured to receive a bevel saw blade 128;
an assembly attachment structure that operatively attaches the user-actuated assembly to the workpiece support and is configured to permit constrained motion of the user-actuated assembly relative to the workpiece support surface, wherein the assembly attachment structure includes a blade bevel angle adjustment mechanism (col. 4, lines 42-67) configured to adjust a blade bevel angle of the bevel saw blade relative to the workpiece support surface; and
a fence 55 that defines a fence surface 53 that extends away from the workpiece support surface and is configured to support a second side of the workpiece, wherein the fence includes a first fence region and a second fence region, wherein the first fence region and the second fence region define a blade-receiving gap therebetween, wherein the blade-receiving gap is configured to receive the bevel saw blade during operative use of the bevel saw to form the bevel cut in the workpiece, and further wherein the fence includes a gap adjustment mechanism configured to automatically adjust the blade-receiving gap based on the blade bevel angle (col. 1, lines 10-15, 40-53; col. 12, lines 3-55), and
wherein the gap adjustment mechanism includes an electric gap adjustment actuator operatively coupled to at least one of the first fence region and the second fence region and configured to adjust the blade-receiving gap based on the blade bevel angle.
See Figs. 1, 4, 7, 8, 13, 21, and 22.
Gehret teaches the invention substantially as claimed except for the gap adjustment mechanism includes an electric gap adjustment actuator operatively coupled to at least one of the first fence region and the second fence region and configured to adjust the blade-receiving gap based on the blade bevel angle.
Cramer teaches a saw system having fences (40, 35) including an electric gap adjustment actuator operatively coupled to the fences for automatically as adjusting the fence for precisely positioning the fences. See Figs. 1 and 4.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use an electric gap adjustment actuator as taught by Cramer in the saw system of Gehret for automatically as adjusting the fence for precisely positioning the fences.
Regarding claim 2, Gehret teaches the gap adjustment mechanism changing the shape of the blade-receiving gap and a bevel angle of the blade-receiving gap. See Figs. 4, 6, and 7, and col. 1, lines 54-62.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, a linkage for automatically adjusting the blade-receiving gap based on an adjustment of the bevel adjustment is best seen in Figs. 7 and 21.
Regarding claim 7, two fence surfaces (55, 126) are best seen in Figs. 2 and 4.
Regarding claims 8-10, each fence surface having a plurality of fence elements (130, 160) is best seen in Figs. 4-6.
Regarding claim 11-14, the linkage 150 causes to pair (130, 160) moving in the same direction and the same distance. See Figs. 7-8.
Regarding claims 15 and 16, a first fence region rotary element 438 is best see in Fig. 21.
Regarding claim 18, Gehret teaches a method of adjusting a fence of a bevel saw, the method comprising:
providing the bevel saw of claim 1;
changing at least one of a blade bevel angle (by rotating element 448) of the bevel saw and a blade miter angle (by rotating element 65) of the bevel saw; and
automatically adjusting a blade-receiving gap (Figs. 4, 7, 8, and 21) of the fence based, at least in part, on the changing.
See Figs. 1, 4, 7, 8, and 21.
Claims 6 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gehret et al. (9,833,924), hereinafter Gehret, in view of Cramer (5,251,142) as applied to claims 1 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (2006/0288836), hereinafter Wang.
Gehret teaches the invention substantially as claimed except for an electric bevel adjustment device.
Wang teaches a bevel saw having an electric bevel adjustment device 216 for automatically adjusting a bevel angle of the saw. See Figs. 6 and 7.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide the saw of Gehret an electric bevel adjustment device as taught by Wang for automatically adjusting a bevel angle of the saw.
When the bevel angle of the saw is electronically adjusted, the blade-receiving gap is adjusted accordingly due to the linkage system.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Cramer reference is introduced to teach the fence being adjustable electrically.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 19 is allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: claim 19 is allowable for setting for the gap adjustment mechanism comprising four linkage members and their specific connection to the fence portions.
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 PHONG H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4510. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8-5.
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.
/PHONG H NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3724