Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/488,988

DRY-CUT RAIL SAW WITH INTEGRATED DUST COLLECTION

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 17, 2023
Examiner
CROSBY JR, RICHARD D
Art Unit
3724
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Jpl Global LLC
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 12m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
322 granted / 471 resolved
-1.6% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 12m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
520
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
43.9%
+3.9% vs TC avg
§102
23.0%
-17.0% vs TC avg
§112
31.4%
-8.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 471 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 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. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/12/2026 has been entered. Claims 16-20 are pending. 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 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergmann (U.S. Patent No. 2005/0160892), in view of Shiotani (U.S. Patent No. 5,063,802), in view of Koegel (U.S. Patent No. 2011/0162501). Regarding claim 16, Bergmann teaches a saw apparatus (5) comprising: a worktable (1); a cutting head comprising a circular saw blade (7), wherein the cutting head is configured to move along a rail (10) positioned above the worktable (Figure 1; Paragraph 0033); a trolley (12) disposed above a vacuum source coupled to the trolley (via hose 18), wherein the vacuum source is configured to provide a negative pressure region beneath the trolley at the center slot to facilitate drawing dust around Shiotani teaches it is known within the art of variable angled saw cutting devices to collect workpiece debris and dust below the worktable (Figure 4 noting the variable angle cuts the saw may make, as well as the dust collection area aligned with a center slot 12 and below worktable 2 and above the base 1). Koegel teaches it is known within the art of dust removal for saw cutting devices to collect workpiece debris and dust both above and below the worktable (Figure 3 noting the upper and lower guards (12, 14 respectively) and removal via dust collection outlets 38, 62 (from a vacuum source not shown; Paragraph 0019) aligned with a center slot (Figure 1) of worktable 16). It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the trolley and vacuum source connected to the trolley in various positions throughout/around the saw device and worktable because rearranging parts with specific locations would have been a mere design consideration based on the desired location of debris collection during use. Such a modification would have involved only routine skill in the art to accommodate the aforementioned requirement(s) as Bergman, Shiotani and Koegel have set forth it is known to have dust collection in different locations on a saw, including below the worktable. Also, it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. As such, the modified device of Bergmann, in view of Shiotani and Koegel provides a saw apparatus (5) comprising: a worktable (1); a cutting head comprising a circular saw blade (7), wherein the cutting head is configured to move along a rail (10) positioned above the worktable (Bergmann Figure 1; Paragraph 0033); a trolley (12) (Berman Figures 1-2) disposed beneath the worktable (Shiotani Figure 4 and Koegel Figure 1) and coupled to the worktable via rollers (20), wherein the trolley is configured to maintain an alignment between the cutting head and a center slot (14)(Figure 2) of the trolley as the cutting head moves along the rail (Bergman Figures 1 and 2; Paragraphs 0034-0038; Examiner notes the trolley of Bergmann to be a component from the saw device); and a vacuum source coupled to the trolley (via hose 18), wherein the vacuum source is configured to provide a negative pressure region beneath the trolley at the center slot to facilitate drawing dust around through the worktable (Koegel Figure 1 and into the trolley disposed beneath the worktable (Shiotani Figure 4 and Koegel Figure 1) proximate to an anticipated point of contact between the circular saw blade and a workpiece (Bergman Figure 1 and Paragraph 0034; Examiner notes the extraction hose is connected to an extraction device (not shown) corresponding to a vacuum source). Regarding claim 17, The modified device of Bergman teaches the saw apparatus of claim 16, but does not provide further comprising a dust guard coupled to the circular saw blade and the vacuum source, wherein the vacuum source is configured to provide a second negative pressure region above the worktable and proximate to the anticipated point of contact between the circular saw blade and the workpiece. Koegel teaches it is known in the art of dust removal for saws to incorporate a first dust removal portion (12) and a dust guard (14) coupled to a saw blade and a vacuum source, wherein the vacuum source is configured to provide a second negative pressure region above the worktable (16) and proximate to the anticipated point of contact between the circular saw blade and the workpiece (Figures 1 and 3; Paragraph 0002, 0016, 0024-0025). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have further modified the device of Bergmann to incorporate the teachings of Koegel to provide the saw with a dust guard. Doing so provides a dust collection system to reduce debris during use. -Regarding claim 18, the modified device of Bergmann teaches he saw apparatus of claim 16, wherein the cutting head is configured to tilt to facilitate angled cuts (Bergman Paragraph 0007). -Regarding claim 19 the modified device of Bergman provides it is known to tilt the cutting head, but does not provide wherein the cutting head is configured to tilt up to 45 degrees relative to the worktable. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to make have tilt angle up to 45 degrees because discovering a workable cutting angle with the specific orientation angles would have been a mere design consideration based on the desired cut to be made. Such a modification would have involved only routine skill in the art to accommodate the aforementioned requirement(s) as Bergmann has set forth it is known to have a saw tilt for various cuts. Also, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, that discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergmann (U.S. Patent No. 2005/0160892) in view of Shiotani (U.S. Patent No. 5,063,802), in view of Koegel (U.S. Patent No. 2011/0162501) as applied to claims 16 and 18 above and further in view of Lacy (U.S. Patent No. 2007/0039441). Regarding claim 20, the modified device of Bergmann teaches the saw apparatus of claim 18, but does not provide wherein the cutting head is configured to lock into a plurality of tilt angles. Lacy teaches it is known in the art of saws to provide a locking mechanism (336) to tilt a cutting head to a plurality of tilting angles (Figures 1A, 3A and 3B; Paragraphs 0007, 0039-0040). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the device of Bergmann to incorporate the teachings of Lacy to provide the cutting head with a lockable tilt mechanism. In doing so, it allows for various cuts to be made at different angles. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 01/12/2026 with respect to claims 16-20 have 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD D CROSBY JR whose telephone number is (571)272-8034. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00. 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. /RICHARD D CROSBY JR/ 02/20/2026Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 17, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 17, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 03, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 12, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 17, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600050
SHAVING APPARATUS HAVING A RAZOR HANDLE FOR DISPOSABLE RAZOR CARTRIDGES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600046
AUTO OPENING FOLDING KNIFE BLADE ENGAGEMENT LOCK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594613
CUTTING PLIER AND CUTTING PLIER HEAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594614
RIBBON SAW WITH DOUBLE SECURITY SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12570015
PERSONAL CARE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
68%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+16.4%)
2y 12m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 471 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month