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 .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains the alternative language “and/or”. Replace with “and” to maintain the concise summary requirements. 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).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because
All elements except [180 and 120] in Fig. 1 are not clearly labeled [text, legend, symbol]
All Elements of Figs. 2A & 2B are not clearly labeled [text, legend, symbol]
Flow chart of Fig. 3 needs to have text filled in the boxes
All elements but 120 in Figs. [4A-5] are not clearly labeled [text, legend, symbol]
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1-15 contain part numbers. Remove them.
Claims 1-6, 9, and 11-14 are replete with “and/or” statements. Ensure that only a single and/or statement is present in each claim (Claims 1, 3, 4, 9, and 14 are ok). However, many claims have “and/or” and “or” statements in the same stanza. Emend the claims to ensure only 1 is present the same stanza to provide proper grammar and clarity.
For instance, from:
wherein the charger (140) is configured to store in the charger memory (142) a shared key (180) or to store a set parameter (220, 250) and derive a set key (210, 260) by the charger controller (142) from the set parameter (220, 250);
to
wherein the charger is configured to store in the charger memory a variable;
wherein the variable in the charger is either a shared key or a set parameter and derived a set key by the charger controller from the set parameter;
Claim 15 ends with “according to claim.” For purposes of examination, it will be interpreted that applicant meant “according to claim 1”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 10 and 12 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.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 10 recites the broad recitation “deriving the set key by a key derivation function is using an initial key or an initial key derived from public/private key pairs stored on the power tools, the battery packs and the chargers of the power tool system from which the key derivation function,”
and the claim also recites “particularly a Cipher-Based Message Authentication Code or a hash-based message authentication code function, calculates the set key with the further input of the set parameter.” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claims are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Furui et al (USPGPN 20140159919) in view of Bessegato et al (USPGPN 20170364360; hereinafter Besse)
Independent Claim 1, Furui discloses a power tool system (Figs. [1A-32A, esp. 2A-2C, 5A-5C]), comprising:
a cordless power tool (10’) with a power tool controller ([12, 14, 18]) and a power tool memory [16]);
an exchangeable battery (40, see at least ¶[170]) pack for the power tool comprising:
a charger (70’, 70’’’’);
a battery pack controller (44, 42, 48]) and a battery pack memory (46),
a first communication interface for communication with the power tool (48, 56); and
a second communication interface for communication with the charger (48, 54);
wherein the charger comprises a charger controller (72, 122, 128, 78) and a charger memory (126, 76);
wherein the charger is configured to store in the charger memory a shared key or to store a set parameter and derive a set key by the charger controller from the set parameter (¶’s [114-117] describes a key being stored for authentication/theft-prevention);
wherein the battery pack is configured to receive the shared key or the set parameter via the second communication interface from the charger and to store the shared key or to store the set parameter and derive the set key by the battery pack controller from the set parameter (¶[101] describes the adapter/charger is used to update both the battery pack and the power tools control program/data, which would include the key as one of ordinary skill in the art would understand);
wherein the power tool is configured to receive the shared key or the set parameter via the first communication interface from the battery pack and to store the shared key or to store the set key derived by the power tool controller from the set parameter and/or to store the set parameter in the power tool memory and derive the set key by the power tool controller from the set parameter (¶[101] describes the adapter/charger is used to update both the battery pack and the power tools control program/data, which would include the key as one of ordinary skill in the art would understand, Figs. [2A-2C & 5A-5C demonstrate that the flow of data is from the adapter/charger to the battery pack and from the battery pack to the power tool).
Assuming the applicant means the key [instead of only data] is for anti-theft, while Furui teaches updating of the data, Furui fails to explicitly teach updating the key for anti-theft.
Besse teaches updating a key for antitheft (¶’s [41, 42, 50] has docking charger 104 updating a battery and/or tool security password/options/keys, see analogous structure in Figs. [1-5], where Fig. 4 shows charger 104 has a charger features). Besse teaches these added features serve to provide improved ease for users (¶’s [04, 22, 37, 58, 62, esp. 04]), along with improved anti-theft via the updated security settings (¶’s [04, 36, 42, 58, 62, 68, esp. 42])
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Furui with Besse to provide improved ease and anti-theft prevention/deterrence.
Independent Claim 9, Furui discloses a method for authorization (¶’s [101, 114-117] describes a key being stored for authentication/theft-prevention;
Noted that “authorization” of power tools is only recited in the preamble, where [When reading the preamble in the context of the entire claim, the recitation “method for authorization” is not limiting because the body of the claim describes a complete invention and the language recited solely in the preamble does not provide any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations. Thus, the preamble of the claim(s) is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. See Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP § 2111.02.];
Furthermore, “method for authorization” is an intended use limitation: [a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.]) of power tools, battery packs and chargers in a power tool system comprising a first power tool, a first battery pack, a first charger and a backend (see Figs. [1A-32A, esp. 2A-2C, 5A-5C, particularly 5A-5C]), comprising the steps of:
providing a shared key (¶’s [101, 114-117]) or a set parameter, for deriving a set key by a key derivation function from an initial key and the set parameter, via a wireless or wired connection (¶’s [117, 94, 100]) from the backend (120: 128, 126, 122) to the first charger (70””);
providing the shared key (¶’s [101, 114-117]) or the set parameter via a wireless or wired connection from the first charger to the first battery pack (40’) and storing the shared key or the set parameter on the first battery pack (¶’s [101, 114-117]); and
providing the shared key or the set parameter via a wireless or wired connection from the first battery pack to the first power tool () and storing the shared key or storing the set parameter and/or the derived set key on the first power tool (¶’s [101, 114-117], where ¶[101] describes the adapter/charger is used to update both the battery pack and the power tools control program/data, which would include the key as one of ordinary skill in the art would understand, Figs. [2A-2C & 5A-5C demonstrate that the flow of data is from the adapter/charger to the battery pack and from the battery pack to the power tool).
Assuming the applicant means the key [instead of only data] is for anti-theft [again, noting that the preamble has not limited the body], while Furui teaches updating of the data, Furui fails to explicitly teach updating the key for anti-theft/authorization.
Besse teaches updating a key for antitheft (¶’s [41, 42, 50] has docking charger 104 updating a battery and/or tool security password/options/keys, see analogous structure in Figs. [1-5], where Fig. 4 shows charger 104 has a charger features). Besse teaches these added features serve to provide improved ease for users (¶’s [04, 22, 37, 58, 62, esp. 04]), along with improved anti-theft via the updated security settings (¶’s [04, 36, 42, 58, 62, 68, esp. 42])
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Furui with Besse to provide improved ease and anti-theft prevention/deterrence.
Dependent Claim 2, Furui discloses the battery pack is configured to transfer data from the charger to the power tool (see at least Fig. 5A) and/or from the power tool to the charger, by receiving data via the first and/or second communication interface, storing the data in the battery pack memory, and sending the data via the first and/or second communication interface.
Dependent Claim 3, Furui discloses the charger is configured to receive the shared key or the set parameter via a third communication interface from a backend and/or to transfer the data via the third communication interface from the charger to the backend or from the backend to the charger (applicant has not described this as a direction connection, where Fig. 5A shows this communication via daisy-train, while Figs. [1A, 3A, 5A] show embodiments with the direction connection if applicant improves the claim language to overcome the above interpretation).
Dependent Claim 4, Furui discloses the battery pack is configured to require an iterative connection via the second communication interface to the charger, while the charger is connected to the backend or has been connected to the backend within a predefined time period, and/or the charger is configured to require a permanent or iterative connection via the third communication interface to the backend, wherein the connection is after a predefined amount of charging cycles, a predefined charging time or a predefined time period (¶[116]).
Dependent Claim 5, Furui discloses the battery pack is configured to:
compare its shared key or derived set key with a shared key or a derived set key of any power tool it is connected to and/or any charger it is connected to; and
control, by the battery pack controller, the power supply for the power tool or the loading of the battery pack it is connected to based on the comparison;
and/or
the power tool is configured to:
compare its shared key or derived set key with a shared key or a derived set key of any battery pack it is connected to; and
control, by the power tool controller, the operation of the power tool based on the comparison;
and/or
the charger is configured to:
compare its shared key or derived set key with a shared key or a derived set key of any battery pack it is connected to and control by the charger controller the charging of the battery pack it is connected to based on the comparison (¶’s [115-117, 327]).
Dependent Claim 6, Furui discloses the first communication interface is a wireless or a wired communication interface and/or the second communication interface is a wireless or a wired communication interface and/or the third communication interface is a wireless or wired communication interface (¶’s [117, 94, 100]).
Dependent Claim 7, Furui discloses the first communication interface and the second communication interface of the battery pack are realized as one wireless or wired physical interface configured to communicate to the charger and the power tool (¶’s [117, 94, 100]).
Dependent Claim 8, Furui discloses the battery pack is configured for communication via the second interface with the charger when the battery pack is not physically connected to the charger (¶’s [94, 100] describes wireless communication).
Dependent Claim 10, Furui discloses deriving the set key by a key derivation function is using an initial key or an initial key derived from public/private key pairs stored on the power tools, the battery packs and the chargers of the power tool system from which the key derivation function, particularly a Cipher-Based Message Authentication Code or a hash-based message authentication code function, calculates the set key with the further input of the set parameter (noted that these limitations were claimed optionally, therefore, these Markush limitations are not required to be met in this claim).
Dependent Claim 11, Furui discloses comprising the steps of:
comparing the shared or derived set keys stored on the first battery pack with the shared or derived set keys stored on the first charger or shared or derived set keys stored on a second charger when the first battery pack is connected to the first or the second charger;
and/or
comparing the shared or derived set keys stored on the first battery pack with the shared or derived set keys stored on the first power tool or shared or derived set keys stored on a second power tool when the first battery pack is connected to the first or the second power tool;
and/or
comparing the shared or derived set keys stored on the first charger with shared or derived set keys stored on a second battery pack when the first charger is connected to the second battery pack;
and/or
comparing the shared or derived set keys stored on the first power tool with the shared or derived set keys stored on the second battery pack when the first power tool is connected with the second battery pack;
and
limiting and/or controlling the use and/or collaboration of any of the first and second battery pack, the first and second charger and the first and second power tool based on the results of any of the comparisons (¶’s [115-117, 327]).
Dependent Claim 12, Furui discloses comprising the steps of:
comparing the initial keys stored on the first battery pack with the initial keys stored on the first charger or initial keys stored on a second charger when the first battery pack is connected to the first or the second charger (¶’s [115-117, 327]);
and/or
comparing the initial keys stored on the first battery pack with the initial keys stored on the first power tool or initial keys stored on a second power tool when the first battery pack is connected to the first or the second power tool ;
and/or
comparing the initial keys stored on the first charger with initial keys stored on a second battery pack when the first charger is connected to the second battery pack ;
and/or
comparing the initial keys stored on the first power tool with the initial keys stored on the second battery pack when the first power tool is connected with the second battery pack ;
and
limiting and/or controlling the use and/or collaboration of any of the first and second battery pack , the first and second charger and the first and second power tool based on the results of any of the comparisons of the initial keys (¶’s [115-117, 327]; again noted that these limitations if not taken as the key already on the machine before and/or after the update were optional according to the Markush grouping).
Dependent Claim 13, Furui discloses the limiting and/or controlling the use and/or collaboration comprises:
a denial of operation including not charging of the first or second battery pack by the first or second charger and/or not providing power to the first or second power tool by the first or second battery pack;
and/or limiting the charging of the first or second battery pack by the first or second charger to a predefined number of chargings or a predefined level of charging;
and/or providing power to the first or second power tool by the first or second battery pack to a predefined period of time or number of operations (¶[116]).
Dependent Claim 14, Furui discloses providing the shared key or the set parameter from the backend to the first charger , from the first charger to the first battery pack and/or from the first battery pack to the first power tool uses cryptographic protection of signing the shared key or the set parameter with a private key (¶[115] describes the key as encrypted, i.e. cryptographic protection of signing as one of ordinary skill in the art would understand).
Dependent Claim 15, Furui discloses the method according to claim 9 using the power tool system according to claim [1] (as cited above for Claim 9, see at least Figs. [5A-5C])
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Closest prior art include:
US-20060179473-A1 OR US-20140151079-A1 OR US-20140159920-A1 OR US-20140159919-A1 OR US-20140159662-A1 OR US-20180076639-A1 OR US-20190334357-A1 OR US-20200343744-A1 OR US-20210367435-A1 OR US-20230336010-A1 OR US-20240380225-A1 OR US-20170047618-A1 OR US-20170364360-A1 OR US-20180368066-A1 OR US-20190373547-A1 OR US-20190258797-A1 OR US-20200295408-A1 OR US-20200301696-A1 OR US-20210286612-A1 OR US-20230127497-A1 OR US-20250208857-A1 OR US-20220358202-A1 OR US-20240265407-A1 OR US-20240412235-A1 OR US-20240347286-A1 OR US-20250141247-A1 OR US-20250153334-A1
US-7784104-B2 OR US-9537335-B2 OR US-9595839-B2 OR US-9780583-B2 OR US-10396573-B2 OR US-10749360-B2 OR US-11114870-B2 OR US-11721990-B2 OR US-12100981-B2 OR US-10425894-B2 OR US-10694463-B2 OR US-11176241-B2 OR US-11094969-B2 OR US-11029941-B2 OR US-12067104-B2 OR US-12131339-B2
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN T TRISCHLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0651. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30A-3:30P (often working later), M-F, ET, Flexible. 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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 5712722312. 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.
/JOHN T TRISCHLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights