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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a feed element which is designed to displace one of the plurality of insert tools from a park position, out of one of the plurality of tool chambers, and into a working position in the tool holder” in claim 1;
“an actuating element which is designed to actuate the feed element” in claim 1;
“a supporting element which is designed to support the feed element at least in the working position in the tool holder” in claim 1;
“the supporting element” in claim 2;
“the feed element…displaces the one of the plurality of insert tools from the park position into the working position” in claim 3;
“at least one adjusting element which is designed to adjust the supporting element during a movement from the working position” in claim 5.
“the actuating element” in claim 6;
“the feed element” in claim 6;
“at least one alignment element which is designed to align the feed element relative to the housing from the parking position to the working position” in claim 10; and
“the feed element” in claim 10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 5 of the claim, “driving” should be changed to “drive”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 8 of the claim, “the at least” should be inserted before “one of the plurality of tool inserts”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 2 of the claim, “at least” should be inserted before “one of the plurality of tool inserts”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 3 of the claim, “it” should be changed to “the feed element”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 2 of the claim, “at least one of the” should be changed to “the at least one ”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 2 of the claim, “at least one” should be inserted before the second instance of “contact web”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: On each of line 1 and line 2 of the claim, “at least one” should be inserted before “contact web”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: On each of line 1 and line 2 of the claim, “at least one” should be inserted before “contact web”. 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 1-11 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the support element" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Please be advised that Applicant previously set forth “a supporting element” not “a support element” in lines 10-11 of the claim.
Regarding claim 2, the phrase “in particular” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation (“radially”) following the phrase is part of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 3, the phrase “in particular” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation (“axial”) following the phrase is part of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 4, the phrase “in particular” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation (“axial”) following the phrase is part of the claimed invention.
Line 2 of claim 7 sets forth, “the support element.” This limitation is viewed to be vague and indefinite, because it is unclear if “the support element” is intended to reference the “supporting element” which was previously set forth in lines 10-11 of claim 1, or if instead “the support element” is intended, for example, to reference both the “supporting element” which was previously set forth in lines 10-11 of claim 1 and “the support element” which was previously set forth in line 13 of claim 1.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the parking position" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Please be advised that Applicant previously set forth “a park position” not “a parking position” in line 8 of claim 1.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the grooves" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Line 2 of claim 9 sets forth, “the support element.” This limitation is viewed to be vague and indefinite, because it is unclear if “the support element” is intended to reference the “supporting element” which was previously set forth in lines 10-11 of claim 1, or if instead “the support element” is intended, for example, to reference both the “supporting element” which was previously set forth in lines 10-11 of claim 1 and “the support element” which was previously set forth in line 13 of claim 1.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the parking position" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Please be advised that Applicant previously set forth “a park position” not “a parking position” in line 8 of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang (U.S. Patent No. 9,421,681 B2).
Claim 1: Figures 1-13 of Zhang show a hand-held power comprising a housing (1) having an insert tool magazine (52) which has a plurality of insert tool chambers (521) [column 30, line 23] configured to hold a respective one of a plurality of insert tools, the insert magazine (52) being arranged rotatably in the housing (1) [column 29, line 47].
As can best be seen between Figures 1 and 2 of Zhang, the hand-held power tool further comprises a tool holder (4) configured to rotatably drive at least one of the plurality of inserts tools [column 25, lines 28-30]. Also, the tool holder (4) is arranged rotatably in a tool holder opening (131) of the housing (1) [column 25, lines 19-30].
Next, be advised that lines 7-9 of claim 1 set forth therein, “a feed element which is designed to displace one of the plurality of insert tools from a park position, out of one of the plurality of tool chambers, and into a working position in the tool holder.” Noting this, “a feed element” is being interpreted by Examiner under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Please be advised that “a feed element” is interpreted as comprising the structure disclosed in paragraph [0012] of Applicant's specification filed on 12/18/2023, as well as equivalents thereto.
Regarding the prior art and Zhang, Figures 1 and 2 thereof show a fixed member (50) and a connecting shaft (51) that is provided with a magnet (511) [column 26, lines 4-6]. Please be advised that the fixed member (50) and connecting shaft (51) of Zhang correspond in structure to the disclosed “feed element (500)” of Applicant. This is because the fixed member (50) and connecting shaft (51) of Zhang are designed in the form of a slide (please see Figures 1 and 2) and have at least one connecting element with the magnet (511). (In paragraph [0012] of Applicant’s specification, Applicant disclosed that: “For example, the feed element can be designed in the form of a slide. The feed element can have at least one connecting element for at least one of the insert tools. The connecting element can, for example, be designed as a magnet that can be connected to at least one of the insert set tools”). Thus, the fixed member (50) and the connecting shaft (51) of Zhang will hereinafter be referred to by Examiner as, “the feed element (50+51).” Be advised that the feed element (50+51) of Zhang is designed to displace the at least one of the plurality of insert tools from a park position, out of one of the plurality of insert tool chambers (521), and into a working position in the tool holder (4) [column 25, line 49 – column 26, line 18].
Next, be advised that line 10 of claim 1 set forth therein, “an actuating element which is designed to actuate the feed element.” Noting this, “an actuating element” is being interpreted by Examiner under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Please be advised that “an actuating element” is interpreted as comprising the structure disclosed in paragraph [0013] of Applicant's specification filed on 12/18/2023, as well as equivalents thereto.
With respect to the prior art and Zhang, Figures 1 and 2 thereof show a slip cover (53). Please be advised that the slip cover (53) of Zhang corresponds in structure to the disclosed “actuating element” of Applicant. This is because the slip cover (53) is an actuating slide, noting that the slip cover (53), with the aid of its guide rail (531) (see Figure 2), is installed so as to slide axially with respect to the housing (1) [column 25, lines 1-3]. Moreover, the slip cover (53) is actuating in that it drives the feed element (50+51) to move axially [column 24, lines 64-66]. (In paragraph [0013] of Applicant’s specification, Applicant disclosed that: “The actuating element can be designed as an actuating slide, for example”). As such, the slip cover (53) of Zhang will hereinafter be referred to as, “the actuating element (53).” Note that the actuating element (53) of Zhang is designed to actuate the feed element (50+51) [column 24, lines 64-66].
Next, be advised that lines 10-12 of claim 1 set forth therein, “a supporting element which is designed to support the feed element at least in the working position in the tool holder.” Noting this, “a supporting element” is being interpreted by Examiner under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Be advised that “a supporting element” is interpreted as comprising the structure disclosed in paragraph [0014] of Applicant's specification filed on 12/18/2023, as well as equivalents thereto.
With respect to the prior art and Zhang, Figures 11-13 thereof show a pivoting restricting member (81). Please be advised that the pivoting restricting member (81) of Zhang corresponds in structure to the disclosed “supporting element” of Applicant. This is because the pivoting restricting member (81) is shown in Figures 11-13 as being embodied as pivoting support lever. (In paragraph [0014] of Applicant’s specification, Applicant disclosed that: “As an example, the support element is designed as a type of support lever”). Based on the foregoing, the pivoting restricting member (81) of Zhang will hereinafter be referred to by Examiner as, “the supporting element (81).” Note that the supporting element (81) of Zhang is designed to support the feed element (50+51) at least in the working position in the tool holder (4) [column 27, lines 6-22].
Lastly, as can be seen in Figure 11, for example, the supporting/support element (81) is located directed behind the feed element (50+51). Noting this position, as can be determined from at least Figures 1 and 5 of Zhang, with respect to a left-to-right/right-to-left direction in Figures 1 and 5, the supporting/support element (81) is arranged at least partially between the insert tool magazine (52) and the actuating element (53) (specifically a rear portion thereof).
Claim 2: As can be seen on the following page in annotated Figure 11 of Zhang, the insert tool magazine (52) is arranged at least partially, in particularly radially, between a gear unit (30) and the supporting element (81).
PNG
media_image1.png
811
1178
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 3: As can be seen in Figure 2, each of the plurality of insert tool chambers (521) in and of itself is a respective axial groove through which the feed element (50+51) is configured to be guided as the feed element (50+51) displaces the at least one of the plurality of insert tools from the park position into the working position.
Claim 4: The feed element (50+51) comprises a blocking rib (51), which as can be seen in the working position in Figure 1 of Zhang, engages (at least a portion of the blocking rib (51) engages, for example) the at least one axial groove of the plurality of insert tool chambers (521) so as to block the at least one of the plurality of insert tools from inadvertently backing out of the tool holder (4). It is reiterated that each of the plurality of insert tool chambers (521) in and of itself is a respective axial groove.
Claim 5: Next, be advised that lines 10-12 of claim 5 set forth therein, “at least one adjusting element which is designed to adjust the supporting element during a movement from the working position.” Noting this, “at least one adjusting element” is being interpreted by Examiner under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Be advised that “at least one adjusting element” is interpreted as comprising the structure disclosed in paragraph [0020] of Applicant's specification filed on 12/18/2023, as well as equivalents thereto.
With respect to the prior art and Zhang, Figure 10 shows an underside, for example, of the actuating element (53). As can be seen therein, the actuating element (53) comprises a release member (532) that is provided with an inclined plane (533). Please be advised that Figure 10 shows the release member (532) as being bar-like in form. Noting this, the release member (532) of Zhang corresponds in structure to the disclosed “at least one adjusting element” of Applicant. (In paragraph [0020] of Applicant’s specification, Applicant disclosed that: “The adjusting element can, for example, be hook-like, pin-like, projection-like, or bar-like”). Based on the foregoing, the release member (532) of Zhang will hereinafter be referred to by Examiner as “the at least one adjusting element (532).” Please note that when the actuating element (53) moves backward, the inclined plane (533) of the at least one adjusting element (532) contacts with one lateral side (813) of the supporting element (81), and said supporting element (81) is driven by the inclined plane (533) of the supporting element (81) to overcome the action of the spring force of a torsional spring (83) to rotate around a pin shaft (82) (see Figure 11) until the supporting element (81), is separated from the fixed member (50) of the feed element (50+51) [column 26, line 54-60]. Thus, it can be seen that the at least one adjusting element (532) is designed to adjust the supporting element (81) during a movement from the working position.
Claim 6: The actuating element (53) is coupled to the feed element (50+51) such that the actuating element (53) is at least partially movable relative to the feed element (50+51) [column 25, line 49 – column 26, line 4].
Claim 7: Figure 11 of Zhang shows the feed element (50+51) having a contact web (50) in the form of its fixed member (50). Please be advised that the contact web (50) is designed such that the supporting/support element (81) blocks the contact web (50) in the working position. Please be advised that the supporting/support element (81) blocks the contact web (50) in the working position by preventing the contact web (50) (and the attached connecting shaft (51)) from moving backwards [column 26, lines 26-34].
Alternatively, Figures 1 and 2 of Zhang show the feed element (50+51) as having a contact web (511) in the form of its magnet (511) which functions to contact, for example, the rear of the at least one of the plurality of insert tools. Be advised that the contact web (511) is designed such that the supporting/support element (81) blocks the contact web (511) in the working position. Please be advised that the supporting/support element (81) blocks the contact web (511) in the working position by preventing the contact web (511) (and the connecting shaft (51) to which it is attached) from moving backwards [column 26, lines 26-34].
Claim 8: First, as can be seen in Figure 2, each of the plurality of insert tool chambers (521) in and of itself is a respective axial groove through which the feed element (50+51) is configured to be guided as the feed element (50+51) displaces the at least one of the plurality of insert tools from the park position into the working position.
Noting the above, with regards to the contact web (511), it (511) is designed such that the contact web (511) is guided through, for example, one of the grooves of the plurality of insert tool chambers (521) from the park position into the working position. Please note that Figure 5 shows the contact web (511) prior to entering one of the grooves of the plurality of insert tool chambers (521), while Figure 1 shows the contact web (511) after having entered (and exited) the one of the grooves of the plurality of insert tool chambers (521).
Claim 9: With regards to the contact web (50), the contact web (50) is designed such that it acts on the supporting/support element (81) during a movement from the park position into the working position. This will now be explained. According to Zhang, once the fixed member/ contact web (50) is released, the supporting/support element (81) is located at a second position (as shown in Figure 13) to allow the connecting shaft (51) to move axially. If, for example, the connecting shaft (51) continuously axially moves, the supporting/support element (81) will be clamped at two ends of the fixed member/contact web (50) [column 26, lines 60-65]. From this position, when the actuating element (53) actuates the feed element (50+51), the result is these two ends of the fixed member/contact web (50) acting on the supporting/support element (81) until the supporting/support element (81) is located at a first position (as shown in Figures 11 and 12 of Zhang).
Claim 10: Next, be advised that lines 1-3 of claim 10 set forth therein, “at least one alignment element which is designed to align the feed element relative to the housing from the parking position to the working position.” Noting this, “at least one alignment element” is being interpreted by Examiner under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Be advised that “at least one alignment element” is interpreted as comprising the structure disclosed in paragraph [0026] of Applicant's specification filed on 12/18/2023, as well as equivalents thereto.
With respect to the prior art and Zhang, Figures 11-13 thereof show the feed element (50+51) as comprising the fixed member (50). With regards to the fixed member (50) of Zhang, it corresponds in structure to the disclosed “at least one alignment element” of Applicant. This is because the fixed member (50) is shown in Figures 11-13 as being embodied as a plate. (In paragraph [0026] of Applicant’s specification, Applicant disclosed that: “The alignment element can be designed as a plate or a disk, for example”). As such, the fixed member (50) of Zhang will hereinafter be referred to by Examiner as, “at least one alignment element (50).” Please note that the at least one alignment element (50) of Zhang is designed to align the feed element (50+51) relative to the housing (1) from the park position to the working position.” When the actuating element (53) is moved towards the tool holder (4), the actuating element (53) is pressed against the at least one alignment element (50) by means of the second protrusion (536) of the actuating element (53) [column 43, lines 59-62]. This causes the feed element (50+51) to be moved forward [column 27, lines 6-8] from the park position to the working position. With this forward movement, the at least one alignment element (50) of the feed element (50+51) has been moved into the working position and has been aligned, for example, relative to the housing (1).
Claim 11: The hand-held power tool is a DC electric screw driver [column 21, lines 3-4].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Vitale whose telephone number is (571)270-5098. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM- 6:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Sunil K Singh 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.
/MICHAEL VITALE/Examiner, Art Unit 3722
/SUNIL K SINGH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3722