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 § 102
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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, 4, 9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Colber et al. (hereinafter Colber, US 2020/0245555 A1).
For claim 1, Colber discloses a power equipment (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses a power equipment 100 – see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0001] and [0040], lines 1-3) comprising:
a controller (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses a controller 132 – see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0045]);
a motor to actuate a work implement (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses a motor 116 to actuate a work implement “cutting blade” (not shown) – see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0041]);
a first element (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses a first element 150 and/or 138– see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0048]-[0050]);
a second element supporting the motor, wherein the first element is rotatably mounted to the second element (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses a second element (110,118) supporting the motor 116, wherein the first element 150 is rotatably mounted to the second element (110, 118) -- see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0042]);
a first sensor positioned to detect an orientation of the first element, wherein the first sensor outputs a first signal corresponding to the detected orientation of the first element to the controller (Fig. 1 and 4 of Colber disclose a first sensor 134/136 positioned to detect an orientation of the first element 150/138, wherein the first sensor 134/136 outputs a first signal corresponding to the detected orientation of the first element 150/138 to the controller 132 – see Colber, Figs. 1, 4 and 25, paragraphs [0045] and [0056]-[0058]);
a second sensor positioned to detect an orientation of the second element, wherein the second sensor outputs a second signal corresponding to the detected orientation of the second element to the controller (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses a second sensor 137 positioned to detect an orientation of the second element (110,118), wherein the second sensor 137 outputs a second signal corresponding to the detected orientation of the second element 110 to the controller 132 – see Colber, Figs. 1 and 3, paragraphs [0045] and [0051]); and
wherein the controller enables or disables the motor based on both the first signal and the second signal (see Colber, Figs. 1 and 3, paragraphs [0051], [0060] and [0068]).
For claim 4, Colber discloses the power equipment of claim 1, further comprising:
a second logic block in communication with the second sensor (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses a second logic block included in controller 132 in communication with the second sensor 137 – see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0044]-[ 0045]), wherein the second logic block:
determines, based on the second signal, whether the orientation of the second element is outside of a second predefined orientation range (see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0051]);
generates a second notification to indicate that the orientation of the second element is outside of the second predefined orientation range based on a determination that the orientation of the second element is outside of the second predefined orientation range (see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0051]); and
outputs the second notification to the controller, wherein the controller disables the motor based on receipt of the second signal indicating that the orientation of the second element is outside of the second predefined orientation range (see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0051]).
For claim 9, Colber discloses the power equipment of claim 1, wherein the second signal indicates the detected orientation of the second element (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses a second sensor 137 which outputs a second signal indicating the detected orientation of the second element– see Colber, Figs. 1 and 3, paragraphs [0045] and [0051]), and wherein the controller:
determines, from the second signal, whether the orientation of the second element is outside of a second predefined orientation range (see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0051]); and
disables the motor based on a determination that the orientation of the second element is outside of the second predefined orientation range (see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0051]).
Claim 17 is "a method" claim which is either same or similar to that of the "apparatus" claim 1. Explanation is omitted.
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colber et al. (hereinafter Colber, US 2020/0245555 A1).
For claim 5, Colber discloses all limitation as applied in claim 4 above. Colber does not disclose the second predefined orientation range is between about 45° and about -30° from the horizontal axis. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to include the first predefined orientation range is between about 45° and about -30° from the horizontal axis, since It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering an optimum range or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. A controlled handle orientation range at specific range improves user comfort, and enhances maneuvering precision around obstacles.
Claims 2-3, 6-8, 10-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colber et al. (hereinafter Colber, US 2020/0245555 A1) in view of Villanova (EP 3 437 454 B1).
For claim 2, Colber discloses all limitations as applied to claim 1 above. Colber is silent for discloses a first logic block in communication with the first sensor, wherein the first logic block:
determines, based on the first signal, whether the orientation of the first element is outside of a first predefined orientation range;
generates a first notification to indicate that the first element is outside of the first predefined orientation range based on a determination that the first element is outside of the first predefined orientation range; and
outputs the first notification to the controller, wherein the controller disables the motor based on receipt of the first notification indicating that the orientation of the first element is outside of the first predefined orientation range.
However, Villanova discloses a power equipment 1 which comprises
determines, based on the first signal, whether the orientation of the first element is outside of a first predefined orientation range (Figs. 1 and 5-6 of Villanova disclose the first logic block (not shown) which determines, based on the first signal, whether the orientation of the first element 3 is outside of a first predefined orientation range (-30°, +30°) – see Villanova, Figs. 1 and 5, paragraphs [0021]-[0023] and [0031]-[0032]);
generates a first notification to indicate that the first element is outside of the first predefined orientation range based on a determination that the first element is outside of the first predefined orientation range (see Villanova, Fig. 10, paragraphs [0047]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify teaching of Colber to incorporate teaching of Villanova for purpose of controlling the operation of power equipment for safety reasons.
Colber in view of Villanova disclose the power equipment which comprises
outputs the first notification to the controller, wherein the controller disables the motor based on receipt of the first notification indicating that the orientation of the first element is outside of the first predefined orientation range (Fig. 1 of Colber in view of Figs. 5 and 10 of Villanova disclose the power equipment which comprises outputs the first notification to Colber’s controller 132, wherein the controller disables Colber’s motor 116/ Villanova’s motor 82 based on receipt of the first notification indicating that the orientation of Colber’s first element 150, 138/ Villanova’s first element 3 is outside of the first predefined orientation range (-30°, +30°) – see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0045] and [0056]-[0058] and see Villanova, Figs. 5-6 and 10, paragraphs [0021]-[0025] and [0047]).
For claim 3, Colber in view of Villanova disclose the power equipment of claim 2, wherein the first predefined orientation range is between about 60° and about 120° from the horizontal axis (see Villanova, Fig. 1, paragraph [0019]-[0022]). Colber and Villanova do not disclose the first predefined orientation range is between about -15° and about 80° from the horizontal axis. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to include the first predefined orientation range is between about -15° and about 80° from the horizontal axis, since It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering an optimum range or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. A controlled handle orientation range at specific range improves user comfort, and enhances maneuvering precision around obstacles.
For claim 6, Colber discloses the power equipment of claim 1, wherein the controller enables the motor based on the first signal indicating that the orientation of the first element (see Colber, Figs. 1 and 3, paragraphs [0060] and [0068]) and the second signal indicating that the orientation of the second element is within a second predefined orientation range (see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0051], lines 1-19. Cober discloses the controller enables the motor based on the first signal which is silent for indicating that the orientation of the first element is specifically within a first predefined orientation range. However, Villanova discloses the first signal indicating that the orientation of the first element is within a first predefined orientation range (Figs. 1 and 5-6 of Villanova disclose the first signal indicating that the orientation of the first element 3 indicating that the orientation of the first element 3 is within a first predefined orientation range (e.g. -30°, +30°) – see Villanova, Figs. 1 and 5, paragraphs [0021]-[0023] and [0031]-[0032]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify teaching of Colber to incorporate teaching of Villanova for purpose of controlling the operation of power equipment for safety reasons.
For claim 7, Colber in view of Villanova disclose the power equipment of claim 6, wherein the controller disables the motor based on at least one of the first signal indicating that the orientation of the first element is outside of the first predefined orientation range or the second signal indicating that the orientation of the second element is outside of the second predefined orientation range (see Villanova, Figs. 1 and 5-6, paragraphs [0021]-[0023] and [0031]-[0032]).
For claim 8, Colber discloses the power equipment of claim 1, wherein the first signal indicates the detected orientation of the first element (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses the first signal indicates the detected orientation of the first element 150/138 – see Colber, Figs. 1, 4 and 25, paragraphs [0045] and [0056]-[0058]). Colber discloses the controller which is silent to
determines, from the first signal, whether the orientation of first element is outside of a first predefined orientation range.
However, Villanova discloses a power equipment 1 which comprises
determines, from the first signal, whether the orientation of first element is outside of a first predefined orientation range (Figs. 1 and 5-6 of Villanova disclose determining, based on the first signal, whether the orientation of the first element 3 is outside of a first predefined orientation range (for example, -30°, +30°) – see Villanova, Figs. 1 and 5, paragraphs [0021]-[0023] and [0031]-[0032]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify teaching of Colber to incorporate teaching of Villanova for purpose of controlling the operation of power equipment for safety reasons.
Colber in view of Villanova disclose the power equipment which comprises
disables the motor based on a determination that the orientation of the first element is outside of the first predefined orientation range (Fig. 1 of Colber in view of Figs. 5 and 10 of Villanova disclose the power equipment which comprises Colber’s controller 132 which disables Colber’s motor 116/ Villanova’s motor 82 based on receipt of the first notification indicating that the orientation of Colber’s first element 150, 138/ Villanova’s first element 3 is outside of the first predefined orientation range (-30°, +30°) – see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0045] and [0056]-[0058] and see Villanova, Figs. 5-6 and 10, paragraphs [0021]-[0025] and [0047]).
For claim 10, Colber discloses a power equipment (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses a power equipment 100 – see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0001] and [0040], lines 1-3) comprising:
a controller (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses a controller 132 – see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0045]);
a work implement (Colber discloses a work implement which is “cutting blade” (not shown) – see Colber, paragraph [0041], lines 1-3);
a motor to rotate the work implement (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses a motor 116 to rotate the work implement “cutting blade” (not shown) – see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0041];
a first element (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses a first element 150 and/or 138– see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0048]-[0050]);
a second element housing the motor, wherein the first element is rotatably mounted to the second element (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses a second element (110,118) housing the motor 116, wherein the first element 150 is rotatably mounted to the second element 110 -- see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0042]);
a first sensor mounted on the first element (Fig. 1 and 4 of Colber disclose a first sensor 134/136 mounted on the first element 150/138), wherein the first sensor:
detects at least one orientation of the first element (Fig. 1 and 4 of Colber disclose a first sensor 134/136 which detects an orientation of the first element 150/138 – see Colber, Figs. 1, 4 and 25, paragraphs [0056]-[0058]); and
outputs a first signal corresponding to the detected at least one orientation of the first element to the controller (Fig. 1 and 4 of Colber disclose the first sensor 134/136 which outputs a first signal corresponding to the detected at least one orientation of the first element 150/138 to the controller 132 – see Colber, Figs. 1, 4 and 25, paragraphs [0045] and [0056]-[0058]);
controller (Fig. 1 and 4 of Colber disclose a first sensor 134/136 positioned to detect an orientation of the first element 150/138, wherein the first sensor 134/136 outputs a first signal corresponding to the detected orientation of the first element 150/138 to the controller 132 – see Colber, Figs. 1, 4 and 25, paragraphs [0045] and [0056]-[0060]);
a second sensor mounted to the second element (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses the second sensor 137 mounted to the second element (110,118) – see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0051]), wherein the second sensor:
detects at least one orientation of the second element (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses the second sensor 137 which detects at least one orientation of the second element (110,118) – see Colber, Figs. 1 and 3, paragraphs [0045] and [0051]); and
outputs a second signal corresponding to the detected at least one orientation of the second element to the controller (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses the second sensor 137 which outputs a second signal corresponding to the detected at least one orientation of the second element (110, 118) to the controller 132 – see Colber, Figs. 1 and 3, paragraphs [0045] and [0051]); and
wherein the controller disables the motor based on either of the orientation of the first element or the orientation of the second element being outside of at least one second predefined orientation range (see Colber, Figs. 1 and 3, paragraphs [0051], [0060] and [0068]).
Colber discloses the controller disables the motor based on the orientation of the first element which is silent to be being outside of at least one first predefined orientation range.
However, Villanova discloses a power equipment 1 which comprises being disables the motor based on a determination that the orientation of the first element is outside of the first predefined orientation range (Figs. 5 and 10 of Villanova disclose the power equipment 1 which disables Colber’s motor 116/ Villanova’s motor 82 based on receipt of the first notification indicating that the orientation of first element 3 is outside of the first predefined orientation range (-30°, +30°) – see Villanova, Figs. 5-6 and 10, paragraphs [0021]-[0025] and [0047]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify teaching of Colber to incorporate teaching of Villanova for purpose of controlling the operation of power equipment for safety reasons.
Claims 11-15 are "apparatus" claims which are either same or similar to that of the "power equipment" claims 2, 3, 6, 8 and 9, respectively. Explanation is omitted.
For claim 16, Colber in view of Villanova disclose the power equipment of claim 10, wherein each of the first sensor (see Villanova, Fig. 1, paragraph [0018]-[0021]) and the second sensor is a three axis accelerometer (see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0051]).
For claim 18, Colber discloses the method of claim 17, wherein the first signal corresponding to the detected orientation of the first sensor includes an indication as to whether the detected orientation of the first sensor (Fig. 1 and 4 of Colber disclose the first signal corresponding to the detected orientation of the first sensor 134/136 which includes an indication as to whether the detected orientation of the first sensor – see Colber, Figs, 1 and 4, paragraphs [0056]-[0058]) and wherein the second signal corresponding to the detected orientation of the second sensor includes an indication as to whether the detected orientation of the second sensor is within a second predefined orientation range (Fig. 1 of Colber discloses the second signal from a second sensor 137 to controller 132, wherein the second signal corresponding to the detected orientation of the second sensor 137 is within a second predefined orientation range – see Colber, Figs. 1 and 3, paragraphs [0045] and [0051]), and wherein determining whether the motor is to be enabled or disabled further comprises:
determining that the motor is to be disabled based on:
the second signal indicating that the detected orientation of the second sensor is outside of the second predefined orientation range (see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0051]).
Colber detected orientation of the first sensor which is silent to be within a first predetermined orientation range. Also, Colber discloses determining that the motor is to be disabled based on the first signal which is silent for indicating that the detected orientation of the first sensor is outside of the first predefined orientation range.
However, Villanova discloses detected orientation of the first sensor which is within a first predetermined orientation range. Also, Colber discloses determining that the motor is to be disabled based on the first signal indicating that the detected orientation of the first sensor is outside of the first predefined orientation range (see Villanova, Figs. 1 and 5-6, paragraphs [0021]-[0023], [00312]-[0032] and [0047]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify teaching of Colber to incorporate teaching of Villanova for purpose of controlling the operation of power equipment for safety reasons.
For claim 19, Colber discloses the method of claim 17, wherein the first signal corresponding to the detected orientation of the first sensor comprises a first value corresponding to the detected orientation of the first sensor (see Colber, Figs, 1 and 4, paragraphs [0056]-[0058]) and the second signal corresponding to the detected orientation of the second sensor comprises a second value corresponding to the detected orientation of the second sensor see Colber, Figs. 1 and 3, paragraphs [0045] and [0051]), and wherein determining whether the motor is to be enabled or disabled further comprises:
determining whether the second value indicates that the second sensor is at an orientation that is within a second predefined orientation range (see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0051]); and
determining that the motor is to be disabled based on a determination that:
the orientation of the second sensor is outside of the second predefined orientation range (see Colber, Fig. 1, paragraph [0051]).
Colber is silent for determining whether the first value indicates that the first sensor is at an orientation that is within a first predefined orientation range; and determining that the motor is to be disabled based on a determination that the orientation of the first sensor is outside of the first predefined orientation range (see Villanova, Figs. 1 and 5-6, paragraphs [0021]-[0023], [00312]-[0032] and [0047]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify teaching of Colber to incorporate teaching of Villanova for purpose of controlling the operation of power equipment for safety reasons.
Claim 20 is “a method” claim which is either same or similar to combination of “an apparatus” claim 14, claim 15 and claim 16. The explanation is omitted.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THAI T DINH whose telephone number is (571)270-3852. The examiner can normally be reached (571)270-3852.
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, EDUARDO COLON-SANTANA can be reached at (571)272-2060. 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.
/THAI T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2846