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 § 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 11-23 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 11, Lines 9-10 recites “the rotation”. It is unclear to the examiner what structure is associated with the rotation, is the rotation of the holding member, the shaft portion, or another structure. For purpose of examination examiner interprets the limitation as the rotation relative to the holding portion and shaft portion.
Claim 11, Line 15 recites “opposite distal side in the longitudinal direction”. It s unclear to the examiner if applicant intended for the opposite distal end is intended to refer to “a distal end portion of the shaft” or be a new different structure. For purpose of examination examiner interprets the limitation as “opposite distal end portion”.
Claim 12, Line 3 recites “a protruding portion”. It is unclear to the examiner if applicant intends to refer to the holding member protrusion in claim 11 or is directed to a different protrusion. For purpose of examination, examiner interprets the limitation as different.
Claim 17, Line 4 recites “the first flute portion side”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purpose of examination, examiner interprets the limitation as “a first fluted portion side”
Claim 18 recites “a plurality of ridges and protrusions are “disposed”. It is unclear to the examiner where these ridges and protrusions are located and what member they are disposed upon. For purpose of examination, Examiner interprets the plurality of ridges disposed on the shaft portion and the plurality of protrusions to be disposed on the holding member.
Claims 13-16 and 19-23 are rejected due to being dependent upon a rejected claim.
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)(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 11-13, 16-18, and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kress (4,103,511).
Regarding Claim 11, Kress teaches A tip tool mounting structure (Fig. 5) for a machining device (Fig. 1, [Abstract]), comprising:
a shaft portion (Ref. 10, fig. 1&3) integrated with an output shaft of a machining device (Ref. 16, Fig. 1), a tip tool (Ref. 34, Fig. 2&4) being mountable on the shaft portion (Fig. 5, [Col. 4, Lines 65-69]); and
a holding member (Ref. 34, Fig. 1&3) rotatably disposed at a distal end portion of the shaft portion (Fig. 1&5, left side of the shaft),
wherein the shaft portion (10) includes a ridge (Fig. 1&3 the space between the tabs (26)) extending in a longitudinal direction (Fig. 1 *5 shows the ridge has a longitudinal dimensions of the tabs and thereby extends in a longitudinal direction) and projecting outward in a radial direction (Fig. 3 shows the ridge projecting outward in a radial direction),
the holding member (36) includes a protrusion (Ref. 40, Fig. 2&4) o projecting outward in the radial direction (Fig. 4) and switches between an attached and detached state (Fig. 7, [Col. 5, Lines 3-5] when the ridges are between the protrusion) and a fixed state by the rotation (Fig. 9[Col. 5, Lines 5-7] recites switching between a locking position and an unlocked position via rotation),
the holding member (34) is configured to be temporarily fixed in the attached and detached state (Fig. 5, [Col. 5, Lines 3-5] when the ridges are between the protrusion), the attached and detached state is a state in which the protrusion overlaps with the ridge in the longitudinal direction (Fig. 7, [Col. 5, Lines 3-5] when the ridges are between the protrusion), and the fixed state is a state in which the protrusion does not overlap with the ridge in the longitudinal direction (Fig. 9&10 show the fixed state when the ridge and protrusions do not overlap in large segments), and the temporary fixation of the holding member is automatically released by a movement of the tip tool to an opposite distal end side in the longitudinal direction ([Col. 5, Lines 3-5] describes the attachment and detachment by moving in the longitudinal direction).
Regarding Claim 12, Kress teaches the limitations of claim 11, as described above, and further teaches wherein one of the shaft portion (10) and the holding member (34) includes a protruding portion (Ref. 20, Fig. 1&6), and the other one includes a first flute portion (Ref. 64, Fig. 11, left side), and the holding member (34) is temporarily fixed in the attached and detached state by entry of the protruding portion (20) into the first flute portion (Fig. 7&11, [Col. 5, Lines 48-56]).
Regarding Claim 13, Kress teaches the limitations of claim 12, as described above, and further teaches wherein a second flute portion (Ref. 64, fig. 7&11, right side) is disposed together with the first flute portion (fig. 7,9,&11), and when the holding member is in the fixed state, the protruding portion enters the second flute portion (Fig. 9 shows that the protruding portion (20) enters the second flute portion in the fixed state, if applicant intended for the protruding member to enter the second flute portion only in the fixed state such a limitation is not required).
Regarding Claim 16, Kress teaches the limitations of claim 13, as described above, and further teaches wherein the shaft portion (10) includes the protruding portion (20, fig. 1), the holding member (34) includes the first flute portion and the second flute portion (Fig. 9&11), is biased to an opposite distal end side with respect to the shaft portion (Ref. 58, Fig. 6, [Col. 5, 33-43] describes biasing the shaft portion (10) towards and away via the spring (58) when rotated), and is biased in a rotation direction in which the holding member shifts from the attached and detached state to the fixed state with respect to the shaft portion (Ref. 58, Fig. 6, [Col. 5, 33-43]), and the holding member in the attached and detached state rotates toward the fixed state by moving to a distal end side with respect to the shaft portion to cause the protruding portion to disengage from the first flute portion (Fig. 7-10).
Regarding Claim 17, Kress teaches the limitations of claim 13, as described above, and further teaches wherein the second flute portion (64, right side) includes an inclined surface portion arranged at the first flute portion side (Fig. 11 shows the second flute portion (64) having an inclined and curved bottom surface arranged at the first flute portion side (left side of the flute)).
Regarding Claim 18, Kress teaches the limitations of claim 11, as described above, and further teaches wherein a plurality of the ridges are disposed (Fig. 1&3 shows a plurality of ridges, the space between the tabs (26)), and a plurality of the protrusions are disposed (Ref. 40, Fig. 2&4 shows a plurality of protrusions).
Regarding Claim 21, Kress teaches the limitations of claim 11, as described above, and further teaches wherein the tip tool includes a center hole (Fig. 2&4),
the center hole includes a wheel flute (Ref. 50, Fig. 2&4), the ridge is allowed to enter the wheel flute (Fig. 7-10), and the protrusion (16) is allowed to enter the wheel flute (Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 22, Kress teaches the limitations of claim 11, as described above, and further teaches an attachment of a machining device comprising the tip tool mounting structure for a machining device (Fig. 16) according to claim 11.
Regarding Claim 23, Kress teaches the limitations of claim 11, as described above, and further teaches a machining device comprising the tip tool mounting structure for a machining device (Fig. 16) according to claim 11.
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 14-15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kress as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Tripp (4,661,009).
Regarding Claim 14, Kress teaches the limitations of claim 13, as described above, and further teaches wherein the shaft portion (10) includes a shaft body (Ref. 12, Fig. 1) and a sleeve (Ref. 15, Fig. 1&3), the sleeve includes the protruding portion (Fig. 1), is movable in the longitudinal direction with respect to the shaft body ([Col. 5, Lines 3-5]), the holding member (26) includes the first flute portion and the second flute portion (Fig. 11) and is biased in a rotation direction in which the holding member shifts from the attached and detached state to the fixed state with respect to the shaft body by a torsion spring (Ref. 58, Fig. 6, [Col. 5, 33-43]), and the holding member in the attached and detached state rotates toward the fixed state by a movement of the sleeve to an opposite distal end side with respect to the shaft body to cause the protruding portion to disengage from the first flute portion ([Col. 5, Lines 31-43]).
Kress fails to explicitly teach the sleeve is biased to a distal end side with respect to the shaft body by a compression spring. Tripp teaches a tool mounting structure with a shaft portion and a holding member and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor. Tripp teaches a sleeve (Ref. 12, fig. 1) of a shaft portion (Ref. 60, Fig. 1), the sleeve is biased to a distal end side (Fig. 1) with respect to the shaft body by a compression spring (Ref. 78, Fig. 1&5). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the sleeve, as taught by Kress, with a compression spring to be biased to a distal end side with respect to the shaft body, as taught by Tripp, to help keep the locking portions from inadvertently being ejected during use ([Col. 5, Lines 20-28]).
Regarding Claim 15, Kress as modified teaches the limitations of claim 14, as described above, and Kress further teaches wherein a ring (Ref. 30, Fig. 1&6) is disposed between the shaft body (10) and the sleeve (15, Fig. 1), and the ring is in contact with an outer surface of the shaft body (Fig. 1&6) and an inner surface of the sleeve (Fig. 1&6).
Regarding Claim 19, Kress as modified teaches the limitations of claim 14, as described above, and Kress further teaches wherein the sleeve (15) includes the ridge and a step portion leading to the ridge (Ref. 26, Fig. 1&3).
Regarding Claim 20, Kress as modified teaches the limitations of claim 14, as described above, and Kress further teaches wherein the tip tool is held between the step portion and the holding member (Fig. 5).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Carruthers (5,915,482), McKelvy (6,071,035), and Marton (2003/0092369) teach tool mounting structures with a shaft portion and a holding portion and can be considered analogous art because they are within the same field of endeavor.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANA L POON whose telephone number is (571)272-6164. The examiner can normally be reached on General: 6:30AM-3:30PM.
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, Bryan Muller can be reached on 571-272-4489. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppairmy.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANA LEE POON/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights