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 .
Detailed Action
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention Group II (claims 1, 2, 5-10, 17 and 20 readable) in the reply filed on 06/09/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objection
Claims 1, 2, 5-10, 17 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
(1) In claim 1, line 5, “one another” should read --each other--.
(2) In claim 1, line 6, “motor shaft” should read --the motor shaft--.
(3) In claim 2, line 2, “one another” should read --each other--.
(4) In claim 9, line 4, “one another” should read --each other--.
(5) In claim 17, line 12, “one another” should read --each other--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejection - 35 U.S.C. 112(a)
1. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
2. Claims 1, 2, 5-10, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
(1) In claim 1, lines 7-9, it is not understood how the transmission system allows the output shaft (354) to selectively change positions along a circumferential direction (353) relative to a rotational axis (341) of the motor shaft (340) to selectively loosen or tighten a connection of the output drive (350) to the chain (28) at the guide bar (26).
(2) In claim 17, lines 13-15, it is not understood how the transmission system allows the second rotational axis (355) at the output shaft (354) to selectively change positions along a circumferential direction (353) relative to the first rotational axis (341) of the motor shaft (340).
Claim Rejection- 35 U.S.C. 112(b)
1. 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.
2. Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
(1) In claim 9, “a first gear” and “a second gear” are vague. Are they in addition to “a plurality of gears” of the transmission system cited in claim 5? It appears claim 9 should depend from claim 1.
Claim Interpretation – 35 U.S.C. 112(f)
1. 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.
Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 112(f). The presumption that § 112(f) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed to invoke § 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke § 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
2. Claim limitation “transmission system” (cited in claims 1 and 17) is being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because it uses a generic placeholder “transmission system” coupled with functional language “allows the output shaft to selectively change positions along a circumferential direction relative to a rotational axis of the motor shaft” or “allows the second rotational axis at the output shaft to selectively change positions along a circumferential direction relative to the first rotational axis of the motor shaft” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. The term “transmission system” is a generic placeholder and is not recognized as the name of a structure but is merely a substitute for the term "means".
Since the claim limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f), claims 1 and 17 have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification (see paragraphs [0062]-[0063]) that achieve the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this limitation interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Claim Rejection – 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2)
1. 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)(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.
2. Claims 1, 2, 5-10, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kinney (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0066742).
Regarding claim 1, Kinney discloses a chainsaw (10) comprising:
a guide bar (100, see Fig.2) configured to receive a chain (14); and
a drive system comprising a motor (52) operably coupled to drive a motor shaft (130, see Fig.3 and paragraph [0034], lines 1-2) and an output drive (170, see Figs.5-6) operably coupled to an output shaft (150,165, see Figs.3-5), wherein the motor shaft (130) and the output shaft (150,165) are mechanically coupled to each other by a transmission system (135,145,155) to transfer energy from the motor (52) to the output drive (170), wherein the motor (52) and the motor shaft (130) are coupled to a first housing (15, see paragraph [0033], lines 10-12).
It is noted Kinney’s transmission system (135,145,155) is the same as Applicants disclose (see paragraph [0062]-[0063]) of this instant application). It is held that Kinney’s transmission system (135,145,155) performs the same function of allowing the output shaft (150,165) to selectively change positions along a circumferential direction relative to a rotational axis of the motor shaft (52) to selectively loosen or tighten a connection of the output drive (170) to the chain (14) at the guide bar (100) as claimed.
Regarding claim 2, Kinney’s motor shaft (130) and output shaft (150,165) are positioned at separate planes and extending parallel to each other (see Fig.3).
Regarding claim 5, Kinney’s transmission system (135,145,155) comprising a plurality of gears (135,145,155) operably connecting the motor shaft (130) to the output shaft (150,165, see Fig.3).
Regarding claim 6, Kinney’s plurality of gears (135,145,155) forms a compound gear assembly (145,155). Note a compound gear assembly is a gear arrangement in which two or more gears are fixed together on “the same shaft” and rotate as one unit. Kinney shows the second gear (145) and the third gear (155) fixed on the same shaft (150).
Regarding claim 7, Kinney’s plurality of gears (135,145,155) forms a reduction gear assembly (135,145), the reduction gear assembly (135,145) comprising between a 1.5:1 gear reduction and a 3:1 gear reduction (see Fig.3).
Regarding claim 8, Kinney’s plurality of gears (135,145,155) is positioned at a second housing (140, see Fig.3 and paragraph [0034], lines 5-14).
Regarding claim 9, Kinney’s transmission system (135,145,155) comprises: a first gear (135, see Fig.3) coupled to the motor shaft (130); a second gear (145) coupled to the output shaft (150,165), wherein the first gear (135) and the second gear (145) are meshed to each other.
Regarding claim 10, Kinney’s transmission system (135,145,155) comprises: a third gear (155, see Fig.3) coupled to the output shaft (150,165), wherein the third gear (155) is co-rotational with the second gear (145).
Regarding claim 17, Kinney discloses a drive system for a chainsaw (10), the drive system comprising:
a motor shaft (130, see Fig.3), wherein the motor shaft (130) is configured to rotate relative to a first rotational axis extending through the motor shaft (130);
a motor (52) operably coupled to drive the motor shaft (130);
a first housing (15), wherein the motor (52) and the motor shaft (130) are operably coupled to the first housing (15, see paragraph [0033], lines 10-12);
an output shaft (150,165, see Fig.3), wherein the output shaft (150,165) is configured to rotate relative to a second rotational axis extending through the output shaft (150,165), wherein the output shaft (150,165) is separate from the motor shaft (130);
an output drive (170, see Figs.5-6) operably coupled to the output shaft (150,165); and
a transmission system (135,145), wherein the motor shaft (130) and the output shaft (150,165) are operably coupled to each other by the transmission system (135,145) to transfer energy from the motor (52) to the output drive (170).
It is noted Kinney’s transmission system is the same as Applicants disclose (see paragraph [0062]-[0063]) of this instant application). It is held that Kinney’s transmission system (135,145) performs the same function of allowing the second rotational axis (extending through the output shaft) at the output shaft (150,165) to selectively change positions along a circumferential direction relative to the first rotational axis of the motor shaft (130) as claimed.
Regarding claim 20, Kinney’s transmission system (135,145, see FIg.3) comprises: a first gear (135) coupled to the motor shaft (130), the first gear (135) co-rotational with the motor shaft (130) relative to the first rotational axis (e.g., a rotational axis of the motor shaft); a second gear (145) coupled to the output shaft (150,165), the second gear (145) co-rotational with the output shaft (150,165) relative to the second rotational axis (e.g., a rotational axis of the output shaft), wherein the first gear (135) is operably coupled to transmit energy to the output shaft (150,165) through the second gear (145).
Prior Art Citations
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Application Publication Nos. 2007/0062361 and 2014/0106915 each shows a chainsaw equipped with a chain tensioner.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0405861 shows a chainsaw (T1) comprising a transmission mechanism (70) having a reduction gear (72) for producing more output torque.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2026/0175463 teaches gear trains including compound gears to provide a gear reduction for output (see paragraph [0039], lines 9-11).
Point of Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HWEI-SIU PAYER whose telephone number is (571)272-4511. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday from 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Boyer Ashley can be reached at telephone number 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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/HWEI-SIU C PAYER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights