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 . 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 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.
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 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergstrand (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2008/0155838) in view of Chen (U.S. Patent No. 7,444,749) in view of Coffland (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2017/0057107).
Regarding claim 1, Bergstrand teaches a handheld cutting device (Figure 1), comprising:
a main body (6) which comprises a handle (62) and a cutting head (63),
a cutting element (4) attached to said cutting head; the cutting element comprising a cutting edge (4A) having a circular shape and a central hole (Figure 7);
a guiding and supporting element (1,2) extending from said cutting head, said guiding and supporting element and cutting head being arranged to form a protecting periphery such that any part of a cutting edge of said cutting element does not protrude outside of said periphery (Abstract, Paragraph 0031), said guiding and supporting element including a distal portion (2A) arranged to form a feed channel (64) together with a portion of said handle (Figure 1; Paragraph 0036, 0039), and
said cutting element is releasably, attached to said cutting head, by a locking device (40,41) wherein in a locked position the cutting element is non-rotatable and in an unlocked position the cutting element is rotatable to provide for re-positioning and thereby renewing of an active part of said cutting edge (Abstract, Paragraphs 0035, 0042-0044 and Figure 7; Examiner notes that when the device is locked via the locking device, the blade does not rotate, and then the locking device is released, the cutting element is capable of rotation to renew the cutting edge);
said locking device comprises a releasable fixing screw (41) co-operating with a threaded part attached to said main body (Paragraph 0030; Examiner notes the fixing screw had threads that cooperate with a threaded hole within recess 30 of the main body 6), which threaded part is centrally positioned within a recess within said cutting head, the fixing screw having a threaded portion (41A) and non-threaded portion (41B) (Figure 7).
Bergstrand does not provide when the threaded portion is within the threaded part the non-threaded portion is within the hole of the cutting element locking the cutting element in the fixed position.
Chen teaches it is known in the art of handheld cutting tools to incorporate a cutting device (A) with a locking device (41) including a threaded portion (43) and a non-threaded portion (Figure 2) such that when the threaded portion is within the threaded part the non-threaded portion is within a hole (62) of a circular cutting element (60) locking the cutting element in the fixed position.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have good reason to pursue locking devices which are known to be useful for a particular locking function. There are a finite number of possible screw thread combinations which pertain to a handheld cutting device and allow for the fixing screw to thread ably lock the blade providing the locking function. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to try any reasonable fixing screw in an attempt to provide an improved locking function for the handheld cutting tool, as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp with a reasonable expectation of success. KSR Int' l Co. V. Teleflex Inc. 550 U.S. _, 82 USPQ 2d 1385 (Supreme Court 2007) (KSR).
Regarding claim 1 Bergstrand also does not provide wherein said locking device is arranged to cooperate with a repositioning arrangement including a pointing member and said cutting head includes a plurality of position markings, wherein by means of locking members said pointing member is arranged to rotate together with said cutting member arranged to visualize by means of interaction with one of said markings which part of the cutting edge is active.
Coffland teaches a handheld cutting device (10), comprising:
a main body (26) which comprises a handle (26a) and a cutting head (50,42),
wherein the cutting device comprises a cutting element (42) attached to said cutting head, a guiding and supporting element (20) extending from said cutting head, said guiding and supporting element and cutting head being arranged to form a protecting periphery (Figures 5 and 9);
wherein a locking device (70,74,76) is arranged to cooperate with a repositioning arrangement (60,80) including a pointing member (82) and said cutting head includes a plurality of position markings (84,86,88), wherein by means of locking members said pointing member is arranged to rotate together with said cutting member arranged to visualize by means of interaction with one of said markings which part of the cutting edge is active (Figures 7A,8A and 9; Paragraph 0053-0057).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the device of Bergstrand to incorporate the teachings of Coffland to provide the housing and shield with a locking member and repositioning arrangement on the shield. In doing so, it allows for the locking member to engage the repositioning arrangement at predetermined intervals to lock the elements in place to appropriately allow access to the cutting element.
Regarding claim 2, Bergstrand teaches the handheld cutting device according to claim 1, wherein said cutting element is positioned within a recess (30) at a level below a plane including a surface of the main body (6)( Bergstrand Figure 7; Paragraph 0042; Examiner notes the plane including a surface of the main body is the main body surface plane).
Regarding claim 3, Bergstrand teaches the handheld cutting device according to claim 1, wherein said locking device comprises a releasable fixing screw co-operating with a threaded part attached to, said main body, which 100 threaded part is centrally positioned within a recess within said cutting head (Bergstrand Figure 3; Paragraph 0048).
Regarding claim 4, Bergstrand teaches the handheld cutting device according to claim 1, wherein said repositioning arrangement includes a fixation element having a first fixation arrangement (60a) arranged to releasably, non-rotatably hold a holding body of a pointing element carrying said pointing member and having a second fixation arrangement (60c, 60d, 60e) arranged to releasably, non-rotatably hold said cutting element (Coffland Figure 9; Paragraph 0058).
Regarding claim 5, Bergstrand teaches the handheld cutting device according to claim 4, wherein said fixation element is provided with at least one surface arranged to transmit a clamping force from said fixing screw to said cutting element against a bottom surface of said recess (Coffland Figures 9 and 9A; Paragraph 0053; Examiner notes the first and second fixation arrangements each have a surface that is arranged to transmit the clamping force of the facing screw towards the cutting element and the recess of the cutting device).
Regarding claim 6, Bergstrand teaches the handheld cutting device according to claim 5, wherein said first fixation arrangement includes said at least one surface (Coffland Figures 9 and 9A; Paragraph 0053).
Regarding claim 7, Bergstrand teaches the handheld cutting device according to claim 2, wherein said pointing member protrudes outside of the peripheral surface of said recess (Coffland Figure 9).
Regarding claim 8, Bergstrand teaches the handheld cutting device according to claim 4, wherein second fixation arrangement comprises at least one axially protruding device (60f) arranged to interact with an indentation arranged within said cutting element (Coffland Figures 9 and 9A; Paragraph 0053 and 0058).
Regarding claim 9, Bergstrand teaches the handheld cutting device according to claim 4, wherein said pointing member extends adjacent said plane including said surface and said holding body extends adjacent a different plane in level with the bottom surface of said recess (Bergstrand Figure 7; Examiner notes said plane is the surface plane corresponding to element 6 as shown in Figure 7 and “a different plane” if the plane level with the bottom surface of said recess as shown in Figure 7/ Examiner notes the recess plane is offset and adjacent to the plane of main body 6; Coffland Figure 9 noting pointing member extension).
Regarding claim 10, Bergstrand teaches the handheld cutting device according to claim 7, wherein said pointing member extends adjacent said plane including said surface and said holding body extends adjacent a different plane in level with the bottom surface of said recess (Bergstrand Figure 7; Examiner notes said plane is the surface plane corresponding to element 6 as shown in Figure 7 and “a different plane” if the plane level with the bottom surface of said recess as shown in Figure 7/ Examiner notes the recess plane is offset and adjacent to the plane of main body 6; Coffland Figure 9 noting pointing member extension)..
Regarding claim 11, Bergstrand teaches the handheld device according to claim 1, wherein a support device (1) is arranged on said guiding and supporting element, which support device is arranged to interact with said cutting edge to improve cutability and wherein said support device is arranged with an upper portion forming a fixed recess interacting with said cutting edge (Bergstrand Figure 7; Abstract).
Related Prior Art
Below is an analysis of the relevance of references cited but not used
- "892 cited references A-G on page 1 establish the state of the art with a variety of different cutting elements/ disc blades using a variety of locking mechanisms for the cutting elements and blades.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 (Fixing screw, threading and non-threading portions) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
-Examiner notes In response to applicant's argument that “The cutting element in Bergstrand can only be turned by the user contacting the cutting element, which can cause cuts”, 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.
-In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., Bergstrand does not disclose any structure for indicating which surface of the cutting blade is worn or damaged. Similarly, Coffland does not show how much of the cutting blade is used up because the rotating part is only a form of protection.) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD D CROSBY JR whose telephone number is (571)272-8034. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00.
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, Adam Eiseman can be reached at 571-270-3818. 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.
/RICHARD D CROSBY JR/ 12/22/2025 Examiner, Art Unit 3724
/BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724