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
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 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.
2. Claims 1-4, 6, 8-11, 13, and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Killian (2,589,554). Regarding claim 1, Killian
teaches a band saw stand comprising: a base 10; and an arm (defined by the guide rods 35, head 22, and handle member 36 which together form a generally rectangular arm structure; Figs. 1-3) rotatably coupled to the base 10 via head 22 and pivot pin 19, wherein the arm defines an enclosed aperture (defined by the opening within the generally rectangular frame structure formed by rods 35, head 22, and handle member 36; Figs. 1 and 5) configured to receive a selected one of at least a mounting portion (defined by the base 50 of the saw 51 positioned between flanges 46 and 47 of frame members 39 and 40; Fig. 5) of a first band saw and a mounting portion of a second band saw, wherein the mounting portion of the first band saw and the mounting portion of the second band saw are different, wherein the band saw stand is configured to couple to the selected one of the mounting portion of the first band saw or the mounting portion of the second band saw. It should be noted that the frame members 39 and 40 include overlapping members 41 and 45 which permit adjustment for various saw base sizes, and therefore the apparatus is capable of receiving saws having different mounting portion dimensions. Further, the claim does not expressly require the enclosed aperture to be entirely enclosed or continuously bounded on all sides, and therefore the opening within the rectangular frame structure formed by rods 35, head 22, and handle member 36 reasonably reads on the claimed enclosed aperture under the broadest reasonable interpretation. Moreover, it should be further noted that the claims do not positively recite structural limitations requiring a specific band saw configuration or structure distinct from the disclosed saw support apparatus of Killian. The recitation of “band saw” is interpreted as intended use and does not further structurally limit the claimed stand apparatus. Accordingly, the disclosed saw support structure of Killian is reasonably capable of supporting saws having differing mounting portions and therefore reasonably reads on the claimed apparatus under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Regarding claim 2, Killian teaches everything noted above including that the base 10 is capable of being positioned in different orientations relative to a support surface, including horizontal and vertical orientations, depending upon the mounting arrangement and orientation of the apparatus during use. It should be noted that the claim does not positively recite a specific mechanism for transitioning between orientations, and therefore the capability of positioning the base in multiple orientations reasonably reads on the claimed limitation under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Regarding claim 3, Killian teaches everything noted above including a first bracket 39 configured to couple to the arm (22, 35, 36) and configured to move with respect to the arm, wherein the first bracket is configured to couple to the mounting portion 50 of the first band saw 51 (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 4, Killian teaches everything noted above including a second bracket 40 (Fig. 5) configured to couple to the arm (22, 35, 36) and configured to move with respect to the arm, wherein the second bracket 41 is configured to couple to the mounting portion 50 of the second band saw 51.
Regarding claim 6, Killian teaches everything noted above including an adjustable fence 30 (Fig. 2) configured to adjust a cut angle and movably coupled to the base 10.
Regarding claim 8, Killian teaches a band saw stand comprising: a base 10 configured to mount to a surface; an arm (defined by guide rods 35, head 22, and handle member 36 which together form a generally rectangular arm structure; Figs. 1-3) rotatably coupled to the base 10 via head 22 and pivot pin 19, wherein the arm includes an upper portion defining a length and width, wherein the upper portion includes at least one engagement feature (defined by the adjustable overlapping members 41 and 45 and associated clamping structure; Fig. 5), wherein the upper portion defines an enclosed aperture (defined by the opening within the generally rectangular frame structure formed by rods 35, head 22, and handle member 36; Figs. 1 and 5) sized to receive different saws, wherein the saws have different mounting portions; and a bracket (defined by frame members 39 and 40 and associated clamping structure; Fig. 5) configured to couple with the arm and move with respect to the arm via the at least one engagement feature, wherein the bracket is configured to couple to the mounting portion of at least one of the saws 51. It should be noted that the overlapping members 41 and 45 permit adjustment for various saw base sizes and therefore the structure is capable of accommodating saws having different mounting portion dimensions. Further, the claim does not expressly require the enclosed aperture to define a completely enclosed or continuous perimeter, and therefore the opening within the rectangular frame structure formed by rods 35, head 22, and handle member 36 reasonably reads on the claimed enclosed aperture under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Moreover, it should be further noted that the claims do not positively recite structural limitations requiring a specific band saw configuration or structure distinct from the disclosed saw support apparatus of Killian. The recitation of “band saw” is interpreted as intended use and does not further structurally limit the claimed stand apparatus. Accordingly, the disclosed saw support structure of Killian is reasonably capable of supporting saws having differing mounting portions and therefore reasonably reads on the claimed apparatus under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Regarding claim 9, Killian teaches everything noted above including that the base 10 is capable of being positioned in different orientations relative to a support surface, including horizontal and vertical orientations, depending upon the mounting arrangement and orientation of the apparatus during use. It should be noted that the claim does not positively recite a specific mechanism for transitioning between orientations, and therefore the capability of positioning the base in multiple orientations reasonably reads on the claimed limitation under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Regarding claim 10, Killian teaches everything noted above including that the at least one engagement feature of the arm includes at least one aperture 42 (Fig. 7) extending along the length dimension of the upper portion of the arm (22, 35, 36), wherein the bracket 39 is securable to the upper portion of the arm via the at least one engagement feature at a plurality of locations along the length of the at least one aperture.
Regarding claim 11, Killian teaches everything noted above including a plurality of brackets (39, 40; Fig. 7) including the bracket, wherein each bracket is configured to couple to different mounting portions of the band saws. It should be noted that the brackets are capable of being coupled to different band saws with slightly different heights or lengths.
Regarding claim 13, Killian teaches everything noted above including
an adjustable fence 30 (Fig. 2) configured to adjust a cut angle and movably coupled to the base 33.
Regarding claims 21-22, Killian teaches everything noted above including that the enclosed aperture comprises a handle 36.
3. Claims 1-2 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Horine et al. (4,085,552), hereinafter Horine. Regarding claim 1, Horine teaches a band saw stand 10 comprising: a base 12; and an arm 20 rotatably coupled to the base 12 (as the support plate 20 pivots with respect to the base plate 12; col. 3, lines 36-45) , wherein the arm 20 defines an enclosed aperture 38 configured to receive a selected one of at least a mounting portion (defined by the portion of the tool that is accommodated within the enclosed aperture 38 during mounting of the tool to the arm 20) of a first band saw (as a belt sander or the like) and a mounting portion of a second band saw (defined by another tool that could have a different or slightly different mounting portion), wherein the mounting portion of the first band saw and the mounting portion of the second band saw are different, wherein the band saw stand is configured to couple to the selected one of the mounting portion of the first band saw or the mounting portion of the second band saw. See Figs. 1-8 in Horine. It should be further noted that the claims do not positively recite structural limitations requiring a specific band saw configuration or structure distinct from the disclosed tool support apparatus of Horine. The recitation of “band saw” is interpreted as intended use and does not further structurally limit the claimed stand apparatus. Accordingly, the disclosed saw support structure of Horine is reasonably capable of supporting saws having differing mounting portions and therefore reasonably reads on the claimed apparatus under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Regarding claim 2, Horine teaches everything noted above including that the base 12 is configured to be selectively moveable between a horizontal orientation and a vertical orientation. It should be noted that the base is movable with respect to the arm 20 to be positioned in either a horizontal orientation or a vertical orientation.
Regarding claim 15, Horine teaches a band saw stand 10 comprising: a base 12; and an arm 20 rotatably coupled to the base, wherein the arm includes a mounting plate 58, wherein the arm includes an enclosed aperture 38 to receive a portable band saw, wherein the band saw stand is configurable in a horizontal orientation when the base 12 is resting on a horizontal surface (Fig. 5), and wherein the band saw stand 10 is configurable in a vertical orientation when the mounting plate 58 is fastened to the horizontal surface (Fig. 6). It should be noted that the horizontal configuration of the band saw stand is defined by the configuration where the base 12 is place on the horizontal surface and where the base 12 is parallel to the bottom surface of the tool as shown in Fig. 5. The vertical configuration of the band saw stand is defined by the configuration where the bracket 58 of the mounting plate is fastened to the horizontal surface as shown in Fig. 6.
Regarding claim 19, Horine teaches everything noted above including that a table plate 66 configured to couple to the arm 20.
4. Claims 1-4, 6, 8-11, 13, 15-17, 19, 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Lanser (7,159,499 B1), as provided with the IDS filled on 03/25/2024. Regarding claim 1, Lanser teaches a band saw stand comprising: a base 33; and an arm 45 rotatably coupled to the base 33, wherein the arm defines an enclosed aperture (defined by the opening bounded by the side portions of the bracket 45 and associated support structure which accommodates support 35; Figs. 3 and 14) configured to receive a selected one of at least a mounting portion (defined by the bottom section of the band saw 13 supported by support 35; Fig. 5B) of a first band saw and a mounting portion of a second band saw, wherein the mounting portion of the first band saw and the mounting portion of the second band saw are different, wherein the band saw stand is configured to couple to the selected one of the mounting portion of the first band saw or the mounting portion of the second band saw. It should be noted that the claim does not expressly require that the enclosed aperture be completely or continuously enclosed on all sides, and therefore the opening region bounded by the structural portions of bracket 45 reasonably reads on the claimed enclosed aperture under the broadest reasonable interpretation. Further, the limitation “wherein the mounting portion of the first band saw and the mounting portion of the second band saw are different” does not further structurally limit the claimed apparatus because the opening is capable of accommodating band saws having differing dimensions, including differing heights and/or lengths.
Regarding claim 2, Lanser teaches everything noted above including that the base (117, 118) is configured to be selectively movable between a horizontal orientation and a vertical orientation. It should be noted that the base operates when the band saw 13 in in a horizontal position (Fig. 5D) and also when the band saw is in vertical position (Fig. 5B).
Regarding claim 3, Lanser teaches everything noted above including a first bracket 53 configured to couple to the arm 45 and configured to move (as pivots about the bolt 65 (Fig. 3) with respect to the arm 45, wherein the first bracket is configured to couple to the mounting portion of the first band saw 13.
Regarding claim 4, Lanser teaches everything noted above including a second bracket 65 (Fig. 3) configured to couple to the arm 45 and configured to move with respect to the arm 45, wherein the second bracket 65 is configured to couple to the mounting portion of the second band saw. The bracket is capable of being mounted to the first band saw also to a second band saw.
Regarding claim 6, Lanser teaches everything noted above including an adjustable fence 113 (Fig. 3) configured to adjust a cut angle and movably coupled to the base 33.
Regarding claim 8, Lanser teaches a band saw stand comprising: a base 33 configured to mount to a surface; an arm 45 rotatably coupled to the base 33, wherein the arm includes an upper portion defining a length and width, wherein the upper portion includes at least one engagement feature (71, 75; Fig. 3), wherein the upper portion defines an enclosed aperture (defined by the bounded opening between the side portions of bracket 45 which accommodates support 35; Fig. 3) sized to receive different band saws, wherein the band saws have different mounting portions; and a bracket 55 configured to couple with the arm 45 and move with respect to the arm via the at least one engagement feature (71, 75), wherein the bracket 55 is configured to couple to the mounting portion of at least one of the band saws 13. It should be noted that the claim does not expressly require the enclosed aperture to define a fully closed or continuous perimeter, and therefore the opening bounded by the side structures of bracket 45 reasonably constitutes the claimed enclosed aperture under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Regarding claim 9, Lanser teaches everything noted above including that the base (117, 118) is configured to be movable between a horizontal orientation and a vertical orientation. It should be noted that the base operates when the band saw 13 in in a horizontal position (Fig. 5D) and also when the band saw is in vertical position (Fig. 5B).
Regarding claim 10, Lanser teaches everything noted above including that the at least one engagement feature (71, 75; Fig. 3) of the arm includes at least one aperture 75 extending along the length dimension of the upper portion of the arm 45, wherein the bracket 55 is securable to the upper portion of the arm via the at least one engagement feature (71, 75) at a plurality of locations along the length of the at least one aperture.
Regarding claim 11, Lanser teaches everything noted above including a plurality of brackets (53, 55; Fig. 3) including the bracket, wherein each bracket is configured to couple to different mounting portions of the band saws. It should be noted that the brackets are capable of being coupled to different band saws with slightly different heights or lengths.
Regarding claim 13, Lanser teaches everything noted above including
an adjustable fence 113 (Fig. 3) configured to adjust a cut angle and movably coupled to the base 33.
Regarding claim 15, Lanser teaches a band saw stand comprising: a base (117, 118); and an arm 45 rotatably coupled to the base via deck 33, wherein the arm includes a mounting plate (defined by the side plates of bracket 45 pivotally fastened to upright pair 43; Fig. 3), wherein the arm defines an enclosed aperture (defined by the bounded opening region between the side portions of bracket 45 configured to accommodate portions of the portable band saw 13), wherein the enclosed aperture is configured to receive the portable band saw 13, wherein the band saw stand is configurable in a horizontal orientation (Fig. 5D) when the base (117, 118) rests on a horizontal surface, and wherein the band saw stand is configurable in a vertical orientation when the mounting plate is fastened to the horizontal surface via upright pair 43. It should be noted that the claim does not expressly require the enclosed aperture to be entirely enclosed or continuously bounded, and therefore the opening region defined by bracket 45 reasonably reads on the claimed enclosed aperture under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Regarding claim 16, Lanser teaches everything noted above including a
first bracket 53 configured to couple to the arm 45 and configured to move with respect to the arm, wherein the first bracket is configured to couple to a mounting portion of a first band saw 13.
Regarding claim 17, Lanser teaches everything noted above including a second bracket 55 configured to couple to the arm and configured to move with respect to the arm, wherein the second bracket is configured to couple to a different mounting portion of a second band saw.
Regarding claim 19, Lanser teaches everything noted above including a table plate 33 configured to couple to the arm 45.
Alternative rejection of claim 15 based on a different interpretation of the Lanser’s disclosure.
Regarding claim 15, Lanser teaches a band saw stand comprising: a base (117, 118); and an arm 35 rotatably (via the deck 33) coupled to the base (117, 118), wherein the arm includes a mounting plate 47 (Fig. 4), wherein the arm 35 includes an enclosed aperture to receive a portable band saw 13, wherein the band saw stand is configurable in a horizontal orientation (Fig. 5D) when the base (117, 118) is resting on a horizontal surface (the base 117, 118 rests on a horizontal surface as the band saw is horizontally oriented; Fig. 5D), and wherein the band saw stand is configurable in a vertical orientation (Fig. 5D) when mounting plate is fastened to a horizontal surface. It should be noted that the mounting plate 47 is fastened to the horizontal surface (defined by the surface of the workpiece support 33) via the bracket 45 and upright pair 43. See Figs. 1-3 in Lanser.
Regarding claims 21-23, Lanser teaches everything noted above including that the enclosed aperture comprises a handle 49. It should be noted that the extension bar 49 which is part of the aperture can be used a handle.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claims 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Killian. Regarding claim 5, Killian does not explicitly teach a trigger bar coupled to the arm, wherein the trigger bar is adjustable into at least a first orientation and a second orientation. Regarding claim 12, Killian teaches everything noted above except a trigger bar coupled to the upper portion of the arm, wherein the trigger bar is configured to be adjustable in a plurality of positions to engage with triggers of the band saws. However, Examiner takes an Official Notice that the use of a trigger bar that actuates or contacts a trigger of a power tool such as band saw is old and well known in the art.
7. Claims 5 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horine. Regarding claims 5 and 18, Horine teaches everything noted above including a trigger bar 152 coupled to the arm 20. Horine does not explicitly teach that the trigger bar is adjustable into at least a first orientation and a second orientation. However, Examiner takes an Official Notice that the use of a trigger bar that actuates or contacts a trigger of a power tool such as band saw is old and well known in the art.
To the degree that it could be argued Killian does not explicitly teach that the base is configured to move to two different orientations, the rejection below is applied.
8. Claims 2, 9, 15, 16-18, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Killian in view of Horine. Regarding claims 2 and 9, Killian teaches a stand having a base 10 and an arm (defined by guide rods 35, head 22, and handle member 36 forming a generally rectangular arm structure) rotatably coupled to the base 10 via pivot pin 19, wherein the stand is capable of being positioned relative to a support surface in different orientations during use. However, Killian does not expressly disclose that the base is configured to be selectively movable between a horizontal orientation and a vertical orientation. Horine teaches a work tool stand comprising a support plate 20 pivotally connected to a fixed plate 12, wherein the support plate 20 is configured to move between a first horizontal position and a second vertical position, thereby selectively supporting a work tool in different orientations relative to a supporting surface (see Figs. 5-7). Horine further teaches that the support structure is selectively positionable between these orientations to provide alternative operating configurations for the supported tool. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the stand of Killian to include a pivotally movable base or support structure as taught by Horine in order to provide selective horizontal and vertical operating orientations, thereby increasing the versatility and usability of the tool support apparatus for different cutting and working conditions.
Regarding claim 15, Killian saw guide teaches a stand comprising a base 10 and an arm (defined by guide rods 35, head 22, and handle member 36 forming a generally rectangular arm structure) rotatably coupled to the base 10 via pivot pin 19, wherein the arm includes a mounting plate (defined by frame members 39 and 40; Fig. 5), wherein the arm defines an enclosed aperture (defined by the opening within the rectangular frame structure formed by rods 35, head 22, and handle member 36), wherein the enclosed aperture is configured to receive a portable saw 51 via base 50 positioned between flanges 46 and 47. Killian further discloses adjustment and positioning of the saw guide structure relative to a supporting surface; however, Killian does not clearly and explicitly teach that the stand is configurable in both a horizontal orientation and a vertical orientation as required by claim 15. Horine work tool stand) teaches a work tool stand including a support plate 20 pivotally connected to a fixed plate 12, wherein the support plate 20 is selectively movable between a first horizontal position and a second vertical position to support a work tool in different operating orientations (see Figs. 5-7). Horine further teaches that the stand may be configured such that the tool is supported for operation in multiple orientations relative to a supporting surface, thereby increasing versatility of use. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the stand of Killian to include a selectively reconfigurable support structure as taught by Horine in order to permit operation in both horizontal and vertical orientations, thereby increasing the flexibility and usability of the tool support apparatus for different cutting applications and work environments. Regarding claim 16, Killian teaches everything noted above including a
first bracket 39 configured to couple to the arm (22, 35, 36) and configured to move with respect to the arm, wherein the first bracket is configured to couple to a mounting portion 50 of a first band saw 61.
Regarding claim 17, Killian teaches everything noted above including a second bracket 40 configured to couple to the arm and configured to move with respect to the arm, wherein the second bracket is configured to couple to a different mounting portion 50 of a second band saw.
Regarding claim 18, Killian teaches everything noted above except a trigger bar coupled to the upper portion of the arm, wherein the trigger bar is configured to be adjustable in a plurality of positions to engage with triggers of the band saws. However, Examiner takes an Official Notice that the use of a trigger bar that actuates or contacts a trigger of a power tool such as band saw is old and well known in the art.
Regarding claim 23, Killian teaches everything noted above including that the enclosed aperture comprises a handle 36.
9. Claims 5, 12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanser. Regarding claim 5, Lanser does not explicitly teach a trigger bar coupled to the arm, wherein the trigger bar is adjustable into at least a first orientation and a second orientation. Regarding claims 12 and 18, Lanser teaches everything noted above except a trigger bar coupled to the upper portion of the arm, wherein the trigger bar is configured to be adjustable in a plurality of positions to engage with triggers of the band saws. However, Examiner takes an Official Notice that the use of a trigger bar that actuates or contacts a trigger of a power tool such as band saw is old and well known in the art.
Response to Arguments
10. Applicant argument that amendment to claims 1, 8 and 15 overcomes the rejection of the claims based on Lanser is unpersuasive. As stated above, the claims do not expressly require that the enclosed aperture be completely or continuously enclosed on all sides, and therefore the opening region bounded by the structural portions of bracket 45 reasonably reads on the claimed enclosed aperture under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Conclusion
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant’s disclosure.
Logan et al. (2003/0221530 A1), and Albretch (5,107,736) teach a band saw stand.
12. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GHASSEM ALIE whose telephone number is (571) 272-4501. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 am-5:00 pm EST.
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, Boyer Ashley can be reached on (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.
/GHASSEM ALIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724 May 15, 2026
Prosecution Insights