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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-7, 21 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.
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 1-5, 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Valanzola n view of Van Der Linde, US 20090104861.
Regarding claim 1, Valanzola discloses: A rechargeable angle drill (Title, “RIGHT-ANGLE POWER TOOL”) comprising:
a motor (Fig. 2, motor 118), which includes a rotor configured to rotate about a motor rotation axis (Fig. 1, longitudinal axis 102A ), the motor rotation axis extending in an up-down direction (see Fig. 3);
a motor housing part (Fig. 1, first end 114), which houses the motor;
a trigger lever (Fig. 1, switch 106), which is operated to start the motor;
a handle housing part (Fig. 1, handle 102), which is disposed upward of the motor housing part and in which the trigger lever is provided;
a speed reduction mechanism ([0017], “a planetary gearing set 124, which reduces the speed and increases the torque delivered by the output shaft 110”);
a gear housing part (Housing portion outside of planetary gear 124), which is disposed downward of the motor housing part and houses the speed reduction mechanism; and
a rotation output part (Fig. 1, output shaft 110), which protrudes forward from the gear housing part and rotates about an output rotation axis orthogonal to the motor rotation axis based on a rotational force transmitted from the motor via the speed reduction mechanism, wherein
the trigger lever is disposed upward of a center of the handle housing part in the up-down direction (see Figs. 1-2).
Valanzola does not explicitly disclose: the handle housing part has a loop shape elongated in the up-down direction, the trigger lever protrudes into a space defined by the handle housing part having the loop shape
Van Der Linde teaches: the handle housing part (Fig. 1, second handle portion 25) has a loop shape (Fig. 1, guard 52) elongated in the up-down direction, the trigger lever (Fig. 1, trigger 30) protrudes into a space defined by the handle housing part having the loop shape.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the loop shaped guard as taught by Van Der Linde in combination with the device of Valanzola, thereby combining prior art elements to achieve a predictable result. The benefit of this alteration is discussed in Van Der Linde, [0050], “a continuous loop around the trigger 30 that protects the trigger 30 from damage if the grinder 5 is inadvertently dropped. The guard 52 can also reduce the likelihood of the trigger 30, and in turn the grinder 5, from being activated through inadvertent contact with the trigger 30.”.
Regarding claim 2, the modified Valanzola further discloses: a power supply part (Fig. 1, battery 104), which is provided upward of the handle housing part and supplies power to the motor.
Regarding claim 3, the modified Valanzola further discloses: a battery mounting part ([0017], “a removable battery pack 104 that powers a motor 118.”), which is provided upward of the handle housing part and to which a battery pack (Fig. 1, battery 104) is detachably attached, wherein the power supply part includes the battery mounting part.
Regarding claim 4, the modified Valanzola further discloses: a battery holding housing part (see Figs. 2-3) in which the battery mounting part is provided, wherein the handle housing part (Fig. 1, handle 102) includes a first handle part (See Fig. 3, the first handle part is on the right side), which is connected to each of the motor housing part and the battery holding housing part, and a second handle part (See Fig. 3, the second handle part is on the left side), which is disposed forward of the first handle part and connected to each of the motor housing part and the battery holding housing part, and the trigger lever is provided in the first handle part.
Regarding claim 5, the modified Valanzola further discloses: the trigger lever (Fig. 1, switch 106) is disposed to protrude forward from a front portion of the first handle part, and the motor is started when the trigger lever is pulled rearward.
Regarding claim 21, the modifed Valanzola discloses the device of claim 1
The modifed Valanzola does not explicitly disclose: the entire trigger lever is disposed upward of a center of the handle housing part in the up-down direction.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to locate the entirety of the trigger upward of a center of the handle housing part. As seen in the Van Der Linde reference, the trigger has two portions, 32 and 34. Each of these triggers allows the user to use the device with a different grip [0042, “The trigger 30 includes an elongate portion 32 associated with the first handle portion 20 and a flange portion 34 associated with the second handle portion 25. This enables a user, while gripping either handle portion 20, 25, to operate the trigger 30 and in turn actuate the switch 40 that operates the power tool 5.”). As such, eliminating the elongate portion 32 would merely eliminate one function of the trigger, but allow the other to function.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Valanzola n view of Kramer, DE 202018101459.
Regarding claim 6, Valanzola discloses the device of claims 1 and 4.
Valanzola does not explicitly disclose: a forward/reverse switching, which is disposed upward of the trigger lever and operated to change a rotation direction of the motor.
Kramer teaches: a forward/reverse switching lever (Fig. 1, directional shift lever 43), which is disposed upward of the trigger lever and operated to change a rotation direction of the motor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to utilize the handle mounted direction switching lever as taught by Kramer in combination with the device of Valanzola, thereby combining prior art elements to achieve a predictable result. The benefit of this modification is that it increases the ergonomics of the tool and allows for one handed direction switching.
Regarding claim 7, Valanzola further discloses: the forward/reverse switching lever (Fig. 1, directional shift lever 43) is disposed in the battery holding housing part (see Fig. 1).
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 DANIEL JEREMY LEEDS whose telephone number is (571)272-2095. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs, 0730-1730.
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, Anna Kinsaul can be reached at 571-270-1926. 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.
/DANIEL JEREMY LEEDS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731