DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 4/07/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 4-14 and 16-21 remain pending in the application. Claims 3 and 15 were cancelled.
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 1-2, 4, 7 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobslaw (US 3092154) in view of Jull (US 1638122).
Regarding claim 1, Dobslaw teaches a material cutting apparatus (see Figure 1) comprising:
a frame (frame which 17 is mounted on, see Figure 2) including a first end and a second end(left side end and right side end, see Figure 1),
a vertical support member (10) mounted to the frame and extending outwardly from the frame (see Figure 1), the vertical support member terminating at a vertical support member free end (at the free end of top of 10), wherein the vertical support member is rotatable about a vertical axis that extends along a length of the vertical support member between the frame and the vertical support member free end (center axis of 51, see Figure 4);
a cantilevered arm (13) extending outwardly from and normal to the vertical support member, the cantilevered arm terminating at an unsupported cantilever free end (at the opposite end of 14, see Figure 1); and
a cutting head (11) configured to move along the cantilevered arm between the vertical support member and the cantilever free end (see Figure 1), the cutting head including a rotational member (saw blade of 11) configured to physically contact the material during material processing (see Figure 1); wherein the cantilevered arm is supported by the material cutting apparatus only at the vertical support member (see Figure 1), wherein the rotational member is mounted directly below the cantilevered arm (see Figure 1).
Dobslaw fails to teach a track running between the first end and the second end; a vertical support member mounted to the track and extending outwardly from the track, wherein the vertical support member is configured to travel about the track from the first end to the second end, wherein the vertical support member is rotatable about a vertical axis that extends along a length of the vertical support member between the track and the vertical support member free end.
Jull teaches a material cutting apparatus comprising: a frame assembly of 2, 3, 4 and 5) including a first end and a second end (to and bottom end in Figure 2), the frame having a track (assembly of 3 and 4) running between the first end and the second end (see Figure 2); a vertical support member (assembly of 10, 6 and 9) mounted to the track and extending outwardly from the track (to top in Figure 1), the vertical support member terminating at a vertical support member free end (at the top end of 21, see Figure 1), wherein the vertical support member is configured to travel about the track from the first end to the second end (page 1 lines 41-59), wherein the vertical support member is rotatable about a vertical axis that extends along a length of the vertical support member between the track and the vertical support member free end (about 9, see Figure 2); a cantilevered arm (assembly 15, 16 and 17) extending outwardly from and normal to the vertical support member, the cantilevered arm terminating at a cantilever free end (end at 41, see Figure 2); and a cutting head (30) configured to move along the cantilevered arm between the vertical support member and the cantilever free end (see Figure 1), the cutting head including a rotational member configured to physically contact the material during material processing (see Figure 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Dobslaw to add a track arrangement for the cantilever arm/vertical support, as taught by Jull, in order to increase the cutting range of the cutting head (page 1 lines 41-59 of Jull).
Regarding claim 2, Dobslaw further teaches the vertical support member is configured to rotate 180 degrees about the vertical axis such that the cantilevered arm can extend outwardly from a first side or a second side of the track (left and right 10 degrees, see Figure 4 of Dobslaw).
Regarding claim 4, Dobslaw further teaches the rotational member includes a blade (see Figure 1 of Dobslaw).
Regarding claim 7, Dobslaw further teaches the vertical support member includes radial bellows (9, see Figure 1 of Dobslaw).
Regarding claim 21, Dobslaw teaches a cutting apparatus comprising:
a frame (frame which 17 is mounted on) including a first end and a second end (left and right end in Figure 1),
a vertical support member (15) mounted to the track and extending outwardly from the track, the vertical support member configured to travel about the track from the first end to the second end (see Figure 1);
a cantilevered arm (13) extending outwardly from and normal to the vertical support member, the cantilevered arm terminating at an unsupported cantilever free end (see Figure 1); and
a cutting head (11) configured to move along the cantilevered arm between the vertical support member and the cantilever free end (see Figure 1), the cutting head being rotatable about a cutting head axis parallel to and offset from the vertical axis (see Figure 1), the cutting head configured to allow varying a cutting angle of a rotational member relative to the cantilevered arm (via 51, see Figure 1), the rotational member being pivotable about a horizontal axis, the rotational member defining a blade configured to physically contact the material during material processing (see Figure 1), the blade defining a rotational axis, the rotational member configured to physically contact the material during material processing, the rotational axis being separate from the cutting head axis and the horizontal axis (see Figure 1);
wherein the cantilevered arm is supported by the material cutting apparatus only at the vertical support member, wherein the rotational member is mounted directly below the cantilevered arm (see Figure 1).
Dobslaw fails to teach a track running between the first end and the second end; a vertical support member mounted to the track and extending outwardly from the track, wherein the vertical support member is configured to travel about the track from the first end to the second end, wherein the vertical support member is rotatable about a vertical axis that extends along a length of the vertical support member between the frame and the vertical support member free end.
Jull teaches a material cutting apparatus comprising: a frame assembly of 2, 3, 4 and 5) including a first end and a second end (to and bottom end in Figure 2), the frame having a track (assembly of 3 and 4) running between the first end and the second end (see Figure 2); a vertical support member (assembly of 10, 6 and 9) mounted to the track and extending outwardly from the track (to top in Figure 1), the vertical support member terminating at a vertical support member free end (at the top end of 21, see Figure 1), wherein the vertical support member is configured to travel about the track from the first end to the second end (page 1 lines 41-59), wherein the vertical support member is rotatable about a vertical axis that extends along a length of the vertical support member between the track and the vertical support member free end (about 9, see Figure 2); a cantilevered arm (assembly 15, 16 and 17) extending outwardly from and normal to the vertical support member, the cantilevered arm terminating at a cantilever free end (end at 41, see Figure 2); and a cutting head (30) configured to move along the cantilevered arm between the vertical support member and the cantilever free end (see Figure 1), the cutting head including a rotational member configured to physically contact the material during material processing (see Figure 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Dobslaw to add a track arrangement for the cantilever arm/vertical support, as taught by Jull, in order to increase the cutting range of the cutting head (page 1 lines 41-59 of Jull).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobslaw (US 3092154) in view of Jull (US 1638122) and in further view of Gauli (US20180250781 A1).
Regarding claim 5, modified Dobslaw teaches all elements of the current invention as set forth in claim 1 above.
Modified Dobslaw fails to teach the rotational member includes a routing bit.
Gauli teaches a that a movable frame can carrier many different tool as the cutting operation requires, such as saw tool or routing bit.
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Dobslaw and change the tool tip from a saw into a routing bit, as taught by Gauli, in order to performed the desired cutting operation (abstract of Gauli).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobslaw (US 3092154) in view of Jull (US 1638122) and in further view of Schlough 735’ (US 6006735).
Regarding claim 6, modified Dobslaw teaches all elements of the current invention as set forth in claim 1 above.
Modified Dobslaw fails to teach the cutting head further includes a waterjet.
Schlough 735’ teaches a cutting frame with a saw and a waterjet cutting head (see Figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Dobslaw to add the waterjet, as taught by Schlough 735’, in order for the device to better cut stone material (abstract of Schlough 735’).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobslaw (US 3092154) in view of Jull (US 1638122) and in further view of Harter (US 5582088).
Regarding claim 8, modified Dobslaw teaches all elements of the current invention as set forth in claim 1 above.
Modified Dobslaw fails to teach the cutting head includes rotatable cable guides about a perimeter of the cutting head.
Harter teaches the cutting head includes rotatable cable guides about a perimeter of the cutting head (58, see Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Dobslaw to add the waterjet, as taught by Harter, in order for the device to better cut stone material (col. 5 lines 37- col. line 5 of Harter).
Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobslaw (US 3092154) in view of Jull (US 1638122) and Guazzoni (US 20180104850 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Dobslaw teaches a material cutting apparatus comprising:
a frame (frame for 17 to mount on) including a first end and a second end,
a vertical support member (15) mounted to the frame and extending outwardly from the frame, wherein the vertical support member is rotatable about [[an]]a vertical axis that extends along a length of the vertical support member between the track and the vertical support member free end (see Figure 1);
a cantilevered arm (13) extending outwardly from and normal to the vertical support member, the cantilevered arm terminating at an unsupported cantilever free end (see Figure 1);
a cutting head (11) including a cutting member configured to move along the cantilevered arm between the vertical support member and the cantilever free end (see Figure 1), the cutting head being rotatable about a cutting head axis parallel to and offset from the vertical axis, the cutting head including a rotational member (see Figure 1) , the rotational member being pivotable about a horizontal axis(see Figure 1), the rotational member defining a blade configured to physically contact the material during material processing (see Figure 1), the blade defining a rotational axis, the rotational axis being separate from the cutting head axis and the horizontal axis (see Figure 1).
Dobslaw fails to teach a track running between the first end and the second end; a vertical support member mounted to the track and extending outwardly from the track, wherein the vertical support member is configured to travel about the track from the first end to the second end, wherein the vertical support member is rotatable about a vertical axis that extends along a length of the vertical support member between the track and the vertical support member free end, a control arrangement integrally mounted to the first end of the frame.
Jull teaches a material cutting apparatus comprising: a frame assembly of 2, 3, 4 and 5) including a first end and a second end (to and bottom end in Figure 2), the frame having a track (assembly of 3 and 4) running between the first end and the second end (see Figure 2); a vertical support member (assembly of 10, 6 and 9) mounted to the track and extending outwardly from the track (to top in Figure 1), the vertical support member terminating at a vertical support member free end (at the top end of 21, see Figure 1), wherein the vertical support member is configured to travel about the track from the first end to the second end (page 1 lines 41-59), wherein the vertical support member is rotatable about a vertical axis that extends along a length of the vertical support member between the track and the vertical support member free end (about 9, see Figure 2); a cantilevered arm (assembly 15, 16 and 17) extending outwardly from and normal to the vertical support member, the cantilevered arm terminating at a cantilever free end (end at 41, see Figure 2); and a cutting head (30) configured to move along the cantilevered arm between the vertical support member and the cantilever free end (see Figure 1), the cutting head including a rotational member configured to physically contact the material during material processing (see Figure 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Dobslaw to add a track arrangement for the cantilever arm/vertical support, as taught by Jull, in order to increase the cutting range of the cutting head (page 1 lines 41-59 of Jull).
Guazzoni teaches a cutting device including a cutting from with movable cutting head (45) and a control arrangement (72) integrally mounted to the first end of the frame (see Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Jull to change the manual system into a controlled system, as taught by Guazzoni, in order to better control the cutting process (abstract of Guazzoni).
Regarding claim 10, modified Dobslaw further teaches the control arrangement includes a control panel (as modified, panel on 72, see Figure 1 of Guazzoni).
Regarding claim 11, modified Dobslaw further teaches the control arrangement is attached to the material cutting apparatus using a mount (as modified, panel on 72, see Figure 1 of Guazzoni).
Regarding claim 12, modified Dobslaw further teaches the control arrangement includes a control screen (as modified, panel on 72, see Figure 1 of Guazzoni).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobslaw (US 3092154) in view of Jull (US 1638122) and Guazzoni (US 20180104850 A1) and in further view of Schlough 223’ (US 20160207223 A1).
Regarding claim 13, modified Dobslaw further teaches all elements of the current invention as set forth in claim 9 above.
Modified Dobslaw fails to teach the control arrangement facilitates remote control of the material cutting apparatus.
Schlough 223’ teaches a cutting device with the control arrangement facilitates remote control of the material cutting apparatus (paragraph 0029).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Dobslaw to change add the remote control, as taught by Schlough, in order better control the device remotely (paragraph 0029 and 0043 of Schlough 223’).
Claims 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobslaw (US 3092154) in view of Jull (US 1638122) and Mantenuto (US 20230037698 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Dobslaw teaches a material cutting apparatus comprising:
a frame (frame for 17) including a first end and a second end (see Figure 1);
a vertical support member (15) mounted to the frame and extending outwardly from the frame (see Figure 1), the vertical support member terminating at a vertical support member free end (see Figure 1), wherein the vertical support member is rotatable about an axis that extends along a length of the vertical support member between the frame and the vertical support member free end (see Figure 1);
a cantilevered arm (13) extending outwardly from and normal to the vertical support member, the cantilevered arm terminating at an unsupported cantilever free end (see Figure 1);
a cutting head (11) including a cutting member configured to move along the cantilevered arm between the vertical support member and the cantilever free end (see Figure 1);
a first modular worktable (18) removably positioned at a first side of the frame, the first modular worktable extending in a first direction at least partially along the frame between the first and second ends, the first modular worktable extending outwardly away from the frame and normal to the vertical support member (see Figure 1);
wherein the cantilevered arm is supported by the material cutting apparatus only at the vertical support member (see Figure 1).
Dobslaw fails to teach a track running between the first end and the second end; a vertical support member mounted to the track and extending outwardly from the track, wherein the vertical support member is configured to travel about the track from the first end to the second end, wherein the vertical support member is rotatable about a vertical axis that extends along a length of the vertical support member between the frame and the vertical support member free end, a second modular worktable removably positioned at a second side of the frame opposite the first side. the second modular worktable extending in the first direction at least partially along the frame between the first and second ends, the second modular worktable extending outwardly away from the frame and normal to the vertical support member in an opposite direction from the first modular worktable; wherein the track extends between the first and second modular worktables.
Jull teaches a material cutting apparatus comprising: a frame assembly of 2, 3, 4 and 5) including a first end and a second end (to and bottom end in Figure 2), the frame having a track (assembly of 3 and 4) running between the first end and the second end (see Figure 2); a vertical support member (assembly of 10, 6 and 9) mounted to the track and extending outwardly from the track (to top in Figure 1), the vertical support member terminating at a vertical support member free end (at the top end of 21, see Figure 1), wherein the vertical support member is configured to travel about the track from the first end to the second end (page 1 lines 41-59), wherein the vertical support member is rotatable about a vertical axis that extends along a length of the vertical support member between the track and the vertical support member free end (about 9, see Figure 2); a cantilevered arm (assembly 15, 16 and 17) extending outwardly from and normal to the vertical support member, the cantilevered arm terminating at a cantilever free end (end at 41, see Figure 2); and a cutting head (30) configured to move along the cantilevered arm between the vertical support member and the cantilever free end (see Figure 1), the cutting head including a rotational member configured to physically contact the material during material processing (see Figure 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Dobslaw to add a track arrangement for the cantilever arm/vertical support, as taught by Jull, in order to increase the cutting range of the cutting head (page 1 lines 41-59 of Jull).
Mantenuto teaches a cutting device set with a second modular worktable is removably positioned at a second side of the frame, the second modular worktable extending in the first direction at least partially along the frame between the first and second ends, the second modular worktable extending outwardly away from the frame and normal to the vertical support member in an opposite direction from the first modular worktable (two work table with a tool head in between, see Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Jull to add the second table for the same tool head, as taught by Mantenuto, in order for the device to performed additional type of work (abstract of Mantenuto).
If there any doubt on the placement of the exact location of the tables, it would also have been obvious to move the table location as needed, since the court have held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. MPEP 2144.04 VI. C.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobslaw (US 3092154) in view of Jull (US 1638122) and Mantenuto (US 20230037698 A1) and in further view of Schlough 223’ (US 20160207223 A1).
Regarding claim 16, modified Dobslaw teaches all elements of the current invention as set forth in claim 14 above.
Modified Dobslaw fails to teach the modular worktable further comprises: a table frame; a movable support surface pivotally mounted to the table frame, the support surface configured for supporting the material; a first link extending between the support surface and the table frame, the first link pivotally connected to the support surface at a first end of the first link and pivotally connected to the table frame at a second end of the first link; a second link extending between the support surface and the table frame, the second link pivotally connected to the support surface at a first end of the second link and pivotally connected to the table frame at a second end of the second link; an actuator pivotally connected to the table frame, the actuator being configured to move the support surface between a generally horizontal position and a generally vertical position; and a fluid tank positioned under the support surface.
Schlough 223’ teaches the modular worktable further comprises: a table frame; a movable support surface pivotally mounted to the table frame (see Figure 3), the support surface configured for supporting the material (top of 118); a first link (128) extending between the support surface and the table frame (see Figure 3), the first link pivotally connected to the support surface at a first end of the first link and pivotally connected to the table frame at a second end of the first link (see Figure 6); a second link (130) extending between the support surface and the table frame, the second link pivotally connected to the support surface at a first end of the second link and pivotally connected to the table frame at a second end of the second link (see Figure 6); an actuator (132) pivotally connected to the table frame (see Figure 3), the actuator being configured to move the support surface between a generally horizontal position and a generally vertical position; and a fluid tank (112) positioned under the support surface (see Figure 7).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Dobslaw to add the modular worktable details, as taught by Schlough 223’, in order to better support and handle the loading of material (abstract of Schlough 223’).
Regarding claim 17, modified Dobslaw further teaches the support surface pivots and translates with respect to the table frame when the support surface moves between the generally horizontal position and the generally vertical position (as modified, see Figure 6 of Schlough 223’).
Regarding claim 18, modified Dobslaw further teaches the support surface includes a metallic grid positioned over the fluid tank when the support surface is in the generally horizontal position (as modified, see Figure 4 of Schlough 223’).
Regarding claim 19, modified Dobslaw further teaches the modular worktable includes a pair of first links, a pair of second links, and a pair of actuators (as modified, see Figure 3 of Schlough 223’).
Regarding claim 20, modified Dobslaw further teaches each actuator includes a ram, the rams being pivotally connected to the second links at locations between the first ends and the second ends of each second link (as modified, 144, see Figure 6 of Schlough 223’).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/07/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2, 4-14, 16-21 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.
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 LIANG DONG whose telephone number is (571)270-0479. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8 AM-6 PM.
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, Ashley Boyer can be reached at 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.
/LIANG DONG/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 5/14/2026
Prosecution Insights