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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group III (claims 16-20) and
Species III (Fig. 12) in the reply filed on 07/03/2026 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/30/2024 is
being considered by the examiner. However, all the foreigner patent documents and some of the U.S. patent documents cited in the IDS appear to be unrelated to the present invention, which concerns a circular saw system. The cited documents relate to glass or plastic wall elements and therefore do not appear to be relevant prior art. These documents should be removed from the list of relevant references, or the Applicant should provide a statement explaining how these documents are related to the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3. 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
4. Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 22, “the Live 2” lacks antecedent basis.
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 16-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Calcote (US 6,209,597 B1) in view of McCambridge et al. (4,350,193), hereinafter McCambridge. Regarding claim 16, Calcote teaches a triple saw system configured to removably receive a circular saw, including a power tool mounting apparatus (10) having a frame (20) supporting an adjustable top (26), wherein the top provides a bench surface configured to removably receive a circular saw (46) in a bench saw configuration. Specifically, Calcote discloses a circular saw (46) mounted to the top (26) by clamps (42) engaging the saw plate (44), with the saw blade (48) extending through the top (26) for table saw operation (Fig. 1; Figs. 8-12; description of circular saw 46, saw plate 44, clamps 42, blade 48, and top 26). Calcote further teaches a miter saw configuration by disclosing an arm/support arrangement associated with the adjustable top (26) for supporting a miter saw (94) (Fig. 15; Figs. 16-18). Although Calcote illustrates the bench saw configuration and the miter saw configuration in separate embodiments, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that Calcote’s disclosed portable saw mounting system is directed to removably supporting portable saw devices on accessory structures to provide different cutting configurations. A skilled artisan would have recognized that the same portable circular saw (46) could be interchangeably mounted to the arm/support arrangement shown in the miter saw embodiment, or would have been motivated to modify the mounting interface of Calcote so that the circular saw (46) is removably received by both the bench structure and the arm structure. Such a modification would have been an obvious implementation of Calcote’s teaching of a removable portable saw mounting system because it would allow a single circular saw to perform multiple cutting operations, thereby increasing versatility and reducing the need for separate dedicated saw assemblies, Calcote additionally teaches a bench connector base having electrical connections configured to connect the circular saw to the bench by disclosing an electrical box (54) having an electrical plug receptacle (56), an electrical plug (59), and an electrical switch (58), wherein the portable power tool is plugged into the receptacle (56) and electrically controlled by the switch (58) located on the bench (Fig. 1; Fig. 3; description of electrical box 54, receptacle 56, plug 59, and switch 58). Thus, Calcote teaches a bench-mounted circular saw system in which the saw is removably mounted to a bench and electrically controlled through a switch located on the bench.
However, Calcote does not expressly disclose that one of the electrical connections between the bench and the circular saw is configured to bypass the on/off switch of the circular saw such that, when the circular saw is received by the bench, the circular saw is operable only through the switch on the bench.
McCambridge teaches this missing limitation by disclosing a power tool accessory table having an electrical socket (13) with an ON/OFF switch (14), wherein the portable power tool is plugged into the socket (13) and, with its own controls placed in the ON position, is controlled by the ON/OFF switch (14) on the table (Fig. 1; description of socket 13 and switch 14). McCambridge therefore teaches that a portable power tool may be operated in a table-mounted configuration by bypassing the tool’s manual switch through an external table-mounted switching arrangement. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Calcote’s power tool mounting apparatus by incorporating McCambridge’s external switching arrangement, including configuring the electrical connection such that the mounted circular saw is controlled through the bench switch rather than through the circular saw’s manual switch, because both Calcote and McCambridge are directed to improving portable power tools by converting them into safer and more convenient bench-mounted tools. Combining McCambridge’s known external switching arrangement with Calcote’s interchangeable power tool mounting stand would have yielded the predictable result of allowing an operator to safely control the mounted circular saw from the bench while retaining Calcote’s ability to mount the saw in multiple cutting configurations.
Regarding claim17, Calcote, as modified by McCambridge, teaches everything noted above including that the bench connector base (where the electric socket 13 is located; Fig. 1 in McCambridge) is configured to alternatively receive power from an attachable battery of the circular saw or from an AC power connector (as connected to power outlet or wall; Fig. 1) , and wherein the bench connector base is configured to receive power from only one power source at a time.
Regarding claim 19, Calcote teaches a triple saw system configured to removably receive a circular saw, including a bench having a bench surface and a connector base configured to receive the circular saw in a bench saw configuration, and further teaches an arm configured to removably receive the circular saw in a miter saw configuration. However, to the extent that Calcote does not expressly teach the limitation of claim 19 requiring that “the bench connector base and the corresponding connector base on the circular saw each have an asymmetric geometry configured to prevent incorrect orientation of connection therebetween,” McCambridge teaches this limitation. Specifically, McCambridge teaches a power tool accessory table having a removable plate and corresponding opening configured to receive different portable power tools in a predetermined orientation, wherein the plate and tabletop include cooperating alignment and locking structures that prevent improper installation and ensure that the power tool is mounted in only the intended orientation. McCambridge further teaches using asymmetric positioning of locking features, including off-center and unsymmetrical slot arrangements, such that the removable plate can only be secured in a proper orientation, thereby preventing incorrect alignment between mating components. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the connector base arrangement of Calcote by incorporating the asymmetric mating geometry and orientation-preventing features taught by McCambridge, thereby ensuring proper alignment and reliable connection between the bench connector base and the corresponding connector base of the circular saw.
7. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Calcote in view of McIntosh et al. (2007/0101851 A1), hereinafter McIntosh.
Regarding claim 16, Calcote teaches a triple saw system configured to removably receive a circular saw, including a bench having a bench surface and a bench connector base, the bench configured to removably receive the circular saw in a bench saw configuration, by disclosing a power tool mounting apparatus (10) having a frame (20) supporting an adjustable top (26), wherein the top provides a bench surface configured to removably receive a circular saw (46) in a bench saw configuration. Specifically, Calcote discloses a circular saw (46) mounted to the top (26) by clamps (42) engaging the saw plate (44), with the saw blade (48) extending through the top (26) for table saw operation (Fig. 1; Figs. 8-12; description of circular saw 46, saw plate 44, clamps 42, blade 48, and top 26). Calcote further teaches an arm configured to removably receive the circular saw in a miter saw configuration by disclosing an arm/support arrangement for supporting a miter saw (94) (Fig. 15; Figs. 16-18). Although Calcote illustrates the bench saw configuration and the miter saw configuration in separate embodiments, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that Calcote’s portable saw mounting system is directed to removably supporting portable saw devices on different accessory structures to perform different cutting operations, and would have recognized that the same portable circular saw could be interchangeably mounted to the bench and arm arrangements with appropriate mounting adaptation, thereby increasing versatility while reducing the need for multiple dedicated saws. Calcote further teaches the bench connector base having a plurality of electrical connections configured to mate with a corresponding connector base on the circular saw when the circular saw is received by the bench by disclosing an electrical box (54) including an electrical receptacle (56), an electrical plug (59), and a switch (58), wherein the portable circular saw is electrically connected to the bench through the receptacle and plug and is operated through the electrical components mounted on the bench (Fig. 1; Fig. 3).
However, Calcote does not expressly disclose that at least one of the plurality of electrical connections is configured to bypass an on/off switch of the circular saw such that, in the bench saw configuration, the circular saw is operable only through a switch on the bench. McIntosh teaches this limitation by disclosing a stand (212) for supporting a portable band saw (50), wherein the stand includes an on/off switch (238) connected to a plug (240) engagable within a socket (254) of the portable band saw, the plug being electrically connected to bypass the finger trigger (96) of the portable band saw and create a circuit through the on/off switch (238) mounted to the stand (paragraphs [0021], [0027], [0031]; Fig. 1; Figs. 4-10). McIntosh therefore teaches a removable power tool mounting arrangement in which the electrical connection between the stand and the portable power tool bypasses the tool-mounted trigger switch so that, when mounted to the stand, the tool is operable only through the switch provided on the stand. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Calcote’s removable circular saw mounting apparatus by incorporating McIntosh’s bypass electrical connection because both references are directed to converting portable power tools into stationary bench-mounted tools while improving operator convenience and safety through the use of a remotely located bench-mounted switch. In addition, such a modification would have yielded the predictable result of allowing the mounted circular saw to be controlled exclusively from the bench while retaining Calcote’s interchangeable mounting arrangement for multiple cutting configurations.
8. Claims 17 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Calcote in view of McIntosh and in further view of Neumann (US 6,573,621). Regarding claim 17, Calcote teaches the triple saw system of claim 16, including a portable circular saw removably received by a bench structure for bench saw operation and electrical connection between the saw and the bench structure. McIntosh further teaches a removable power tool support system in which a portable power tool is coupled to a support structure through a mating electrical connector interface, including electrical connections between the tool and the support structure. Calcote in view of McIntosh does not expressly disclose that the bench connector base alternatively receives power from an attachable battery of the circular saw or from an AC power connector. Neumann teaches a power tool system configured to operate from either a battery source or an AC power source through a common electrical interface, including a removable battery module (12) and an AC-to-DC power converter module (14) supplying power to the same tool (col. 2, ll. 1-35; col. 3, ll. 45-67; Figs. 1-3). Neumann further teaches preventing simultaneous connection of battery power and AC-derived power through switching circuitry.
It would have been obvious to modify the bench connector arrangement of Calcote and McIntosh to incorporate Neumann’s dual battery/AC power capability so that the removable circular saw could be operated from either an attachable battery or an AC power source while using the same electrical interface. Such a modification would have provided the predictable benefit of allowing operation in both cordless and AC-powered environments without requiring separate tool configurations. Neumann’s source-selection arrangement would further provide the predictable benefit of preventing simultaneous connection of incompatible power sources.
Regarding claim 20, Calcote and McIntosh teach the removable bench-mounted power tool system and electrical interface described above. Neumann teaches an AC-to-DC power converter for a battery-powered tool, including circuitry for converting AC input power into DC power suitable for operating the tool (col. 2, ll. 1-35; col. 3, ll. 45-67; Figs. 1-3). Neumann further teaches supplying the tool with DC power from the converter while maintaining compatibility with the battery-powered tool voltage requirements. It would have been obvious to incorporate Neumann’s AC-to-DC converter into the bench connector system of Calcote’s apparatus, as modified by McIntosh,
so that the circular saw could receive DC operating power from an AC source through the AC power connector, thereby increasing flexibility by allowing operation where battery power is unavailable.
Regarding claim 21, Calcote and McIntosh teach a common connector interface between the removable circular saw and the bench structure. Neumann teaches a power supply arrangement in which battery power and AC-converted power are selectively supplied to a power tool while preventing simultaneous connection of both power sources through switching circuitry (col. 2, ll. 15-32; col. 3, ll. 45-67; col. 4, ll. 1-32; Figs. 3-4). It would have been obvious to incorporate Neumann’s source-selection arrangement into the system of Calcote’s apparatus, as modified by McIntosh, such that the battery and AC power connector provide mutually exclusive power sources while presenting the same connector interface to the circular saw. Such a modification would predictably improve safety and reliability by preventing conflicting power inputs.
Regarding claim 22, as best understood, Calcote and McIntosh teach supplying power to a removable power tool through a bench connector interface and controlling operation through the bench-mounted switch arrangement. Neumann teaches supplying a power tool with DC operating power from either a battery source or an AC-to-DC converter, wherein the converter produces DC power corresponding to the operating voltage of the battery-powered tool and automatically switches between power sources (col. 2, ll. 1-35; col. 3, ll. 45-67; col. 4, ll. 1-32; Figs. 1-4). It would have been obvious to configure the bench connector system of Calcote’s apparatus, as modified by McIntosh, such that the circular saw receives a common DC supply voltage at the same connector interface regardless of whether power is supplied from the attachable battery or the AC power converter, while retaining the bench-controlled operation. The modification would merely apply Neumann’s known power-conversion and source-selection techniques to achieve predictable operation of a removable battery-powered saw system from either battery or AC power.
9. Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Calcote in view of McIntosh in view of Mergener et al. (US 10,131,043 B2), hereinafter Mergener. Regarding claim 18, Calcote and McIntosh teach the triple saw system of claim 17, including a removable circular saw configured to be received by a bench structure and an electrical interface between the saw and the bench structure. McIntosh further teaches a removable power tool support system having a connector interface between the support structure and the portable power tool, wherein the support structure includes a switch for controlling operation of the mounted tool by bypassing the tool-mounted trigger (paragraphs [0021], [0027], [0031]; Figs. 1 and 4-10). Calcote and McIntosh do not expressly disclose a Live 2 connection that bypasses the circular saw on/off switch by routing power through a separate connector path. Mergener teaches an adapter and connector system having mating connector portions with multiple electrical terminals configured to establish different electrical paths between a power source and a tool depending on the desired operating configuration. It would have been obvious to modify the connector interface of Calcote and McIntosh using Mergener’s multi-terminal connector arrangement so that one electrical path provides direct operating power to the circular saw while another electrical path corresponds to the tool’s existing switch-controlled power path. Such a modification would predictably allow the bench-mounted saw to be controlled through the bench switch while preserving normal handheld operation of the circular saw. Accordingly, the combination of Calcote, McIntosh, and Mergener teaches a bench connector base having a Live 2 connection configured to mate with a corresponding connector on the circular saw and route power through a selected electrical path that bypasses the circular saw on/off switch rather than through a Live 1 connection associated with the switch-controlled path.
Regarding claim 19, Calcote and McIntosh teach a removable saw mounting system having a bench structure and corresponding electrical connector interfaces between the bench and the circular saw. Mergener teaches connector assemblies having keyed or asymmetric geometries configured to permit mating in only a proper orientation and to prevent incorrect connection between corresponding connector portions. It would have been obvious to modify the connector interface of Calcote and McIntosh to include Mergener’s keyed or asymmetric connector geometry because such a modification would predictably prevent improper alignment of the electrical contacts, improve user safety, and increase reliability of the removable saw connection.
Conclusion
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Pilchowski (6,418,829 B1) teaches a table for receiving a circular saw.
11. 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
July 23, 2026
Prosecution Insights