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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: The limitation reading “a blade section, the blade section having a serrated front edge in which at least one line of cutouts is provided along the width of the blade section behind the serrated front edge” should read: “a blade section, the blade section having a serrated front edge, and the blade section having
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: The limitation reading “” should read: “”.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: The limitation reading “” should read: “”.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: The limitation reading “” should read: “”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 12-26 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
The limitation(s) of Claims 12 and 22, (respectively) reading: “the cutouts are spaced apart along the width of the blade section” is indefinite. For example, looking at figure 2, the cutouts appear to be spaced apart relative to one another along the length of the blade section, e.g. from the front edge 18 to the rear section adjacent to part 12. There does not seem to be any relative spacing between the cutouts in the width direction. Rather, the cutouts 20 appear to be spaced apart from one another along a length of the blade and extending all the way along a width of the blade, as best seen in fig 1. For purposes of advancing prosecution, this is how said limitation will be interpreted, as best understood in light of the specification
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 12-16 and 20-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by USPGPUB20120255417, Frueh.
Regarding Claim 12, Frueh discloses a blade assembly 10 for an oscillating tool (abstract), the blade assembly comprising:
an attachment section 12 having an attachment formation 14 for mating with an oscillating tool (par 0041);
and a blade section 16, the blade section having a serrated front edge 20 in which at least one line of cutouts (breaking locations 28, 24; the cutouts are being interpreted as being lines/locations at which a blade section may be broken or cut off from the rest of the blade, see par. 0028 of the present specification) is provided along the width of the blade section behind the serrated front edge (fig 1), each cutout defining at least one substantially forward-facing point (points of the teeth of the lines 24 and 28 which extend furthest forward, e.g. in the right most direction in fig 1), and in which the cutouts are spaced apart along the width of the blade section (fig 1), a front part of the blade section forward of the cutouts being attached to a rear part of the blade section behind the cutouts at least by material in the spaces laterally between the cutouts (e.g. material between the teeth formed by the break locations 24 and 28, and the material of the blade formed between the breaking locations).
Regarding Claim 13, in Frueh one of the cutouts extends to a forward-facing point at a lateral edge of the blade section (see annotated fig 1 below).
Regarding Claim 14, in Frueh another cutout extends to a forward- facing point at another lateral edge of the blade section (see annotated fig 1 below).
Regarding Claim 15 in Frueh at least one of the cutouts is substantially V-shaped, with the point of the V facing forwards (see annotated fig 1 below).
Regarding Claim 16, in Frueh at least one of the cutouts is substantially W-shaped, with two points facing forward and one point facing backwards (see annotated fig 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
569
826
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 20, in Frueh the cutouts are bevelled (at least in shape/outline, e.g. since teeth are formed by the lines/break locations).
Regarding Claim 21, in Frueh the plurality of lines of cutouts are provided, and the lines being spaced along the length of the blade section (see: fig 1).
Regarding Claim 22, Frueh discloses: a blade assembly 10 comprising:
an attachment section 12 having an attachment formation 14 for mating with an oscillating tool (par 0041);
and a blade section (12), the blade section having a serrated front edge 20 in which at least one line of cutouts (“breaking locations” 24 and 28; the cutouts are being interpreted as being lines/locations at which a blade section may be broken or cut off from the rest of the blade, see par. 0028 of the present specification) is provided along the width of the blade section behind the serrated front edge (fig 1), each cutout defining at least one substantially forward-facing point (points of the teeth of the lines 24 and 28 which extend furthest forward, e.g. in the right most direction in fig 1), and in which the cutouts are spaced apart along the width of the blade section (fig 1), a front part of the blade section forward of the cutouts being attached to a rear part of the blade section behind the cutouts at least by material in the spaces laterally between the cutouts (e.g. material between the teeth formed by the break locations 24 and 28, and the material of the blade formed between the breaking locations); and a tool (“pliers”, per par. 0045) for snapping-off a front part of the blade section (par 0045),
the tool comprising a body having a slit for receiving the front part of the blade section (“pliers”, since pliers are known to have spacing between jaws, to accept a portion of the blade to be received by the pliers).
Regarding Claim 23, in Frueh one of the cutouts extends to a forward-facing point at a lateral edge of the blade section (see annotated fig 1 below).
Regarding Claim 24, in Frueh another cutout extends to a forward- facing point at another lateral edge of the blade section (see annotated fig 1 below).
Regarding Claim 25 in Frueh at least one of the cutouts is substantially V-shaped, with the point of the V facing forwards (see annotated fig 1 below).
Regarding Claim 26, in Frueh at least one of the cutouts is substantially W-shaped, with two points facing forward and one point facing backwards (see annotated fig 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
569
826
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 of this title, 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 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frueh as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of USPN 9884380, Muti.
Regarding Claims 17-18, Frueh lacks the cutouts being through cutouts, whereby the blade section is cut all the way through the material (Claim 17) and wherein the cutouts are partial cutouts, whereby the blade section is thinned (Claim 18).
Muti discloses a blade for a reciprocating tool, in the same field of endeavor as the blade for a reciprocating tool device, of the present invention and discloses that such a system includes the cutouts “scores 150”, which like the cutouts of Frueh are used for breaking off one piece of the blade from another piece of the blade, see col. 4, 50-65 and col 5, 1-15) being formed partially by through cutout portions (152), whereby the blade section is cut all the way through the material (col. 4, 50-65 and col 5, 1-15) (Claim 17) and wherein the cutouts are partially formed via partial cutouts (“non-through grooves” 154), whereby the blade section is thinned (col. 4, 50-65 and col 5, 1-15) (Claim 18) in order to have the cutouts be scores structurally strong enough to prevent unintentional breakage and/or separation (col. 5; 20-30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Frueh by making the cutouts being through cutouts, whereby the blade section is cut all the way through the material (Claim 17) and wherein the cutouts are partial cutouts, whereby the blade section is thinned (Claim 18) in order to have the cutouts be scores structurally strong enough to prevent unintentional breakage and/or separation, as taught in muti.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frueh as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of USPN 3630699 Catlin.
Regarding Claim 19 in Frueh the blade section is made from carbide steel.
Catlin discloses a blade for a reciprocating tool (abstract), in the same field of endeavor as the blade for a reciprocating tool device, of the present invention and discloses that such a system includes the tool having cutouts 141 used for breaking off one piece of the blade from another piece of the blade (col 6, 70-80), and that such a blade may be made of carbide steel, in order to provide the blade having sharp cutting edges for abrading applications; col 1, 20-40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Frueh by making the cutouts being through cutouts, whereby the blade section is cut all the way through the material (Claim 17) and wherein the cutouts are partial cutouts, whereby the blade section is thinned (Claim 18) in order to have the provide the blade having sharp cutting edges for abrading applications as taught in Catlin.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. USPNs/USPGPUBs 9884380 11433560 D628453 20120255417 3630699 3889368 2051199 4729168 20070011885 3448518 20120073143 4240202 4615118 20120073143 6938345 4196515 4063356 1969618 3630699 20060035577 20070006683 20110067197 8162784 20040250423 20060035577 20090188115 20100088901 20120317819 6202721 20100071216 and WO 2023099873 A1 disclose blades/cutting-tools with cutout portions, while USPNs/USPGPUBs 3448518 score lines 2051199 disclose tools for breaking a blade. Thus, each of these references disclose elements relevant to the present invention/application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FERNANDO A AYALA whose telephone number is (571)270-5336. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm Eastern standard.
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.
/FERNANDO A AYALA/Examiner, Art Unit 3724
/BOYER D ASHLEY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724