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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the side wall of the spring limiting seat and the side wall of the first groove must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-10 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 1, the claim states “a plurality of limiting slots are arranged on one side of the first lug facing the second lug with the through-hole as the center of a circle” in lines 7-9 of the claim. It is unclear how the through-hole is the center of a circle. The common definition of a “through-hole” is a generally circular hole that provides a path through an object. As a through-hole is generally known to have a circular shape and another structure has not been claimed as being circular it is unclear as to what the limitation requires. To expedite prosecution the Examiner in view of the entire disclosure best understands the limitation as “the through-hole centered on a side of the first lug and a side of the second lug”.
Regarding claims 2-10, these claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as indefinite due to their dependency on claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, the claim states “the end thereof is provided with a support plate arranged perpendicular to the knife head in space” in lines 4-5 of the claim. It is unclear what the limitation “arranged perpendicular to the knife head in space” requires. The common definition for the term “space” is a period of time, a limited extent in 1, 2 or 3 dimensions, the extent between two things, or the region beyond the earth’s atmosphere. To expedite prosecution the Examiner in view of the entire disclosure best understands the limitation as “the end thereof is provided with a support plate arranged perpendicular relative to the knife head”.
Regarding claim 10, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as indefinite due to its dependency on claim 9.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (CN 207509381 U) in view of Winnard (US 2021/0187710 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jia teaches an electro-thermal knife (Jia, Figs. 1-2, P. 0004), comprising: a knife body (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 2 (Jia) below) and a knife holder (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 2 (Jia) below); wherein a front end of the knife body is provided with a knife head (Jia, Figs. 1-2, 8).
Jia does not teach an angle adjusting mechanism; wherein the other end of the knife body is rotatably connected to the knife holder via an angle adjusting structure; a first groove is provided on one side of an end of the knife body away from the knife head, a first lug and a second lug are symmetrically provided on the top end of the knife holder, a through-hole is provided at the center of the first lug, and a plurality of limiting slots are arranged on one side of the first lug facing the second lug with the through-hole as the center of a circle.
Winnard teaches an angle adjusting device (Winnard, Figs. 1-6B) comprising: a body (Winnard, Figs. 1-6B, 30), a holder (Winnard, Figs. 1-6B, 12) and an angle adjusting mechanism (Winnard, Figs. 1-6B, 14a); wherein a front end of the body (Winnard, Figs. 1-6B, 18) is provided with a head (Winnard, Figs. 1-6B, 16a) and the other end of the body is rotatably connected to the holder (Winnard, Figs. 1-6B, 12) via an angle adjusting structure (Winnard, Figs. 1-6B, 14a); a first groove (Winnard, Figs. 1-6B, 36) is provided on one side of an end of the knife body away from the knife head, a first lug (Winnard, Figs. 4-6B, 20a) and a second lug (Winnard, Figs. 4-6B, 20b) are symmetrically provided on the top end of the holder, a through-hole (Winnard, Fig. 5, 22) is provided at the center of the first lug, and a plurality of limiting slots (Winnard, Fig. 5, 26) are arranged on one side of the first lug facing the second lug with the through-hole as the center of a circle (Winnard, Fig. 5, 20a and 22). Such an angle adjusting mechanism allows for the device to be adjusted into multiple positions (Winnard, P. 0014).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the electro-thermal knife taught by Jia to include an angle adjusting mechanism like that taught by Winnard as doing so allows for the device to be adjusted into multiple positions.
PNG
media_image1.png
382
739
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Jia in view of Winnard teaches the electro-thermal knife with an angle-adjustable knife holder according to claim 1, wherein the angle adjusting structure (Winnard, Figs. 1-6B, 14a) comprises a lock button (Winnard, Figs. 1 and 3-6B, 40a) and an elastic piece (Winnard, Figs. 4-6B, 60), one side of the lock button is provided with a pressing portion (Winnard, Figs. 4-5, 42), and a plurality of limiting ribs (Winnard, Figs. 4-5, 46) adapted to the limiting slots (Winnard, Fig. 5, 26) are uniformly arranged one side of the lock button provided with the pressing portion with the center of the lock button as the center of a circle (Winnard, Figs. 1 and 3-6B, 40a); one end of the knife body away from the knife head is arranged between the first lug and the second lug (Winnard, Figs. 3-6B, 32), one end of the elastic piece is arranged in the first groove (Winnard, Figs. 6A-6B, 36 and 60), the other end of the elastic piece is connected to the lock button (Winnard, Figs. 6A-6B, 40a and 60), one side of the lock button provided with the limiting rib (Winnard, Figs. 4-5, 46) is arranged towards the first lug, the pressing portion of the lock button is arranged in the through-hole (Winnard, Fig. 3, 40a), and the limiting rib is adapted to be connected to the limiting slot (Winnard, P. 0022).
Claims 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (CN 207509381 U) in view of Winnard (US 2021/0187710 A1) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Huang (US 7,370,423 B1).
Regarding claim 3, Jia in view of Winnard teaches the electro-thermal knife with an angle-adjustable knife holder according to claim 2.
Jia in view of Winnard does not teach wherein a fixing groove is provided in the first groove, a fixing rib adapted to the fixing groove is provided on the other side of the lock button away from the pressing portion, and the fixing rib is adapted to be connected to the fixing groove.
Huang teaches an angle adjustment mechanism featuring a button (Huang, Figs. 1-3, 60), wherein a fixing groove (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 3 (Huang) below) is provided in the first groove (Huang, Figs. 2-4, 22), a fixing rib (Huang, Figs. 2-3, 62) adapted to the fixing groove is provided on the other side of the lock button away from the pressing portion, and the fixing rib is adapted to be connected to the fixing groove (Huang, Col. 3, lines 9-27). Such structures help retain and prevent rotation of the button during pivoting of the head.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the first groove to include a fixing groove and the button to include a complementary fixing rib like those taught by Huang as such features help to retain the button and prevent the button from rotating while pivoting the tool head.
PNG
media_image2.png
462
707
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Jia in view of Winnard teaches the electro-thermal knife with an angle-adjustable knife holder according to claim 2, wherein the elastic piece (Winnard, Figs. 4-6B, 60) is a spring (Winnard, Figs. 4-6B, 62, P. 0024).
Jia in view of Winnard does not teach wherein a spring limiting seat is provided at the center of the bottom surface of the first groove and one end of the spring is provided in the spring limiting seat.
Huang further teaches a first groove (Huang, Figs. 2-4, 22) wherein a spring limiting seat (Huang, Figs. 3-4, 25) is provided at the center of the bottom surface of the first groove and one end of the spring is provided in the spring limiting seat (Huang, Col. 3, lines 28-36). This helps to bias the spring against the button and ensures the limiting ribs are engaged. This is an alternative to Winnard which includes two buttons with a spring between the two buttons, however both the arrangement taught by Winnard and the arrangement taught by Huang both allow for the selective pivoting of the head when the button is depressed and locking the head in position when not depressed.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the first groove to include a spring limiting seat like that taught by Huang as such a feature allows for the button to be pressed and returned to its initial position without a second button.
Regarding claim 5, Jia in view of Winnard teaches the electro-thermal knife with an angle-adjustable knife holder according to claim 4.
Jia in view of Winnard does not teach wherein a side wall of the spring limiting seat is provided with a first notch, an end of the side wall of the section of the spring limiting seat at the first notch is respectively provided with an extension extending towards the side wall of the first groove, a fixing groove is formed between the two connected extensions at the first notches, and the other side of the lock button away from the pressing portion is provided with a fixing rib adapted to the fixing groove. However, Huang teaches that it is known in the art of pivots for the button to have ribs (Huang, Fig. 3, 62 and 65) adapted to a groove (Huang, Fig. 3, 22 and 72) with the structure as claimed only the grooves taught by Huang are not located on the spring limiting seat. As such, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the lock button and spring limiting seat taught by Jia in view of Winnard and Huang to include a fixing groove in the spring limiting surface and a fixing fib adapted to the fixing groove
Regarding claim 6, Jia in view of Winnard teaches the electro-thermal knife with an angle-adjustable knife holder according to claim 4, wherein a second groove (Jia, Figs. 6A-6B, 48) is provided at the center of the other side of the lock button away from the pressing portion, and one end of the spring connected to the lock button is provided in the second groove (Jia, Figs. 6A-6B, 48 and 62).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (CN 207509381 U) in view of Winnard (US 2021/0187710 A1) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Rapp et al. (US 2013/0178296 A1) and Velderman et al. (US 2019/0273421 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Jia in view of Winnard teaches the electro-thermal knife with an angle-adjustable knife holder according to claim 2, wherein a heat dissipation fan (Jia, Fig. 1, 4) is provided in an external power supply (Jia, F1ig. 1, 6) with a plurality of heat dissipation holes (Jia, Fig. 2, 5) to cool the electrical components (Jia, P. 0009).
Jia in view of Winnard does not teach wherein a heat dissipation fan is provided in an end of the knife body located between the first lug and the second lug, and a plurality of heat dissipation holes are provided on an outer housing of the end of the knife body.
Rapp teaches a device (Rapp, Figs. 1 and 8-16, 900) wherein a heat dissipation fan (Rapp, Fig. 11, 913) is provided in an end of a body (Rapp, Fig. 11, 902) located between a first lug and a second lug (Rapp, Fig. 11, 903b).
Velderman teaches a hand held tool (Velderman, Figs. 1-17, 100) wherein a heat dissipation fan (Velderman, Figs. 3-4, 6-8 and 13-16, 130) is provided in an end of a body (Velderman, Fig. 3, 102a and 102b) and a plurality of heat dissipation holes (Velderman, Fig. 3, 140) are provided on an outer housing of the end of the body.
The combination of the teachings of Jia, Rapp, and Velderman show that a person of ordinary skill in the art would position a heat dissipation fan and accompanying heat dissipation holes where ever desirable to cool a device. Further Rapp shows that it is known in the art of pivoting bodies to place a heat dissipation inside of the pivoting body between the pivot lugs. As such it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the heat dissipation fan and plurality of heat dissipation hole taught by Jia in view of Winnard that such the fan and holes were arranged in any desirable location where cooling is needed as such a rearrangement of part requires only a basic level of skill for a worker in the art (see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C)). As the prior art of Jia, Rapp, and Velderman show that a person of ordinary skill in the art would know to put cooling elements like holes or fans in proximity to components that generate heat and that these components may be located in different parts of the device there is clear motivation in the art to provide cooling for elements of the device inside the body.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (CN 207509381 U) in view of Winnard (US 2021/0187710 A1) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of White (US 1,279,807 A).
Regarding claim 8, Jia in view of Winnard teaches the electro-thermal knife with an angle-adjustable knife holder according to claim 2.
Jia in view of Winnard does not teach wherein a wire binding buckle is provided on a side of the second lug facing the first lug, and a wire inlet hole is provided on a side of the end of the knife body adjacent to the wire binding buckle.
White teaches an angle-adjustable holder (White, Fig. 1, b) wherein a wire binding buckle (White, Fig. 6, I) is provided on a side of a lug facing another lug (White, Fig. 1, b), and a wire inlet hole (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 6 (White) below) is provided on a side of the end of the body adjacent to the wire binding buckle. Such structures help to prevent wire strain and undesired bending or twisting (White, Pg. 1, lines 43-62)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the second lug taught by Jia in view of Winnard to include a wire binding buckle and wire inlet hole like those taught by White as such structure helps to prevent wire strain and undesirable bending of the wire.
PNG
media_image3.png
230
407
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (CN 207509381 U) in view of Winnard (US 2021/0187710 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Harrison et al. (US 2011/0010951 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Jia in view of Winnard teaches the electro-thermal knife with an angle-adjustable knife holder according to claim 1.
Jia in view of Winnard does not teach a support comprising a connecting rod and a support plate, wherein one end of the connecting rod is fixedly connected to the knife body, the other end of the connecting rod extends towards the knife head, and the end thereof is provided with a support plate arranged perpendicular to the knife head in space.
Harrison teaches a support (Harrison, Figs. 1-9, 30) comprising a connection rod (Harrison, Figs. 1-9, 34) and a support plate (Harrison, Figs. 1-9, 38), wherein one end of the connecting rod is fixedly connected to a body (Harrison, Figs. 1 and 9, 34 and 14), the other end of the connecting rod extends towards a head (Harrison, Figs. 1 and 9, 34 and 26), and the end thereof is provided with a support plate (Harrison, Figs. 1 and 9, 98) arranged perpendicular to the head in space (Harrison, Figs. 1 and 9, 98 and 26). Such supports help to provide increased stability for the device while cutting (Harrison, P. 0002).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify the electro-thermal knife with an angle-adjustable knife holder taught by Jia in view of Winnard to include a support like that taught by Harrison as such support helps to provide increased stability for the device while cutting.
Regarding claim 10, Jia in view of Winnard and Harrison teaches the electro-thermal knife with an angle-adjustable knife holder according to claim 9, wherein an end of the support plate (Harrison, Figs. 1 and 9, 98) adjacent to the head (Harrison, Figs. 1 and 9, 26) is provided with a second notch (Harrison, Figs. 1 and 9, 142) through which the head passes.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert D Cornett whose telephone number is (571) 270-0182. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 am-5:30 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, Boyer Ashley 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.
/ROBERT D CORNETT/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 /BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724