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 drive having a transmission as set forth in claim 14 and the drive set forth in claim 29 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 Objections
2. Claims 28-29 objected to because of the following informalities: the status
identifier of claim 28 should be –(New)--. In claim 29, “housing housing” should be –housing--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
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. Claims 14-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 14 and 29, the specification does not clearly disclose what is “a drive” that includes the transmission 22 and that is connected to the pendulum lifting rod 26 at a drive location, to the bearing device 28 at a first connecting region 42, and also to the bearing housing at a second connecting region 60. See Fig. 2 of the drawings. It should also be noted that the drive also does actuate the lever 52, which is connected to the bearing device at second connecting region 60 (according to claim 17). In this case, it appears that the lever 52 is not part of the drive. Therefore, the drive does not appear to be directly connected to the bearing device 28 at second connecting region 60. Accordingly, it is unclear what encompassed by the term “a drive.” The specification merely discloses a “drive device 27,” which is a motor device. However, claim 27 discloses that drive has a single drive (which assume to be the motor 27).
Regarding claim 14, the specification also does not clearly disclose what is considered to be a transmission. Although, the specification discloses “a transmission 22,” it is unclear what components are included in the transmission. In particular, the specification does not clearly identify which parts of the drive are considered to be part of the transmission and which parts are not. In addition, the reference number 22 (Fig. 2 of the drawings) designated for a transmission points to the bearing device 28. Therefore, it is not clear whether the bearing device is part of the transmission and the drive.
Regarding claim 30, the specification also does not clearly disclose that the movement of the bearing device in the first connecting region and in the second connecting region being matched to one another in such a way that, during operation of the power saw, the plurality of teeth each have identical movement paths relative to the housing. The original disclosure does not disclose about the identical movement paths of the teeth relative to the housing.
5. Claims 14-33 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 14, “the first connection region of the bearing device” lacks antecedent basis since the claim does not previously recite that the first connecting region is part of the bearing device. In addition, “the second connection region of the bearing device” lacks antecedent basis since the claim does not previously recite that the second connecting region is part of the bearing device.
Regarding claim 14, “the also drive connected at a first connecting region separate from the drive location to the bearing device” is confusing. It is not clear what is considered to be “a drive.” Th specification discloses a drive device 27 (which is a motor device). However, there is not a clear drive device that is connected to the pendulum lifting rod at a drive location, to the bearing device at a first connecting region 42, and also to the bearing housing at a second connecting region 60. See Fig. 2 of the drawing. It should also be noted that the drive also does actuate the lever 52, which is connected to the bearing device at second connecting region 60. In this case, it appears that the lever 52 is not part of the drive. Therefore, the drive is really not connected to the bearing device at second connecting region 60.
Regarding claim 29 “the first connection region of the bearing device” lacks antecedent basis since the claim does not previously recite that the first connecting region is part of the bearing device.
Regarding claim 29, “the drive also connected to the bearing device at a second connection separate from the drive location, so as to permit movement of the first connecting region of the bearing device in relation to the housing with at least one translational movement component” is confusing. It is unclear how the drive which is connected to the second connection region permits the movement of the first connection region of the bearing device.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. Claims 14-16, 19-20, 27-30, and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Bauer (3,890,708). Regarding claim 14, as best understood, Bauer teaches a hand-held power saw comprising: a drive having a transmission (4-6), a housing 35 (Fig. 2); a pendulum lifting rod 8 operatively connectable to a tool 9, the tool being a saw blade 9, the pendulum lifting rod 8 being mounted in a bearing device 13; the drive connected to the pendulum lifting rod at a drive location (where the U-shaped guide 7 is located; Fig. 2) to displace the pendulum lifting rod 8 in relation to the bearing device 13 in a linear movement, the drive also connected at a first connecting region 19 (Fig. 2) separate from the drive location to the bearing device 13 so as to move the first connecting region 19 of the bearing device 13 in relation to the housing 35, the drive connected at a second connecting region 47 (as a screw that is in contact with an eccentric 17 of the drive which moves the bearing device to an adjusted pivoting position) separate from the drive location and the first connecting region 19 of the bearing device so as to move the second connecting region 47 of the bearing device in relation to the housing 35 in a movement having at least one translational movement component. See Figs. 1-5 in Bauer. It should be noted that the drive is defined by the component that move the pendulum lifting rod 8 and all the parts including the eccentric 17, which moves the bearing device.
Regarding claim 15, Bauer teaches everything noted above including that the movement of the bearing device in the first connecting region and in the second connecting region are matched to one another in such a way that, during operation of the power saw, the pendulum lifting rod 8 performs an identical movement in a longitudinal direction of the pendulum lifting rod 8.
Regarding claim 16, Bauer teaches everything noted above including that the movement of the bearing device 13 in the first connecting region and in the second connecting region are matched to one another in such a way that, during operation of the power saw, the bearing device 13 is displaced perpendicularly (left and right) with respect to a movement direction of the pendulum lifting rod 8.
Regarding claim 19, Bauer teaches everything noted above including that
the drive cooperates with the first connecting region of the bearing device by way of a control cam (defined by the balancing body 21, which has a cam surface 23; Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 20, Bauer teaches everything noted above including that the drive cooperates with the second connecting region of the bearing device by way of a control cam (defined by eccentric 17).
Regarding claim 27, Bauer teaches everything noted above including that the drive has a single drive (1) usable to displace the pendulum lifting rod in the first connecting region or in the second connecting region of the bearing device 13.
Regarding claim 28, Bauer teaches everything noted above including that the drive is connected to the pendulum lifting rod 8 at the drive location via a pin 4 , and connected to the bearing device at the first connecting region via a first cam 21 and to the bearing device at the second connecting region via a second cam 17.
Regarding claim 29, as best understood, Bauer teaches a hand-held power saw comprising: a housing 35; a drive, the housing the drive; a bearing device 13; a pendulum rod 8 connectable to a saw blade 9 and mounted in the bearing device; the drive connected to the pendulum rod at a drive location to impart reciprocal linear movement of the pendulum rod within the bearing device, the drive also connected to the bearing device at a first connection 19 separate from the drive location, so as to permit movement of the first connecting region of the bearing device in relation to the housing, the drive also connected to the bearing device at a second connection 47 separate from the drive location, so as to permit movement of the first connecting region of the bearing device in relation to the housing with at least one translational movement component.
Regarding claim 30, as best understood, Bauer teaches everything noted above including that the saw blade 9 has a plurality of teeth (Fig. 2), the movement of the bearing device 13 in the first connecting region and in the second connecting region being matched to one another in such a way that, during operation of the power saw, the plurality of teeth each have identical movement paths relative to the housing.
Regarding claim 33, Bauer teaches everything noted above including that the hand-held power saw is a reciprocating power saw or a power jigsaw.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. Claims 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bauer in view of Yamashita et al. (2022/0305577 A1), hereinafter Yamashita. Regarding claim 21, Bauer teaches everything noted above including that the drive is operatively connected to the pendulum lifting rod 8 by way of a bevel surface or formation (4, 20; Figs. 2-4). Bauer does not explicitly teach that the bevel formation is a bevel gear. However, Yamashita teaches a bevel gear 1000 as an eccentric formation to reciprocate a pendulum lifting rod 6. See Figs. 1-5 in Yamashita. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art to replace the reciprocating mechanism for the pendulum rod of Bauer’s power saw with the reciprocating mechanism, as taught by Yamashita, since both reciprocating mechanisms are art-recognized equivalent which produce the same result.
Regarding claim 22, Bauer, as modified by Yamashita, teaches everything noted above including a pin-shaped element (160C; Fig. 5 in Yamashita) is arranged eccentrically on the bevel gear 100, the pin-shaped element being in engagement with an oblong hole 146 connected to the pendulum lifting rod 6 at the drive location. See Figs. 1-5 in Yamashita.
Regarding claim 23, Bauer, as modified by Yamashita, teaches everything noted above including that and wherein the control cam is configured in a rotationally fixed manner with the bevel gear.
Regarding claim 24, Bauer, as modified by Yamashita, teaches everything noted above including that the drive is operatively connected to the pendulum lifting rod by way of a bevel gear (100; Fig. 6 in Yamashita) and wherein the control cam is configured in a rotationally fixed manner with the bevel gear.
Regarding claim 25, Bauer, as modified by Yamashita, teaches everything noted above including that the bearing device is in engagement with the control cam by way of a control element arranged in the first connecting region of the bearing device.
10. Claims 31-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bauer. Regarding claims 31-32, Bauer does not explicitly teach that the first cam is a disc-shaped region, the first cam controlling the first connecting region via a radial extent of the first control cam that varies in terms of extent’ and the second cam is a separate disc-shaped region, the second cam controlling the second connecting region via a radial extent of the second control cam that varies in terms of extent. However, Official Notice is taken that the use of a disc shaped cams for imparting movement on a bearing device is old and well known in the art.
Comment
11. It should be noted that claims 17-18 and 26 have not been rejected over the prior art. However, in view of eh issues under U.S.C. 112, first and second paragraphs, the allowability of the claimed subject matter cannot be determined at this time.
Response to Arguments
12. Applicant’s argument with respect to claim(s) 14 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
13. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant’s disclosure.
Dassoulas et al. (6,286,217 B1) and Park (2005/0210687 A1) teach a hand-held power saw.
14. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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.
15. 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 March 5, 2026