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 .
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, and 4-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kozlowski (EP 1124670) in view of Chen (US 20160346941).
Regarding claim 1, Kozlowski discloses a cutting knife, which: is configured as an upper knife of a guillotine knife, three-way knife or trimmer knife for cutting paper, cardboard, cartons and/or plastic films (blade 12 is configured to trim books or the like; see paragraph [0001]), and has a knife holder (knife carrier 1’’’ and blade holder 4’’’; see fig. 9) with a detachably fastened knife blade (blade 12 is clamped in place between knife carrier 1’’’ and blade holder 4’’’; see fig. 9) and is movably mounted for performing a shear cut, parallel cut, parallel oblique cut, vertical swing cut or oblique swing cut (since blade 12 is held in clamping engagement between knife carrier 1’’’ and blade holder 4’’’, the positioning of blade 12 is adjustable; see fig. 9), wherein the knife blade is mounted in a force-fitting and form-fitting manner on the knife holder (blade 12 is clamped between knife carrier 1’’’ and blade holder 4’’’; see fig. 9), for which purpose: the knife blade has a cutting edge region and a clamping region (blade 12 has a cutting edge along the tip and extension section 14; see paragraph [0018] and fig. 9) and is clamped in the clamping region between two clamping bodies of the knife holder (extension section 14 of blade 12 is held between knife carrier 1’’’ and blade holder 4’’’; see fig. 9), wherein clamping surfaces of the knife blade and the knife holder are aligned in such a way that a normal force causing the frictional connection is aligned orthogonally to a plane of movement of the cutting knife (blade 12 is clamped between knife carrier 1 ‘’’ and blade holder 4’’’ – at least some of the surfaces of knife carrier 1’’’ and blade holder 4’’’ are positioned against blade 12 such that the normal force is perpendicular to a plane of movement; see fig. 9).
Kozlowski does not explicitly disclose and corresponding form-fitting elements are formed on the knife blade and on the knife holder, which engage in one another when the cutting knife is in the assembled state, wherein the form-fitting elements are formed on a knife blade side by at least two recesses and on a knife holder side by at least two correspondingly formed projections.
Chen discloses and corresponding form-fitting elements are formed on the knife blade and on the knife holder (blade 30 comprises notches 32 and blade holding element 26 comprises protrusion 264; see paragraphs [0021, 0023] and fig. 6), which engage in one another when the cutting knife is in the assembled state (protrusion 264 engages with one of notches 32; see paragraph [0023] and fig. 6), wherein the form-fitting elements are formed on a knife blade side by at least two recesses (blade 30 comprises at least two notches 32; see figs. 6 and 7) and on a knife holder side by a correspondingly formed projection (blade holding element 26 comprises protrusion 264 which corresponds to notches 32; see figs. 6 and 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kozlowski in view of Chen to include form-fitting elements. Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives (see MPEP 2143(I)(F)). In this case, Chen discloses a knife with an arrangement of form-fitting elements (notches 32, protrusion 264) that allow for the blade to be held securely to the blade holder (see paragraph [0024]). Kozlowski does not include form-fitting elements, instead relying on the clamping force of the knife holder to secure the blade. A person of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably seek to include similar form-fitting elements on the device of Kozlowski to further improve security of the blade within the knife holder. For example, unwanted movement may be prevented which could cause uneven cuts. Therefore, in order to provide increased stability to the blade of Kozlowski, such a modification would be obvious.
Kozlowski as modified does not explicitly disclose at least two projections.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Kozlowski in view of Chen to include a corresponding protrusion for each recess since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art (see St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8). In the instant case, providing as many protrusions as there are recesses would yield an even more secure connection. Therefore, in order to further increase stability of the blade within the knife holder, such a modification would be obvious.
Regarding claim 2, Kozlowski as modified discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described in the rejection above.
Chen further discloses wherein the recesses are at least two grooves and the projections are formed as pins and engage in the grooves of the knife blade in the assembled state of the cutting knife (blade 30 includes two notches 32, and as modified, includes a corresponding protrusion 264 (which is interpreted as a pin) for each notch 32 – when assembled, protrusions 264 engage notches 32; see paragraphs [0023-0024] and fig. 6).
Regarding claim 4, Kozlowski as modified discloses the limitations of claim 2 as described in the rejection above.
Chen further discloses wherein a depth DF of the recesses/grooves is greater than or equal to a height HZ of the projections/pins (as modified, the depth of notches 32 is greater than the height of protrusions 264; see figs. 6 and 7).
Regarding claim 5, Kozlowski as modified discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described in the rejection above.
Kozlowski as modified further discloses wherein the clamping bodies of the knife holder have a stepped contact surface (knife carrier 1’’’ and blade holder 4’’’ are stepped relative to one another; see fig. 9).
Regarding claim 6, Kozlowski as modified discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described in the rejection above.
Kozlowski as modified further discloses wherein the knife blade is L-shaped when viewed in cross-section (blade 12 has an L shaped when viewed from the side; see fig. 9), wherein a long leg of the knife blade forms the clamping region (extension section 14 of blade 12 forms the clamping region; see fig. 9) and a short leg of the knife blade forms the cutting edge region (the tip of blade 12 forms the cutting edge region; see annotated portion of fig. 9 below), which projects freely from the knife holder (the cutting edge region projects from knife carrier 1’’’ and blade holder 4’’’; see annotated portion of fig. 9 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
282
572
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Kozlowski as modified discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described in the rejection above.
Kozlowski as modified further discloses wherein the cutting edge region is formed by two surfaces arranged at an angle to one another (the cutting region has two surfaces angled relative to one another; see annotated portion of fig. 9 above), wherein a first surface is aligned parallel to the plane of movement of the cutting knife (the first surface is parallel to the plane of movement of blade 12; see annotated portion of fig. 9 above).
Regarding claim 8, Kozlowski as modified discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described in the rejection above.
Kozlowski as modified further discloses wherein the cutting edge region has, on a side facing away from the cutting edge, a contact surface which is in contact with a first clamping body of the knife holder (opposite the cutting edge is a contact surface which contacts blade holder 4’’’; see annotated portion of fig. 9 above).
Regarding claim 9, Kozlowski as modified discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described in the rejection above.
Kozlowski as modified further discloses wherein the clamping region of the knife blade extends parallel to the plane of movement of the cutting knife (extension section 14 extends parallel to the plane of movement of blade 12; see annotated portion of fig. 9 above).
Regarding claim 10, Kozlowski as modified discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described in the rejection above.
Kozlowski as modified further discloses wherein the clamping region of the knife blade is engaged at least in sections by a second clamping body of the knife holder (extension section 14 is engaged by knife carrier 1’’’; see fig. 9).
Regarding claim 11, Kozlowski as modified discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described in the rejection above.
Kozlowski as modified further discloses wherein the two clamping bodies of the knife holder have several holes for receiving fastening screws outside the clamping region of the knife blade (knife carrier 1’’’ and blade holder 4’’’ comprise through-bores 6 for receiving threaded bores 5; see paragraph [0013] and figs. 1, 9).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s assertion that the knife and knife holder of Kozlowski are not detachable (see pg. 6 of remarks), Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant cites paragraph [0015] of Kozlowski in support of this assertion. However, paragraph [0015] is drawn to blade holder 4, which is a different embodiment than what is relied upon for the rejection (blade holder 4’’ and blade holder 4’’’ are both secured via a screw or other releasable securing element; see paragraphs [0017-0018] and fig. 9).
Regarding Applicant’s assertion that the clamping bodies of Kozlowski do not provide a clamping force on the knife (see pg. 6 of remarks), Examiner respectfully disagrees. As discussed above, the knife is held securely between the clamping bodies (knife carrier 1’’’ and blade holder 4’’’). Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “clamp” as “to fasten with or as if with a clamp” or “to hold tightly”. Blade 12 is securely fastened between knife carrier 1’’’ and blade holder 4’’’ (see fig. 9). As such, it is Examiner’s position that the blade is clamped by the clamping bodies.
Regarding Applicant’s assertion that there is no indication the clamping surfaces are oriented such that the normal force is perpendicular to the plane of movement of the blade (see pg. 6 of remarks), Examiner respectfully disagrees. A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a normal force exists perpendicular to a surface. In view of this and the fact that knife carrier 1’’’ and blade holder 4’’’ are clamped to blade 12, it is Examiner’s position that there must be a corresponding normal force applied as the elements are secured to one another.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US 5304055 to Van Lengerich, drawn to an apparatus and method for the production of three-dimensional food products; US 4765216 to Schommler, drawn to a knife shaft pair for cutting web-like material; US 5475925 to Newman, drawn to a three-piece retractable-bladed knife; and US 5390576 to Ishibashi, drawn to a cutting machine.
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 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 HALEIGH N WATSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3818. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 530AM-330PM 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 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.
/HALEIGH N WATSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 /BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724
