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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/06/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
The “at least one heating element” or “a first heating element…a second heating element” in claims 1-2, 4 invokes 112F because first, "element" is a generic substitute for “means”; second, the "element" is modified by functional language including “configured to provide power …”; and third, the "element" is not modified by sufficient structure to perform the recited function because "heating" preceding element describes the function, not the structure of the element.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-9 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.
Claim 1, the 2nd paragraph “the heating unit is configured to provide power to one or both of the first and second heating element based on reading of a temperature of at least one of the rear handle or the front handle from the temperature sensor” (emphasis added) is unclear and vague. “Based on reading of a temperature of at least one of the rear handle or the front handle from the temperature sensor”, the heating unit is configured to provide power to one or both of the first and second heating element. Can the user turn on/off heat for the handles based on reading of a temperature from the temperature sensor that meets claimed invention right? Another word, how do the heating unit provide power based on the reading of a temperature? How is the temperature sensor relative with the heating unit for providing and adjusting power to the handles (from the temporary power boost to a constant power)?
Claim 1, the last paragraph states that “the heating unit is configured to provide, upon activation, a temporary power boost to the one or both front and rear handles and, subsequently, to provide a constant state of power to one or both the front and rear handles,…” which is confusing and unclear since there is no controller. It is unclear how and what the heating unit (at least one heating element) can be able to perform these steps. If an art has a heating unit in both front and rear handles, an user turns on if needs to warm user’s hands and turn off if no needs to warm the handles and meet this limitation right (turn off heat), right? The limitation “a constant state of power” is unclear. What is the constant state of power”? Is it no power right? Or is it a state the handles in room temperature (no need to heat), right? Claim 6 has the same issue of without a controller that causes unclear how “the power boost is continuously controlled”.
Claim 1, 2nd paragraph “one or both the first and second heating element” lacks of antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim and renders indefinite because it is unclear whether they refers to the at least one heating element in the 1st paragraph of claim 1 or not.
Claim 2 recites “a first heating element…a second heating element” is unclear whether the first and second heating elements refer to one or both first and second heating element in claim 1, 2nd paragraph or additional heating elements.
For examination purposes, as best understood, Examiner is interpreting the “issues above” as below and all claims dependent from claim 1 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being dependent from the rejected parent claim.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leufen et al (US 8667955) hereinafter Leufen in view of Breton (WO 2020/019054, art of record).
Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Leufen shows a
approximately in the elongated direction of the guide bar (Figure 1), wherein the
wherein the heating unit is configured to provide power to one or both the first and second heating element based on a reading of a temperature of at least one the rear handle and the front handle from the temperature sensor (see Col. 5, lines 8-54 “for example, a temperature feedback by the heating element 13 of the first electrical load 27 to the control unit 40 can be expedient, as is indicated by the dashed line in FIG. 2… the first heater unit 113 of the carburetor heater, as well as the second electrical load, that is the second heater unit 133 as a handle heater and/or the further heater unit 134 as a second handle heater, can be supplied with a sufficient amount of electrical power”), and
wherein the heating unit is configured to provide, upon activation, a temporary
power boost to one or both the front and rear handles and, subsequently, to provide a constant state of power to the front and rear handles (Col. 2, line 33 “For providing essentially constant power to a heater unit in a work apparatus having a combustion engine” and Col. 5, lines 14-19 “the first heater unit 113 above a threshold temperature, such as, for example, 20.degree. C. Advantageously, an NTC thermosensor is used, which is integrated into a controller integrated in the control unit 40 in such a manner that a simple temperature control of the first heater unit 113 is achieved. In this way, the temperature of the first heater unit 113 is simple to monitor and at the same time can be securely set via the controller.”), lower than the power of the power boost (Col. 5, lines 50-54 “…The heating element 13 of the carburetor heater could overheat. For this reason, it is provided that the control unit 40 is configured in such a manner that, by influencing the generator voltage applied, the flowing current IV can be limited to a mean current and thus to a mean power which corresponds to the desired temperature of the heating element 13.”.
However, Leufen silently discusses the heating unit to be operated by a battery.
The heating unit operated by a battery is well known in the art, for an example,
Breton shows a heating unit (figure 3) in a handle (H) that is operated by a battery (28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the power generator (23) of Leufen to be a battery, as taught by Breton, since this is known alternative way for the same purpose of providing power to the heating unit and in order to allow the heating unit can be independently power source and reduce electrical load (power) from the combustion engine.
Regarding claim 2, Leufen shows that the at least one heating element comprises the first heating element (34) in the rear handle and the second heating element (33) in the front handle(Figure 1 of Leufen).
Regarding claim 3, Leufen shows that the temperature sensor, however, it is unclear whether it is located in the rear handle or not.
It is well known to have the sensor and the controller of Leufen is located in the rear handle. Since claim has not recited that having any specific location of the sensor solve any stated problem or is a criticality for any particular purpose and it appears that the sensor between the chainsaw housing (a safe location) would perform equally well while being in the rear handle, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Therefore, as per MPEP 2144.04(VI)C, this constitutes a rearrangement of parts that does not modify the operation of the device. therefore, rearranging the sensor in the rear handle has no effect on how the device performs, and thus this is considered to be an obvious matter of design choice.
Regarding claim 4, Leufen shows that the first and second heating elements are series connected (Figure 2 of Leufen).
Regarding claim 5, Leufen shows that a duration and a level of the power boost is determined based on a temperature acquired at start or activation of the chainsaw (see the discussion in claim 1 and see Col. 4, lines 40-66 of Leufen).
Regarding claim 6, as best understood, Leufen shows that the power boost is continuously controlled (as it is written, it is unclear for how long the power boost is continuously controlled. See the Figure 2 of Leufen and all the discussions above, the power boost is continuously controlled as discussed in claim 1).
Regarding claim 7, as best understood, Leufen shows that power is continuously controlled based on a temperature reading (of the sensor) and a PI-regulator (a Proportional and Integral Controller; see the controller 40-41 of Leufen).
Regarding claim 8, Leufen shows that a compartment for a battery (28, see Figures 3-4 of Breton).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leufen et al (US 8667955) hereinafter Leufen in view of Breton (WO 2020/019054, art of record) and Sigle (US 2022/0170425).
Regarding claim 9,Leufen shows all of the limitations as stated above except a Bluetooth interface.
Sigle shows a chainsaw (Figures 1-2) including a Bluetooth interface (Paras. 37-39).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the chainsaw of Leufen to have a Bluetooth interface, as taught by Sigle, in order to allow the chainsaw communicate with ascertainment devices as the gardening, forestry and/or construction device or integrated therein as discussed in Para. 39 of Sigle.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for the reasons below:
With regards to the previous 112b rejections, Applicant has amended to claims, some of the rejections are mooted and some of the rejections remain the same with further explanations. See the rejections above for details.
In the last sentence of page 5 of the remarks, Applicant states that “the heating element controls the heating” is unclear what Applicant tells a reader. See Heating element – Wikipedia; a heating element is a device used for conversion of electric energy into heat; the heating element is NOT a device to control heat. See Applicant’s specification, page 3, line 14 “the handle heating may be controlled by a user interface including buttons 11, lines 21-22 “control the heating by means of a nearby smartphone”, and page 6, line 3 “PI or PID controller”…. How does the heating unit perform the steps of “… to provide, upon activation, a temporary power boost to the one or both of the front and first and second rear handles and, subsequently, to provide a steady constant state of power to one or both of the front and rear handles, lower than the power of the power boost” if there is no controller?
With regards to the claim rejection 35 USC 103, Applicant disagree “a temporary power boost”. This argument is not persuasive because as the claim is written, it is unclear what the “temporary power boost” to the front and rear handles are and when it is occurred. Is the power being claimed as a heat, temperature, or an energy to the handles, (not voltages or frequency) right? How long is it considered as “temporary”? and it is unclear how the power can be performed (see the issue as stated above).
Therefore, reading at Leufen’s Col. 5, lines 46-54 “…If the handle heaters are turned off with the switch 30 open, the total sum of electrical power of the generator 23 is supplied to the first electrical load 27, the carburetor heater. The heating element 13 of the carburetor heater could overheat. For this reason, it is provided that the control unit 40 is configured in such a manner that, by influencing the generator voltage applied, the flowing current IV can be limited to a mean current and thus to a mean power which corresponds to the desired temperature of the heating element 13.”) that means the controller configured to lower a power from the overheat condition (a temporary power boost).
However, if Applicant still believes that the claimed invention’s apparatus/method different from the prior art’s apparatus/method or needs to discuss the rejections above or suggestion amendments that can be overcome the current rejections, Applicant should feel free to call the Examiner to schedule an interview.
Conclusion
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 NHAT CHIEU Q DO whose telephone number is (571)270-1522. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-5PM 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.
/NHAT CHIEU Q DO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724 5/27/2026
Prosecution Insights