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 .
This Office Action is in response to the applicant’s amendment filing on 10/28/2025.
Claims 1-10 are pending and examined below.
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, 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 1-3, 5-7, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Ikuta et al. (2023/0027337) in view of reference Orr (2,968,190).
Regarding claim 1, Ikuta et al. disclose a gear arrangement (4, 7, 40, 70) for a handheld electrical apparatus (1A), the gear arrangement (4, 7, 40, 70) comprising:
a housing (40, 70) having a first housing section (40) and a second housing section (70);
a planetary gear (4) defining a central axis (A1) and being disposed in said first housing (40),
wherein the planetary gear (4) is configured for reducing a gear ratio of a driving movement provided by a drive motor (2) of the handheld electrical apparatus (1A);
an eccentric gear unit (7) disposed in said second housing section (70),
wherein the eccentric gear unit (7) is configured for converting a rotational driving movement, of which the gear ratio has been reduced by the planetary gear (4), into an oscillation driving movement.
(Figure 2, 3 and Page 3 paragraph 33, 39, 40, 42)
However, Ikuta et al. do not disclose re-lubrication opening, an inflow opening, and a drain outlet.
Orr disclose a gear arrangement comprising:
a housing (21, 52) having a first housing section (21) and a second housing section (52),
wherein said housing defines a re-lubrication opening (105) for introducing lubricant from outside said housing (21, 52) into said housing (21, 52);
a first gear (15) disposed in said first housing section (21); and
a second gear (50) disposed in said second housing section (52);
wherein the first housing section (21) being assigned an inflow opening (see Figure 1 below) for introducing lubricant into said first housing section (21) and a drain outlet (85) for discharging lubricant from said first housing section (21).
(Figure 1 and Column 2 lines 1-6, 61-65, Column 4 lines 16-20, 44-53, 62-65)
[AltContent: textbox (Orr)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Inflow Opening)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Lubrication Channel)]
PNG
media_image1.png
388
598
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the gear arrangement of Ikuta et al. by incorporating the re-lubrication opening, the inflow opening, and the drain outlet as taught by Orr, since column 1 lines 50-54 of Orr state such a modification would allow lubricating of the first gear and the second gear.
When modifying Ikuta et al. in view of Orr, the re-lubrication opening is fully capable of introducing gear grease.
Regarding claim 2, Ikuta et al. modified by Orr disclose the drain outlet (Orr – 85) has a spacing from said inflow opening (Orr – see Figure 1 above). (Orr – Figure 1)
Regarding claim 3, Ikuta et al. modified by Orr disclose the inflow opening (Orr – see Figure 1 above) is closer to the central axis than said drain outlet (Orr – 85). (Orr – Figure 1)
Regarding claim 5, Ikuta et al. modified by Orr disclose housing (Ikuta et al. – 40, 70) defines a single re-lubrication opening (Orr – 105) for both the first housing section (Ikuta et al. – 40) and the second housing section (Ikuta et al. – 70). (Orr – Column 4 lines 44-53, 62-65)
Regarding claim 6, Ikuta et al. modified by Orr disclose the re-lubrication opening (Orr – 105) is defined on said second housing section (Orr – 52). (Orr – Figure 1)
Regarding claim 7, Ikuta et al. modified by Orr disclose the re-lubrication opening (Orr – 105) and said inflow opening (Orr – see Figure 1 above) are fluidly interconnected by a lubricant channel (Orr – see Figure 1 above), wherein the lubricant channel (Orr – see Figure 1 above) runs through a drive shaft (Ikuta et al. – 419). (Orr – Figure 1 and Column 4 lines 11-16, 62-65)
Regarding claim 10, Ikuta et al. disclose a handheld electrical apparatus (1A) comprising:
a drive motor (2); and
a gear arrangement (4, 7, 40, 70) comprising: a housing (40, 70); a planetary gear (4); and an eccentric gear unit (7),
wherein the housing (40, 70) has a first housing section (40) and a second housing section (70);
wherein the planetary gear (4) defines a central axis (A1) and being disposed in said first housing (40),
wherein the planetary gear (4) is configured for reducing a gear ratio of a driving movement provided by a drive motor (2) of the handheld electrical apparatus (1A);
wherein the eccentric gear unit (7) disposed in said second housing section (70), and
wherein the eccentric gear unit (7) is configured for converting a rotational driving movement, of which the gear ratio has been reduced by the planetary gear (4), into an oscillation driving movement.
(Figure 2, 3 and Page 3 paragraph 33, 39, 40, 42)
However, Ikuta et al. do not disclose re-lubrication opening, an inflow opening, and a drain outlet.
Orr disclose a gear arrangement comprising:
a housing (21, 52) having a first housing section (21) and a second housing section (52),
wherein said housing defines a re-lubrication opening (105) for introducing lubricant from outside said housing (21, 52) into said housing (21, 52);
a first gear (15) disposed in said first housing section (21); and
a second gear (50) disposed in said second housing section (52);
wherein the first housing section (21) being assigned an inflow opening (see Figure 1 above) for introducing lubricant into said first housing section (21) and a drain outlet (85) for discharging lubricant from said first housing section (21).
(Figure 1 and Column 2 lines 1-6, 61-65, Column 4 lines 16-20, 48-53, 62-65)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the gear arrangement of Ikuta et al. by incorporating the re-lubrication opening, the inflow opening, and the drain outlet as taught by Orr, since column 1 lines 50-54 of Orr state such a modification would allow lubricating of the first gear and the second gear.
When modifying Ikuta et al. in view of Orr, the re-lubrication opening is fully capable of introducing gear grease.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 8-9 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
The Amendments filed on 10/28/2025 have been entered. Claims 1-10 are pending in the application.
In response to the arguments of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 with reference Ikuta et al. (2023/0027337) modified by reference Orr (2,968,190), Examiner finds the arguments not persuasive.
Applicant states:
Ikuta and Orr are incompatible, at least for the reason that the handheld power tool, such as a hedge trimmer, of Ikuta will be rotated by a user during operation while Orr’s fluid sump (disposed beneath the line C-C in Orr) needs to be always the lowest point
The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). In this case, Orr is not relied upon for the teaching of a brake or clutch system. Orr is relied upon for the teaching a lubrication system that allows lubricate to travel between a first gear system to a second gear system. Ikuta et al. is relied upon for the teaching of a gear arrangement comprising: a first gear system in a first housing section; and a second gear system in a second housing section. When modifying Ikuta et al. in view of Orr, the person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate teaches of Orr in order to have one lubrication system lubricate both gear systems.
Furthermore, since Applicant does not provide any evidence to support the assertion that the teachings of Orr could never be incorporating into a handheld electrical apparatus, the assertion is mere speculation. “An assertion of what seems to follow from common experience is just attorney argument and not the kind of factual evidence that is required to rebut a prima facie case of obviousness”. [MPEP 2145(I)] Orr does not disclose that the gear arrangement can never rotate or move, nor disclose the teachings disclosed can never be incorporated into other gear arrangements such as the handheld electrical apparatus. Rather, in column 5 lines 42-47 of Orr, the disclosed invention is not limited the specific construction and arrangements shown. Therefore, in view of Applicant not providing support for the assertion, and in view of Orr not teaching away from incorporating the teaching into other gear arrangements, Applicants argument is rendered moot.
Applicant states:
Neither Ikuta nor Orr disclose a re-lubrication opening for introducing lubricant from the outside into the housing.
In column 4 lines 44-48 of Orr, the second housing (52) is disclosed to have an opening (105) that allows lubricate from outside the second housing (52) into said second housing (52). Therefore, Orr does disclose a re-lubrication opening for introducing lubricate from outside into said housing.
Applicant states:
Furthermore, grease as lubricant is incompatible with the hydraulic system of Orr.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Orr is not relied upon for grease as a lubricate. Orr is relied upon for the teaching a lubrication system that allows lubricate to travel between a first gear system to a second gear system.
Furthermore, claim 1 discloses “a re-lubrication opening for introducing gear grease” (emphasis added). Claim 1 does not disclose the gear arrangement comprises gear grease. The functional description is treated as a functional recitation. In other words, it is not a structural limitation, and the prior art is considered to meet the limitations of the apparatus claim as long as the prior art is fully capable of performing the functional recitation. [MPEP 2114(II)]
When modifying Ikuta et al. in view of Orr, the housing is interpreted to defined a re-lubrication opening, wherein the re-lubrication opening is fully capable of introducing gear grease. Therefore, Ikuta et al. modified by Orr do disclose the features of amended claim 1.
Conclusion
Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 PATRICK B FRY whose telephone number is (571)272-0396. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thur 7am-4pm.
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, Shelley Self can be reached at (571) 272-4524. 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.
/PATRICK B FRY/Examiner, Art Unit 3731 February 26, 2026
/SHELLEY M SELF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3731