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 filed on 7/28/2024 is being considered by the Examiner.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
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 3-14 and 18 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 3, claim 3 recites “a user interface”, which is antecedently established in claim 2. Please amend claim 3 to reflect proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 4, claim 4 recites “in both directions”. Within the context of claim 4, it is unclear what the recitation of ‘both directions’ is limiting as the directions are undefined.
Regarding claim 5, claim 5 recites “on both sides”. It is unclear what is being limited. On both sides of what element?
Regarding claim 7, it is unclear what is being imparted by the recitation of “the end of the handle housing facing the central web is adjusted, in terms of shape, to the central web and/or the surface” within the context of the claimed invention, specifically regarding the adjustment of shape of the end of the housing. When seeking clarification, Examine reflected upon [0194], which restates the claim language in a similar manner. However, the specification did not provide any additional information directed towards the end of the handle housing being adjusted in shape. For example, is the end of the handle housing flexible, movable, expandable…? It is unclear what is imparted into the claimed invention within the context of claim 7, nor does the instant disclosure provide additional clarification. For the purposes of examination, the claim is being interpreted to impart that the end of the handle housing is provided such that the shape of the end of handle housing enables access to the central web and/or the surface portion.
Regarding claims 10 and 18, claims 10 and 18 recite “an opening for air to escape from the at least one air outlet opening is formed between the end of the handle housing facing the central web and the drive housing”. Within the context of claims 10 and 18, the claims impart both “an opening” and “at least one air outlet”. When seeking clarification for the intended structure, Examiner reflected upon at least [0205-207], which discloses that there can be one or more air outlet openings (74a or 74). Furthermore, [0210] describes opening (80a) and recites the claim language. However, within the scope of claims 10 and 18, it is unclear what is structurally imparted by the opening allowing air to escape from the at least one air outlet. As described in [0205], the air outlet opening(s) 74/74a direct air that has been drawn in via cooling air inlet openings 266a to the air outlet openings 74a to blow the engine exhaust air out of the air outlet openings 74. The air pathway does not seem to travel from at least one of the air outlets 74/74a to the opening 80a based on the specification in a manner that clarifies the intended structure. Is the additional opening (80a) provided in case of overflow or additional airflow that cannot be expelled by the outlets 74a? Please amend the claim to reflect Applicant’s intent. For the purposes of examination, the claimed device requires at least two outlets/openings.
Any claim listed as rejected above but not specifically addressed above has inherited the rejection of a claim specifically addressed above due to dependency therefrom.
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.
Claims 7-14 and 18 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 claim 7, recitation of “the end of the handle housing facing the central web is adjusted, in terms of shape, to the central web and/or the surface” was considered by the examiner. When seeking for a written description of the claimed “end of the handle housing…is adjusted”, Examiner was unable to find any support for the claimed subject manner to convey that Applicant had possession of the claimed invention. Examiner reflected upon [0194], which restates the claim language in a similar manner. However, the specification did not provide any additional information directed towards the end of the handle housing being adjusted in shape. For the reasons stated in the 112(b) rejection above, there is no description as to how the end of the housing handle is adjusted.
Regarding claims 10 and 18, Examiner considered the recitation of “an opening for air to escape from the at least one air outlet opening”. The claims were found indefinite as pointed out in the 112(b) rejection above. When seeking further clarification as to how the claim limitation should be interpreted, Examiner was unable to find a written description in support of the relationship between the opening and air outlet opening such that the air escapes from one to another. Examiner reflected upon at least [0205-207], which discloses that there can be one or more air outlet openings (74a or 74). Furthermore, [0210] describes opening (80a) and recites the claim language. However, the specification does not convey that Applicant had possession of the claimed invention such that the structure provides air escaping from the at least one air outlet opening to an opening, as the airflow pathway within the device is not described in a manner which supports the claimed invention.
Dependent claims 8, 9, and 11-14 inherit the rejection of a claim specifically pointed out above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-9, 15-17, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by King (US 20120220203).
Regarding claim 1, King discloses a hand-held power tool, comprising:
a housing unit which has at least one handle housing and a drive housing which is coupled to the handle housing (see sander 10 having handle H; see also [0046] and see Reference Drawing 1 below, which is an annotated and simplified Figure 1; wherein there is a drive system 18 and multiple platens 22, which can be mounted on the apparatus, including finishing sander platen 50, detail sander platen 52, and random orbit sander platen 54; wherein as can be seen in Figures 1-5, each platen 50, 52, 54 has internal drive components, i.e. a drive housing coupled to the handle housing); and
a central web on a surface of an upper side of the drive housing, and raised relative to the surface (see Figure 1 regarding the mode selector element 24 disposed on a surface of an upper side of the drive system 18 and each respective platen 50, 52, 54 when mounted thereon, and raised relative to the surface; see also [0047] and Figures 20-22).
PNG
media_image1.png
420
612
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Reference Drawing 1
Regarding claim 2, King discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein King further discloses wherein the central web has a receptacle configured to receive a user interface and/or a communication module (see mode selector 24 including a movable dial 26 and pictorial key 28, as well as [0047]; see also [0061-0063], as well as Figures 20-22).
Regarding claim 3, King discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein King further discloses a user interface is accommodated in the receptacle; the user interface has at least one input element (see mode selector 24 including a movable dial 26 and pictorial key 28, as well as [0047]); and
a rotational speed of the hand-held power tool can be set via the at least one input element (see speed control disclosed in [0061-0063], which is used to control the rotational speed of output member 38).
Regarding claim 4, King discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein King further discloses the central web slopes down onto the surface in both directions starting from a main extension plane of the handle housing and perpendicular to the main extension plane of the handle housing (please refer to the greyed double arrow in Reference Drawing 1, as well as the 112b rejection provided above; please also refer to the main plane P as best attempted to be shown by Examiner in Reference Drawing 2); and
one end of the handle housing is arranged above the raised central web (please see the H End labeled in Reference Drawing 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
422
549
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Reference Drawing 2
Regarding claim 5, King discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein King further discloses wherein: the handle housing at least partially covers the central web on both sides in directions running perpendicularly to the main extension plane of the handle housing (see Reference Drawing 2; wherein the handle portion labeled H End at least partially covers the element 24 on the sides labeled LS and RS in directions which run perpendicular to the plane P).
Regarding claim 6, King discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein King further discloses wherein:
the end of the handle housing faces the central web (see Reference Drawing 1; wherein H End faces the element 24);
the end surrounds the drive housing in a substantially ring-like manner (see substantially-ring like manner in Reference Drawing 1); and
the end is arranged at a distance from the drive housing radially and axially (wherein the H End is arranged at a distance from the drive system 18 and drive components housed within each respective platen 50, 52, 54 in the vertical direction, i.e. axially, and wherein the H End is also arranged at a distance in the horizontal direction, i.e. also radially).
Regarding claim 7, King discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein King further discloses wherein: the end of the handle housing facing the central web is adjusted, in terms of shape, to the central web and/or the surface (please see Reference Drawings 1 and 2, as well as the 112(b) rejection and interpretation as provided above).
Regarding claim 8, King discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein King further discloses wherein:
the drive housing has at least one air outlet opening which is at least partially covered by the handle housing as viewed in at least one main outlet direction of the at least one air outlet opening (see at least air outlet of chute 84 or 84’ in Figure 1, as well [0056-0057] disclosing that sander platen 54 includes attachment hub 116 which may include chutes, i.e. each platen when attached has at least one air outlet opening on the drive housing, which is at least partially covered by the handle housing H labeled in Reference Drawing 1; see also [0053-0055]; wherein the handle housing H is vertically above and at least partially covers a respective chute outlet; see also extraction port(s) 20 to dust chamber 21, see also [0046]).
Regarding claim 9, King discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein King further discloses wherein the drive housing has a motor housing which is arranged on the central web and has the at least one air outlet opening (wherein motor 36 is labeled in Figure 4 and disclosed in [0048]; wherein the drive housing includes the motor, as well as additional wall elements, i.e. a motor housing, and is arranged on the central web area and includes the at least one air outlet of chute 84, 84’ or extraction port 20).
Regarding claim 15, King discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein King further discloses wherein the hand-held power tool is configured as a hand-held grinding tool having a hand-held power tool apparatus (see Figure 1, as well as [0002], [0006], [0008]).
Regarding claim 16, King discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein King further discloses wherein the hand-held power tool is configured as a random orbital sander or an orbital sander (see [0049] disclosing random orbit sander and orbital sander).
Regarding claim 17, King discloses a hand-held power tool, comprising:
a housing unit which has at least one handle housing and a drive housing which is coupled to the handle housing (see sander 10 having handle H; see also [0046] and see Reference Drawing 1, which is an annotated and simplified Figure 1; wherein there is a drive system 18 and multiple platens 22, which can be mounted on the apparatus, including finishing sander platen 50, detail sander platen 52, and random orbit sander platen 54; wherein as can be seen in Figures 1-5, each platen 50, 52, 54 has internal drive components, i.e. a drive housing coupled to the handle housing),
wherein the drive housing has at least one air outlet opening which is at least partially covered by the handle housing as viewed in at least one main outlet direction of the at least one air outlet opening (see at least air outlet of chute 84 or 84’ in Figure 1, as well [0056-0057] disclosing that sander platen 54 includes attachment hub 116 which may include chutes, i.e. each platen when attached has at least one air outlet opening on the drive housing, which is at least partially covered by the handle housing H labeled in Reference Drawing 1; see also [0053-0055]; wherein the handle housing H is vertically above and at least partially covers a respective chute outlet; see also extraction port(s) 20 to dust chamber 21, see also [0046]).
Regarding claim 19, King discloses a hand-held power tool, comprising:
a housing unit which has at least one handle housing and a drive housing which is coupled to the handle housing (see sander 10 having handle H; see also [0046] and see Reference Drawing 1, which is an annotated and simplified Figure 1; wherein there is a drive system 18 and multiple platens 22, which can be mounted on the apparatus, including finishing sander platen 50, detail sander platen 52, and random orbit sander platen 54; wherein as can be seen in Figures 1-5, each platen 50, 52, 54 has internal drive components, i.e. a drive housing coupled to the handle housing), wherein the drive housing has a closed cable duct (wherein there is a chute portion 84 leading to extraction port element 20, into the dust chamber 21, i.e. there is a closed cable duct).
Regarding claim 20, King discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein King further discloses wherein:
the drive housing has at least two housing shells between which the cable duct is arranged (see Figures 4 and 5, wherein the chute 84 is located between shroud 106 and extraction port 20, i.e. there are at least two shells between which the chute 84 is located ();
a first housing shell of the at least two housing shells forms a groove for the cable duct (wherein the shroud 106 forms an annular groove for the chute 84, see Figures 4 and 5; see also [0054]); and a second housing shell of the at least two housing shells forms a lid for the cable duct (wherein the extraction port 20 and shell shown in Figures 4 and 5 form a lid for the chute 84).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 10-14 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King (US 20120220203) in view of Miyazawa (US 20210260745).
Regarding claim 10, King discloses the claimed invention as applied above. However, King does not explicitly teach an opening for air to escape from the at least one air outlet opening is formed between the end of the handle housing facing the central web and the drive housing.
Regarding claim 18, King discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein King further discloses wherein:
a central web is on a surface of an upper side of the drive housing, and raised relative to the surface (see Figure 1 regarding the mode selector element 24 disposed on a surface of an upper side of the drive system 18 and each respective platen 50, 52, 54 when mounted thereon, and raised relative to the surface; see also [0047] and Figures 20-22);
the drive housing has a motor housing which is arranged on the central web (60a) and has the at least one air outlet opening (wherein motor 36 is labeled in Figure 4 and disclosed in [0048]; wherein the drive housing includes the motor, as well as additional wall elements, i.e. a motor housing, and is arranged on the central web area and includes the at least one air outlet of chute 84, 84’ or extraction port 20).
However, King does not explicitly teach an opening for air to escape from the at least one air outlet opening is formed between an end of the handle housing facing the central web and the drive housing.
Regarding both claims 10 and 18, from the same or similar field of endeavor, Miyazawa teaches an opening for air to escape from the at least one air outlet opening is formed between the end of the handle housing facing the central web and the drive housing (see exhaust ports 21a, 21b, [0007], [0032], [0034], Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Miyazawa to include an additional exhaust port, into the invention of King. One would be motivated to do so in order to impart an air pathway which enables cooling of the motor element (see Miyazawa [0032]), thus decreasing the likelihood of overheating of the device and improving the longevity of the hand tool. King already describes a type of cooling airflow in at least [0048] but does not explicitly provide an exit for the airflow. This combination would be recognized as using a known technique, i.e. exhaust ports in the context of surfacing devices that have cooling airflows incorporated therein, to improve a similar device in the same manner, and would yield predictable results with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 11, King in view of Miyazawa teaches the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified King further teaches the drive housing has a closed cable duct (King: wherein there is a chute portion 84 leading to extraction port element 20, into the dust chamber 21, i.e. there is a closed cable duct).
Regarding claim 12, King in view of Miyazawa teaches the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified King further teaches the drive housing has at least two housing shells between which the cable duct is arranged (King: see Figures 4 and 5, wherein the chute 84 is located between shroud 106 and extraction port 20, i.e. there are at least two shells between which the chute 84 is located).
Regarding claim 13, King in view of Miyazawa teaches the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified King further teaches a first housing shell of the at least two housing shells forms a groove for the cable duct (King: wherein the shroud 106 forms an annular groove for the chute 84, see Figures 4 and 5; see also [0054]); and
a second housing shell of the at least two housing shells forms a lid for the cable duct (King: wherein the extraction port 20 and shell shown in Figures 4 and 5 form a lid for the chute 84).
Regarding claim 14, King in view of Miyazawa teaches the claimed invention as applied above, wherein modified King further teaches wherein: the cable duct is arranged at least partially in the central web (King: wherein as can be seen in the combination of Figures 1-5, the interior chute 84 is arranged at least partially in the area defined by the central web).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kuntheeya (US 20220016738), see Figure 1, [0026], [0045], [0032]
Valentini (US 2020/0384596), see Figure 1, [0028]
Kelly (US 20210008688), see Figure 1B, as well as [0006], [0022-0023]
King (US 7722435), see Figures 1 and 2
Zimmerman (US 20230017671), see Figures 1, 2, and [0022].
Zhang (US 20240198483), see [0079] and Abstract.
Boeck (US 20160342142), see Figure 1 and [0007], [0016], and [0056]
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAKENA S MARKMAN whose telephone number is (469)295-9162. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 am-6:00pm.
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, David Posigian can be reached at 313-446-6546. 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.
/MAKENA S MARKMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights