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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in DE on 12-08-2021. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the DE102021132353.3 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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, in Claim 4, each of the following embodiments “detachable form-fit and/or frictional engagement means, for example in the form of a plug-in and/or clamping and/or screw and/or detent and/or snap-fit connection,” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Each of these embodiments must be shown. The Examiner notes that the figures illustrate a single embodiment. No new matter should be entered.
Therefore, “wherein the electrical power supply (45) is arranged in the extension means (70), optionally removably,” must be shown or the features cancelled from the claims. Applicants figures illustrate power supply (batteries #45) are located in the handle #30 assembly and not the extension means #70 – see Applicants Fig 4. No new matter should be entered.
Therefore, “wherein the socket (60) and/or the guide and/or the plug sockets has/have in each case at least one sealing lip and/or at least one scraper,” of Claim 9, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The examiner notes that the claim allows for a socket with sealing lip, a socket with a scraper, and a socket with a sealing lip and scraper; a guide with a sealing lip a guide with a scraper; a guide with a sealing lip and a scraper; and plug socket with a sealing lip, a plug socket with a scraper, and a plug socket with a sealing lip and scraper. However, only one embodiment is illustrated. No new matter should be entered.
Therefore, “a hedge trimmer, a lawn trimmer, a saw, a pair of shears, in particular pruning shears, or a non-electrical implement, such as a rake, a spade, a broom or a shovel,” of Claim 11, must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. Each of these embodiments must be shown. 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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – 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 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.
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:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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: a processing device in Claim 1; means for mechanically connecting the tool (50) or a charger (100) in claim 1; contact means in Claim 2;means for mechanically connecting the tool in Claim 3; frictional engagement means in Claim 4; means for mechanical and electrical connection of the tool in Claim 6; extension means in Claim 7;
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 1-11 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.
The claim(s) are narrative in form and replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. Note the format of the claims in the patent(s) cited.
Regarding claims 1, 5-7 and 11, the phrase "in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claims 4-5, and 6, the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claims 4 and 5, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
In re Claim 1, “ which serve alternately, on the one hand, for the electrical connection of a tool (50) to the handling device (20) and, on the other hand, for charging the electrical power supply, in particular by means of a charger (100),” is indefinite. it is unclear how human hands relate to the claims. Additionally, as best understood, claims are directed to the structure located on the handling device #20 and the contacts/connection on that device. The tool or charger are not required by the claim only the capability of connecting either a tool or charger to the handing device is required. The claims were examined as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 1, “has detachable form-fit and/or frictional engagement means, for example in the form of a plug-in and/or clamping and/or screw and/or detent and/or snap-fit connection to a, preferably non-circular, guide,” is indefinite. It is unclear if “for example in the form of a plug-in and/or clamping and/or screw and/or detent and/or snap-fit connection to a, preferably non-circular, guide,” are examples or required by the claim. The claims were interpreted that these were examples and not required by the claim. The claims were examined as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 1, “a gardening and/or household device,” is indefinite. The claims allow for two devices connected at the same time, a gardening device and a household device. However, only one “device” can be attached to the handling device at a time. The claims were interpreted as “a gardening device or a household device.” The claims were examined as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 2, “wherein the contact means (80) are arranged in a connecting portion (40) of the handling device (20) arranged distally with respect to the handle portion (30),” is indefinite. It is unclear what is “arranged distally with respect to the handle portion,” the contact means or the connecting portion. The claims were interpreted as ““wherein the contact means (80) are arranged in a connecting portion (40) of the handling device (20), the connecting device (40) is arranged distally with respect to the handle portion (30).” The claims were examined as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 3, means for mechanically connecting the tool (50) or a charger (100) and/or a charging coupling (110) to the handling device (20) within the socket (60),” is indefinite. The claim allows for two separate means on the handling device. A means for connecting the tool or a charger. And, a second means for connecting a charging coupling. However, Applicant’s disclosure does not disclose two separate “means for connecting” on the same tool/handling device. As best understood, the “means for mechanically connecting the tool or a charger” is the same structure as the “means for connecting to a charring coupling.” An electrical contacting means #80. Additionally, as best understood, the only way disclosed by Applicant to connect to a charger #100 is by way of a charging coupling #110. In Applicant’s disclosure, #100 connects to a wall socket and not the tool. The claims were interpreted as a means for mechanically connecting to the tool or to a charging coupling (110) of a charger (100). The claims were examined as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 4, the handling device (20) has detachable form-fit and/or frictional engagement means, for example in the form of a plug-in and/or clamping and/or screw and/or detent and/or snap-fit connection to a, preferably non-circular, guide, in order to insert a plug-in pin of the tool (50) into the connecting portion (40) and to lock it detachably in a locking position, in particular, in an end position,” is indefinite. The claim allows for detachable form fit means and a frictional engagement means. As best understood, the Applicant has disclosed a single connection structure. Is Applicant labeling this single connection structure with different names? As best understood, Applicant’s disclosure is directed to single embodiment with a single attachment structure and does not disclose an attachment structure with two separate attachment connections that the claim appears to claim (form fit means and frictional engagement means). Additionally, it is unclear if what follows ‘for example” is required by the claim. The claim was interpreted as what follows “for example” is an example and not required by the claim. The claims were examined as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 5, “wherein the contact means (80) for the electrical connection of the tool (50) or the charger (100) and/or the charging coupling (110) to the handling device (20) has at least two, preferably at least three, electrical contacts,” is indefinite. It is unclear how many contacts are required by the claim. The Claim was interpreted as requiring 2 contacts. The claims were examined as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 5, “for example in the form of plug sockets,” is indefinite. It is unclear if plug sockets are required by the claim or an example. The claim was interpreted as not requiring plug sockets. The claims were interpreted as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 5 “ in order to establish electrically conductive contact with corresponding contacts, in particular plugs, of the tool (50) or of the charger (100) and/or of the charging coupling (110),” is indefinite. The claim allow for electrically conductive contact with the charger 100 and the charging coupling 110. However, the charger 100 plugs into a “wall outlet” and not the tool. The only connection of the charger assembly that applicant has disclosed connects to the tool is by way of the charging coupling 110. As such, it is unclear how the end of the tool provides contacts for connecting to both the charger’s wall plug and the contacts of the charging coupling 110 at the same time, which the claim allows for. The claims were examined as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 6, “means for mechanical and electrical connection of the tool’ is indefinite. This phrase was not previously introduced. Is this referring to previously introduced structure or introducing limitations directed to previously unclaimed structure? This unclear. Has Applicant combined contact means and means for mechanically connecting? The scope of the claims are indefinite. The claims were examined as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 6, “wherein the means for mechanical and electrical connection of the tool (50) or the charger (100) and/or the charging coupling (110) to the handling device (20) are arranged relative to one another in such a way that, in a locking position, in particular end position, of the mechanical connection,” is indefinite. The run-on nature of the clause renders the claim indefinite. What is arranging the tool/charger/charging coupling and handling device arranged relative to one another? This is unclear. The claim was interpreted as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 6, “ an electrical connection of the various plug sockets to the corresponding plugs of the tool (50) or the charger (100) and/or the charging coupling (110) assigned to them is ensured,” is indefinite. The sockets were introduced as “plug sockets” which requires at least two sockets. However, “various plug sockets” appears to imply more than two sockets. As such, it is unclear how many sockets are required by the claim. Additionally, corresponding plugs of the tool or charger/charging coupling was not affirmatively claimed. Does Applicant intend to claim these plugs? The Examiner notes that the charger itself, structure #100, does not have plug for connecting to the tool. The only plugs on the charger assembly to connect to the tool are found on the charging coupling #110, in Applicants disclosure. The claims were interpreted as not requiring plugs on the tool device or the charger. The claims were examined as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 7, “for example in the form of a tube extension or a shaft, which is in particular telescopic and optionally detachable from the handle portion (30) and/or connecting portion (40),” is indefinite. It is unclear if this is an example of the claimed structure or the claimed structure. The claims were interpreted as if this were an example of the claimed structure and not required by the claim. The claims were examined as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 8, “wherein the electrical power supply (45) is arranged in the extension means (70),” is indefinite in view of Applicant’s disclosure. Applicants disclosure illustrates batteries #45 (power supply) in the handle assembly #30 and not the extension means #70. It is unclear how the batteries are located in the extension means. The claims were examined as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 8, “optionally removably,” is indefinite. It is unclear if this clause is required by the claim or optional. The claims were interpreted as structure for removing is optional an not required by the claim. The claims were examined as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 9, “wherein the socket (60) and/or the guide and/or the plug sockets has/have in each case at least one sealing lip and/or at least one scraper,” is indefinite. It is unclear what is a sealing lip and what is a scraper. Are these the same structure? The figures do not illustrate either and the figures only illustrate a single embodiment. The claims were examined as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claim 10, wherein the guide is in the form of a sleeve which guides and/or holds the plug-in pin of the tool (50) or the charger (100) and/or the charging coupling (110) closely and without play when it is inserted and/or in its locking position in the connecting portion (40),” is indefinite. Claim 1 indicates that the guide structure is optional. Additionally, the term “closely” is a relative term. It is unclear how close the tool or charger needs to be in order to read on the claim. Further, the term “without play” is indefinite in view of “inserted.” As best understood, without plate requires no movement and yet inserted appears to require movement. How can the device couple without play (i.e. no movement) while being inserted (i.e. requiring movement). The claims were examined as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-6 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 4,050,003 to Owings et al.
In re Claim 1, Owings teaches a handling device (see Owings, Fig. 20, #212/313/312, and Col 7, ll. 37-Col. 8, ll. 37 in view of Figs. 14-19 and Col. 6, ll. 50 – Col. 7, ll. 36), in particular for a processing device, such as a gardening and/or household device (see Owings, Fig. 20, #214 is a gardening device), comprising a gripping portion (see Owings, Fig. 20, #212) and an electrical power supply (see Owings, Fig. 15, #211/211) in the form of at least one rechargeable battery (see e.g., Owings Fig. 6, in view of Col 6, ll. 50-59, wherein the handling device (see Owings, Fig. 20, #212/313/312) also comprises contact means (see e.g., Fig. 15 contacts #244/246), which serve alternately, on the one hand, for the electrical connection of a tool (see Owings, Fig. 20, showing the tool #214 connected by way of contacts #244/245/9246) to the handling device (see Owings, Fig. 20, #312/313/212) and, on the other hand, for charging the electrical power supply, in particular by means of a charger (see e.g., Fig. 6, see also Col. 6, ll. 50-58 and Col. 7, ll. 60-65).
In re Claim 2, Owings teaches wherein the contact means (see Owings, Figs. 15/17, #244-246) are arranged in a connecting portion (see e.g., Figs. 15/17 in view of #312, contacts #244-246 are arranged in the connecting surface of #312) of the handling device (#312/313/212) arranged distally with respect to the handle portion (in Owings, contacts #244-246 are arranged at the “end” of #312).
In re Claim 3, Owings teaches wherein the connecting portion (see Owings, Fig. 15/17/20, the surfaces on #312 that that connect to #214) is formed as a socket (see `Owings, e.g., Fig. 15, and Col. 6, ll. 61- Col. 7, ll. 2, which states: The mechanical and electrical interconnection assembly is provided in this embodiment and includes a pair of laterally dovetailed ribs 215 provided in the forward surface of the power handle 212 which cooperate with a pair of slots 217 in the rear surface of the tool head – the examiner notes that a “socket” was interpreted as structure for receiving a corresponding structure. In Owings, #215 receives #217, and therefore are considered, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, a socket – the claims were examined as best understood.) and in addition to the contact means (Owings, #244-246) further comprises means for mechanically connecting the tool (see Owings, e.g., Fig. 15, and Col. 6, ll. 61- Col. 7, ll. 2, which states: The mechanical and electrical interconnection assembly is provided in this embodiment and includes a pair of laterally dovetailed ribs 215 provided in the forward surface of the power handle 212 which cooperate with a pair of slots 217 in the rear surface of the tool head) (50) or a charger (100) and/or a charging coupling (110) to the handling device (20) within the socket (60) – the structure previously described connects both a tool and a charger – see Fig. 20 in view of Fig. 6).
In re Claim 4, Owings, teaches wherein the connecting portion (see Owings, Figs. 15/17/20, surfaces of #312 that connect to #214) for mechanically connecting the tool (see Owings, Fig. 20, #214) to the handling device (see Owings, Fig. 20, #312/313/212) has detachable form-fit and/or frictional engagement means (see Owings, e.g., Fig. 15, and Col. 6, ll. 61- Col. 7, ll. 2, which states: The mechanical and electrical interconnection assembly is provided in this embodiment and includes a pair of laterally dovetailed ribs 215 provided in the forward surface of the power handle 212 which cooperate with a pair of slots 217 in the rear surface of the tool head), for example in the form of a plug-in and/or clamping and/or screw and/or detent and/or snap-fit connection to a, preferably non-circular, guide (as best understood, the dovetailed ribs #215 and slots #217 read on one of these examples), in order to insert a plug-in pin of the tool (see Figs. 17-20, contacts #256/254 of the tool) into the connecting portion (see Figs. 17-20, contacts #256/254 are inserted 40) and to lock it detachably in a locking position, in particular, in an end position (see 20, showing the tool detachably locked at an end position).
In re Claim 5, Owings teaches wherein the contact means (see Owings, Figs. 17-19, #244/245/246) for the electrical connection of the tool (see Fig. 19, #254/256) or the charger (see Fig. 6) and/or the charging coupling (see Fig. 6 – the claim was examined as best understood) to the handling device (see Fig. 20, #312) has at least two, preferably at least three, electrical contacts, for example in the form of plug sockets, in order to establish electrically conductive contact with corresponding contacts, in particular plugs, of the tool (#256/254) or of the charger (see Fig. 6) and/or of the charging coupling (see Fig. 6).
In re Claim 6, Owings teaches wherein the means for mechanical and electrical connection of the tool (see Figs. 17-19, #254/256) or the charger (see Fig.6) and/or the charging coupling (see Fig. 6) to the handling device (see Fig. 20, #312/313/) are arranged relative to one another in such a way that, in a locking position, in particular end position, of the mechanical connection, an electrical connection of the various plug sockets to the corresponding plugs of the tool (50) or the charger (100) and/or the charging coupling (110) assigned to them is ensured (when attaching the tool or the charger to the end of #312, the electrical connection of either the tool or the charger connects with the contacts #256/254 of #312).
In re Claim 11, Owings teaches wherein the tool (50) is an electrically operable implement, such as a hedge trimmer, a lawn trimmer, a saw, a pair of shears, in particular pruning shears, or a non-electrical implement, such as a rake, a spade, a broom or a shovel. – See Fig. 20 showing a lawn trimmer or saw or pair of shears.
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 4,050,003 to Owings et al. in view of US 10,420,287 to Chou.
In re Claim 7, Owings is silent as to teaches wherein the handling device (20) has, between the handle portion (30) and the connecting portion (40), an extension means (70), for example in the form of a tube extension or a shaft, which is in particular telescopic and optionally detachable from the handle portion (30) and/or connecting portion (40).
However, Chou teaches that it is known in the art of pole saws to provide an extension means in the form of a tube extension or shaft (see Figs. 1A-1B, #12/61). In the same field of invention, electrically powered saws on poles, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the earliest effective filing date, to add the pole extension structure between the trigger and the head of Owings, as taught by Chou. Doing so would allow the user to use the tool and an extended position thus making the tool more usable.
In re Claim 8, modified Owings, in re Claim 7, teaches wherein the batteries is arranged in the handle assembly (see Owings Fig. 15, #211 in view of Fig. 20).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 4,050,003 to Owings et al. in view of US 10,420,287 to Chou, and further in view of US 9,009,920 to Ramsey.
In re Claim 8, Owings, in re Claim 7, is silents as to wherein the electrical power supply (45) is arranged in the extension means (70), optionally removably.
In this interpretation the batteries were required to be located in the “tube.” Ramsey teaches that it is known in the battery power tools with tubular extensions, to place the batteries in the tubular structure of the device (see Ramsey, Fig. 3-4, #54/56). In the same field of invention, saws with extension structures (see Ramsey, Col. 1, ll. 40-47). In the same field of invention, saws with poles, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the earliest effective filing date, replace the end of the device of modified Owings with that taught by Ramsey. Doing so is the substation of one known extension/handle for another known extension handle to achieve the results of proving the user with an electrical power tool at an extended distance that the user can operate to perform tasks at a distance they would not otherwise be able to reach. See MPEP 2143, I, B.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 4,050,003 to Owings et al. in view of US 10,420,287 to Chou, US 9,009,920 to Ramsey, and further in view of US 2005/0037651 to Axenbock.
In re Claim 9, modified Owings, in re Clam 8, does not teach wherein the socket (60) and/or the guide and/or the plug sockets has/have in each case at least one sealing lip and/or at least one scraper.
However, Axenbock teaches that it is known in the art of electrical connectors to provide a sealing lip with a connector (see Axenbock, Para. 0047, which states : “The slide seal 13 may here comprise sealing lips in the guide 34 for the spring-loaded contact pins 5, the sealing lips improving the sealing effect with respect to the spring-loaded contact pins 5”). Additionally, the seal I Axenbock remains stationary while the spring loaded contact pin #5 moves, and during that movement “scraps” or contacts the spring loaded contact pin #5 and thus the inner surface of the seal #13 surrounding the spring loaded contact pin is considered a scraper under the broadest reasonable interpretation. In the same field of invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the earliest effective filing date, to add a sealing lip, as taught by Axenbock. Doing so improves the sealing effect thereby improving the connection and reliability of the connection.
In re Claim 10, modified Owings, in re Claim 9, teaches wherein the guide is in the form of a sleeve which guides and/or holds the plug-in pin of the tool (under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the ribs #215 and slots #217 of Owings is considered as sleeve and they interconnect in a male/female manner) or the charger (100) and/or the charging coupling (110) closely and without play when it is inserted and/or in its locking position in the connecting portion (40). The structure of modified Owings is held closely and without play when it is inserted and in the locked position, as best understood.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1-11 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1- of copending Application No. US 2024/0326228 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
In re Claim 1, US 2024/0326228 claims :a handling device (20), in particular for a processing device, such as a gardening and/or household device, comprising a gripping portion (30) and an electrical power supply (45) in the form of at least one rechargeable battery, wherein the handling device (20) also comprises contact means (80), which serve alternately, on the one hand, for the electrical connection of a tool (50) to the handling device (20) and, on the other hand, for charging the electrical power supply, in particular by means of a charger (100) [US 2024/0326228, Claim 1 claims :1. The handling device according to claim 3, wherein the connecting portion (40) for mechanically connecting the tool (50) to the handling device (20) has detachable form-fit and/or frictional engagement means, for example in the form of a plug-in and/or clamping and/or screw and/or detent and/or snap-fit connection to a, preferably non-circular, guide, in order to insert a plug-in pin of the tool (50) into the connecting portion (40) and to lock it detachably in a locking position, in particular, in an end position.]
In re Claim 2, 2024/0326228 claims wherein the contact means (80) are arranged in a connecting portion (40) of the handling device (20) arranged distally with respect to the handle portion (30). [ 2024/0326228, claim 3, claims wherein the connecting portion (40) for mechanically connecting the tool (50) to the handling device (20) has detachable form-fit and/or frictional engagement means, for example in the form of a plug-in and/or clamping and/or screw and/or detent and/or snap-fit connection to a, preferably non-circular, guide, in order to insert a plug-in pin of the tool (50) into the connecting portion (40) and to lock it detachably in a locking position, in particular, in an end position].
In re Claim 3, US 2024/0326228 claims: wherein the connecting portion (40) is formed as a socket (60) and in addition to the contact means (80) further comprises means for mechanically connecting the tool (50) or a charger (100) and/or a charging coupling (110) to the handling device (20) within the socket (60). [US 2024/0326228 claim 2, claims: wherein the connection portion (40) is in the form of a socket (60) and means for connecting either of the electrical and the non-electrical tool (50) to the handling device (20) are located within the socket (60).].
In re Claim 4, US 2024/0326228 claims 4 wherein the connecting portion (40) for mechanically connecting the tool (50) to the handling device (20) has detachable form-fit and/or frictional engagement means, for example in the form of a plug-in and/or clamping and/or screw and/or detent and/or snap-fit connection to a, preferably non-circular, guide, in order to insert a plug-in pin of the tool (50) into the connecting portion (40) and to lock it detachably in a locking position, in particular, in an end position. [US 2024/0326228 claim 3, claims The processing device according to claim 1, wherein the connecting portion (40) for mechanically connecting the tool (50) to the handling device (20) has detachable form-fit and/or frictional engagement means, for example in the form of a plug-in and/or clamping and/or screw and/or detent and/or snap-fit connection to a, preferably non-circular, guide, in order to insert a plug-in pin of the tool (50) into the connecting portion (40) and to lock it detachably in a locking position, in particular, in an end position.]
In re Claim 5, US 2024/0326228 claims wherein the contact means (80) for the electrical connection of the tool (50) or the charger (100) and/or the charging coupling (110) to the handling device (20) has at least two, preferably at least three, electrical contacts, for example in the form of plug sockets, in order to establish electrically conductive contact with corresponding contacts, in particular plugs, of the tool (50) or of the charger (100) and/or of the charging coupling (110). [US 2024/0326228 claim 4, claims he processing device according to claim 1, wherein the connecting portion (40) for the electrical connection of the tool (50) to the handling device (20) has at least two, preferably at least three, electrical contacts, for example in the form of sockets, in order to establish contact, in particular electrically conductive contact, with corresponding contacts, in particular plugs, of the tool (50).]
In re Claim 6, US 2024/0326228 claims wherein the means for mechanical and electrical connection of the tool (50) or the charger (100) and/or the charging coupling (110) to the handling device (20) are arranged relative to one another in such a way that, in a locking position, in particular end position, of the mechanical connection, an electrical connection of the various plug sockets to the corresponding plugs of the tool (50) or the charger (100) and/or the charging coupling (110) assigned to them is ensured. [US 2024/0326228 claim 5, claims the processing device according to claim 4, wherein the means for mechanical and electrical connection of the tool (50) to the handling device (20) are arranged relative to one another in such a way that, in the locking position of the mechanical connection, an electrical connection of the sockets to the corresponding plugs of the tool (50) is ensured.]
In re Claim 7, US 2024/0326228 claims wherein the handling device (20) has, between the handle portion (30) and the connecting portion (40), an extension means (70), for example in the form of a tube extension or a shaft, which is in particular telescopic and optionally detachable from the handle portion (30) and/or connecting portion (40). [US 2024/0326228, Claim 6, claims The processing device according to claim 1, wherein the handling device (20) has, between the handle portion (30) and the connecting portion (40), an extension means (70), for example in the form of a tube extension or a shaft, which is in particular telescopic and optionally detachable from the handle portion (30) and/or connecting portion (40).]
In re Claim 8, US2024/0326228 claims wherein the electrical power supply (45) is arranged in the extension means (70), optionally removably. [US2024/0326228 claim 7, claims The processing device according to claim 6, wherein the electrical power supply (45), which is preferably at least one battery, optionally a rechargeable battery, is arranged in the extension means (70), optionally removably.]
In re Claim 9, US 2024/0326228 claims wherein the socket (60) and/or the guide and/or the plug sockets has/have in each case at least one sealing lip and/or at least one scraper. [US 2024/0326228 claim 8, claims “. The processing device according to claim 7, wherein the socket (60) and/or the guide and/or the plug sockets has/have in each case at least one sealing lip and/or at least one scraper.]
In re Claim 10 US 2024/0326228 claims wherein the guide is in the form of a sleeve which guides and/or holds the plug-in pin of the tool (50) or the charger (100) and/or the charging coupling (110) closely and without play when it is inserted and/or in its locking position in the connecting portion (40). [US 2024/0326228 claim 9, claims “The processing device according to claim 8, wherein the guide is in the form of a sleeve which guides and/or holds the plug-in pin of the tool (50) closely and without play when it is inserted and/or in its locking position in the connecting portion (40)].
In re Claim 11, US 2024/0326228 claims wherein the tool (50) is an electrically operable implement, such as a hedge trimmer, a lawn trimmer, a saw, a pair of shears, in particular pruning shears, or a non-electrical implement, such as a rake, a spade, a broom or a shovel. [US 2024/0326228 claim 11, claims A handling device (20) for a processing device, in particular a gardening and/or household device, according to any one of the preceding claims, having a handle portion (30) and a connecting portion (40) and an electrical power supply (45), wherein the connecting portion (40) has means with which either of an electrical and a non-electrical tool (50) can be connected to the handling device (20).]
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN RILEY whose telephone number is (571)270-7786. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
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.
/JONATHAN G RILEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724