DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 9/03/2026 has been entered. Claims 14, 28-37 and 39-44 remain pending in the application. Claims 1-13, 15-26, 28 and 38 were cancelled.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/04/2026 and 9/03/2026 were filed after the filing date of the application on 7/02/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
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 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wolf (US 2589914) in view of Hard (US 2380753).
Regarding claim 14, Wolf teaches a device incorporating a cutting chain comprising:
a saw bar (9); and
a plurality of links (17, see Figures 4-5) arranged in a chain along a chain path around the saw bar, the plurality of links comprising left cutting links (30 in Figure 1) and right cutting links (31 in Figure 1);
wherein each left cutting link comprises one or more cutting teeth positioned along a left lateral side of the left cutting link with no cutting teeth positioned along a right lateral side of the first left cutting link (see Figure 1), and each right cutting link comprises one or more cutting teeth positioned along a right lateral side of the right cutting link with no cutting teeth positioned along a left lateral side of the right cutting link (see Figure 1),
wherein the saw bar comprises a main body and a rail extending from the main body, wherein the main body comprises a left ledge on a left side of the rail and a right ledge on the right side of the rail (see Figure 1);
wherein each link in the plurality of links comprises a groove that so that the link fits over and straddles the rail of the saw bar, wherein the groove extends from a bottom of the link upward part way to a top of the link, the groove terminating at a top end of the groove (see Figure 1); and
wherein when the plurality of links is assembled on the saw bar, a left tangent section at the bottom of each link contacts the left ledge of the main body of the saw bar and a right tangent section at the bottom of each link contacts the right ledge of the main body of the saw bar (see Figure 1).
Wolf fails to teach with a clearance space present between a top of the rail and the top end of the groove of each link, such that the left ledge and the right ledge of the main body of the saw bar bear a vertical load from the links.
Hard teaches a chain saw including each link in the plurality of links comprises a groove that so that the link fits over and straddles the rail of the saw bar, wherein the groove extends from a bottom of the link upward part way to a top of the link, the groove terminating at a top end of the groove (see Figure 4); and wherein when the plurality of links is assembled on the saw bar, a left tangent section at the bottom of each link contacts the left ledge of the main body of the saw bar and a right tangent section at the bottom of each link contacts the right ledge of the main body of the saw bar (see Figure 4), a clearance space (space in 20) present between a top of the rail and the top end of the groove of each link, such that the left ledge and the right ledge of the main body of the saw bar bear a vertical load from the links (see Figure 3).
Examiner notes that both 21 of Wolf and 20 of Hard are both used for movement of a sprocket. Wolf differs from the claimed device due to Wolf’s extra space are on the side of the ledge, whereas Hard teaches the extra space with in the groove. Such modification will achieve the predictable result of providing securing the cap of the handle, since both groove style of Wolf and Hard are known for the same purpose in the art. See MPEP § 2143 I. (B). Therefore, it would have been an obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the groove of Wolf for the groove of Hard for the purpose of providing a groove for the sprocket. The resulting device of modified Wolf teaches a clearance space (space in 20 of Hard) present between a top of the rail and the top end of the groove of each link, such that the left ledge and the right ledge of the main body of the saw bar bear a vertical load from the links (see Figure 3 of Hard).
Claims 28-33, 35-37 and 39-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wolf (US 2589914) in view of Hard (US 2380753) and in further view of Strunk (US 2827932).
Regarding claim 28, modified Wolf teaches all elements of the current invention as set forth in claim 14 above.
Modified Wolf fails to teach the plurality of links further comprises spacer links that do not have any cutting teeth.
Strunk teaches the plurality of links further comprises spacer links that do not have any cutting teeth (80s, see Figure 2A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Wolf to change the teeth pattern (such as making some of the cutting teeth into spacers), as taught by Strunk, in order to get the desired kerf (col. 1 lines 15-19 of Strunk).
Regarding claim 29, modified Wolf further teaches the chain comprises singles of cutting links alternating with singles of spacer links (80, see Figure 2A of Strunk).
Regarding claim 30, modified Wolf further teaches multiples of cutting links alternating with multiples of spacer links (80s, see Figure 2A of Strunk).
Regarding claim 31, modified Wolf further teaches the chain comprises multiples of cutting links alternating with singles of spacer links (80, see Figure 2A of Strunk).
Regarding claim 32, modified Wolf further teaches the chain comprises singles of cutting links alternating with multiples of spacer links (80s, see Figure 2A of Strunk).
Regarding claim 33, modified Wolf further teaches the links of the plurality of links are arranged in the chain in the following repeating pattern: single left cutting link, two spacer links, single right cutting link, two spacer links (81, 80, 80 and 81, see Figure 2A of Strunk).
Regarding claim 35, modified Wolf further teaches the chain comprises singles of left cutting links alternating with singles of right cutting links (see Figure 2A of Strunk).
Regarding claim 36, modified Wolf further teaches the chain comprises multiples of left cutting links alternating with multiples of right cutting links (see Figure 2A of Strunk).
Regarding claim 37, Strunk teaches a device incorporating a cutting chain comprising:
a saw bar (9); and
a plurality of links (7) arranged in a chain along a chain path around the saw bar;
the plurality of links comprises a plurality of cutting links, each cutting link having one or more cutting teeth (see Figure 1).
wherein the saw bar comprises a main body and a rail extending from the main body, wherein the main body comprises a left ledge on a left side of the rail and a right ledge on the right side of the rail (see Figure 1);
wherein each link in the plurality of links comprises a groove that so that the link fits over and straddles the rail of the saw bar, wherein the groove extends from a bottom of the link upward part way to a top of the link, the groove terminating at a top end of the groove (see Figure 1); and
wherein when the plurality of links is assembled on the saw bar, a left tangent section at the bottom of each link contacts the left ledge of the main body of the saw bar and a right tangent section at the bottom of each link contacts the right ledge of the main body of the saw bar (see Figure 1).
Wolf fails to teach with a clearance space present between a top of the rail and the top end of the groove of each link, such that the left ledge and the right ledge of the main body of the saw bar bear a vertical load from the links, and wherein the plurality of links further comprises at least one spacer link, wherein the at least one spacer link does not have any cutting teeth.
Hard teaches a chain saw including each link in the plurality of links comprises a groove that so that the link fits over and straddles the rail of the saw bar, wherein the groove extends from a bottom of the link upward part way to a top of the link, the groove terminating at a top end of the groove (see Figure 4); and wherein when the plurality of links is assembled on the saw bar, a left tangent section at the bottom of each link contacts the left ledge of the main body of the saw bar and a right tangent section at the bottom of each link contacts the right ledge of the main body of the saw bar (see Figure 4), a clearance space (space in 20) present between a top of the rail and the top end of the groove of each link, such that the left ledge and the right ledge of the main body of the saw bar bear a vertical load from the links (see Figure 3).
Examiner notes that both 21 of Wolf and 20 of Hard are both used for movement of a sprocket. Wolf differs from the claimed device due to Wolf’s extra space are on the side of the ledge, whereas Hard teaches the extra space with in the groove. Such modification will achieve the predictable result of providing securing the cap of the handle, since both groove style of Wolf and Hard are known for the same purpose in the art. See MPEP § 2143 I. (B). Therefore, it would have been an obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the groove of Wolf for the groove of Hard for the purpose of providing a groove for the sprocket. The resulting device of modified Wolf teaches a clearance space (space in 20 of Hard) present between a top of the rail and the top end of the groove of each link, such that the left ledge and the right ledge of the main body of the saw bar bear a vertical load from the links (see Figure 3 of Hard).
Strunk teaches the plurality of links comprises a plurality of cutting links (81), each cutting link having one or more cutting teeth; and wherein the plurality of links further comprises at least one spacer link (80), wherein the at least one spacer link does not have any cutting teeth (see Figure 2A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Wolf to change the teeth pattern (such as making some of the cutting teeth into spacers), as taught by Strunk, in order to get the desired kerf (col. 1 lines 15-19 of Strunk).
Regarding claim 39, modified Wolf further teaches the chain comprises singles of cutting links alternating with singles of spacer links (80s, see Figure 2A of Strunk).
Regarding claim 40, modified Wolf further teaches the chain comprises multiples of cutting links alternating with multiples of spacer links (80s, see Figure 2A of Strunk).
Regarding claim 41, modified Wolf further teaches the chain comprises multiples of cutting links alternating with singles of spacer links (80s, see Figure 2A of Strunk).
Regarding claim 42, modified Wolf further teaches the chain comprises singles of cutting links alternating with multiples of spacer links (80s, see Figure 2A of Strunk).
Regarding claim 43, Strunk teaches the links of the plurality of links are arranged in the chain in the following repeating pattern: single cutting link, two spacer links, single cutting link, two spacer links (81, 80, 80 and 81, see Figure 2A).
Claims 34 and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wolf (US 2589914) in view of Hard (US 2380753) and in further view of Strunk (US 2827932) and in further view of Donley (US 2826226).
Regarding claim 34, modified Wolf teaches all elements of the current invention as set forth in claim 28.
Modified Wolf fails to teach the spacer links have depth limiters.
Donley teaches the spacer links (26) have depth limiters (49).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to modify the device of modified Wolf to add the depth limiters, as taught by Donley, In order to cut the ideal kerf wanted by the end user.
Regarding claim 44, modified Wolf teaches all elements of the current invention as set forth in claim 37.
Modified Wolf fails to teach the at least one spacer link has a depth limiter.
Donley teaches the spacer links (26) have depth limiters (49).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to modify the device of Wolf to add the depth limiters, as taught by Donley, In order to cut the ideal kerf wanted by the end user.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/03/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 14, 28-37 and 39-44 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 LIANG DONG whose telephone number is (571)270-0479. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8 AM-6 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, Ashley Boyer 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.
/LIANG DONG/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 9/24/2026
