DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 6/25/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-22 remain pending in the application.
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 12-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sitter (US 20200276660 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Sitter teaches a handheld band saw comprising:
a saw blade (34);
a housing (14) including:
a deck (46) surrounding the saw blade,
a handle (36) configured to be grasped by a user during a cutting operation, and
a battery receptacle (receptacle for 26) for receiving a battery (26, see Figure 1);
a motor (62) supported by the housing for driving a drive wheel spindle (82); a drive wheel (70) driven by the drive wheel spindle and a driven wheel driven by the drive wheel via the saw blade (See Figure 7);
a mounting hub (housing near 30, see Figure 7) extending from the deck and surrounded radially by the drive wheel; and
a bearing (bottom 84 in Figure 7) that supports the drive wheel for rotation on the mounting hub, wherein the bearing is disposed on an outer periphery of the mounting hub between the mounting hub and the drive wheel (See Figure 7).
PNG
media_image1.png
1000
956
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Sitter teaches the handle is a first handle (38) and the band saw further includes a second handle (left tip of the handle in Figure 1) spaced away from the first handle and a battery (26) removably coupled to the housing adjacent at least the first handle, wherein the battery, when coupled to the housing, is configured to provide power to the motor (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 14, Sitter teaches a trigger (42) disposed adjacent a gripping portion of the first handle, wherein power from the battery is supplied to the motor when the trigger is actuated (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 15, Sitter teaches a planetary transmission between the motor and the drive wheel spindle, wherein the planetary transmission includes a carrier coupled for co-rotation with the drive wheel spindle (see Figure 7).
Regarding claim 17, Sitter teaches the drive wheel spindle is driven about a drive wheel axis, and wherein the drive wheel spindle transfers torque from the motor to the drive wheel (See annotated Figure 7).
Regarding claim 18, Sitter teaches the mounting hub extends along the drive wheel axis, and wherein the motor defines a rotational axis that is coaxial with the drive wheel axis (See annotated Figure 7).
Regarding claim 19, Sitter teaches the mounting hub includes an aperture that is diametrically larger than the drive wheel spindle, such that the drive wheel spindle is not supported by the aperture of the mounting hub (See annotated Figure 7).
Regarding claim 20, Sitter teaches a thrust bearing positioned between a radially outward extending flange on the drive wheel spindle and the mounting hub, wherein the thrust bearing is configured to absorb a thrust load applied to the drive wheel spindle (See annotated Figure 7).
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, 3-11 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sitter (US 20200276660 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Sitter teaches a handheld band saw comprising:
a saw blade (34);
a housing (14) including a deck (46) surrounding the saw blade, the deck having a mounting hub (housing near 30, see Figure 7) extending from the deck (see Figure 1);
a handle (38) coupled to the housing and configured to be grasped by a user during a cutting operation (see Figure 1);
a motor (62) supported by the housing for driving a drive wheel spindle (82, see Figure 7);
a drive wheel assembly (68) including a drive wheel (70) driven by the drive wheel spindle and a driven wheel driven by the drive wheel via the saw blade (paragraph 0017); and
a bearing (84) that supports the drive wheel for rotation on the mounting hub, wherein the mounting hub includes an aperture (aperture in 30, see Figure 7) through which the drive wheel spindle extends (see Figure 7),
an outer race engaged with the mounting hub (see Figure 7).
Sitter fails to teach the bearing including an inner race engaged with the mounting hub and an outer race engaged with the drive wheel,
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modified Sitter to have the bearing between the outside of the mounting hub and the drive wheel (because the drive wheel is still fixed to the drive spine and the rotation relationship would not change). Since the courts have held that a rearrangement of parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) MEPE 2144.04 VI. C.
Regarding claim 3, Sitter teaches the drive wheel spindle is driven about a drive wheel axis, wherein the drive wheel spindle transfers torque from the motor to the drive wheel (see Figure 7).
Regarding claim 4, Sitter teaches the mounting hub extends along the drive wheel axis (see Figure 7).
Regarding claim 5, Sitter teaches the housing further includes a guard (50) coupled to the deck, wherein the deck and the guard cooperatively surround the saw blade in a shielded position, and wherein the deck and the guard define a cut zone through which the saw blade passes in an exposed position to engage a workpiece (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 6, Sitter teaches the aperture is diametrically larger than the drive wheel spindle, such that the drive wheel spindle is not supported by the aperture of the mounting hub (see Figure 7).
Regarding claim 7, Sitter teaches a transmission (22) positioned between the motor and the drive wheel spindle, wherein the drive wheel spindle is coupled to and driven by a carrier of the transmission (see Figure 7).
Regarding claim 8, Sitter teaches the drive wheel spindle includes a radially outward-extending flange adjacent the carrier, and wherein the band saw further comprises a thrust bearing adjacent (top 84 in Figure 7) an opposite side of the flange as the carrier (See annotated Figure 7).
PNG
media_image1.png
1000
956
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Sitter teaches the thrust bearing is disposed between the flange and the mounting hub (See annotated Figure 7).
Regarding claim 10, Sitter teaches the handle is a first handle (38) and the band saw further includes a second handle (left tip of the handle in Figure 1) spaced away from the first handle and a battery (26) removably coupled to the housing adjacent at least the first handle, wherein the battery, when coupled to the housing, is configured to provide power to the motor (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 11, Sitter teaches a trigger (42) disposed adjacent a gripping portion of the first handle, wherein power from the battery is supplied to the motor when the trigger is actuated (see Figure 1).
Regarding claims 21-22, Sitter teaches the bearing is a first bearing (top 84), and further comprising a second bearing (bottom 84) that supports the drive wheel spindle, and wherein the first bearing and the second bearing are disposed internally of the aperture of the mounting hub (see Figure 7).
Modified Sitter fails to teach the first bearing and the second bearing are disposed externally of the aperture of the mounting hub.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modified Sitter to have the first bearing and the second bearing are disposed externally of the aperture of the mounting hub. Since the courts have held that a rearrangement of parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) MEPE 2144.04 VI. C.
Claims 2 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sitter (US 20200276660 A1) in view of Dean (US 6736037 B2).
Regarding claim 2, Sitter further teaches the bearing is a ball bearing including an inner race engaged with drive spine (See Figure 7), a plurality of rollers disposed between the inner race and the outer race (see Figure 7), allowing relative rotation between the inner race and the outer race (see Figure 7).
Sitter fails to teach the bearing is a needle bearing and a plurality of rollers disposed between the inner race and the outer race, allowing relative rotation between the inner race and the outer race.
Dean teaches that a needle and roller bearing are common equivalent of each other.
Sitter differs from the claimed device due to Sitter’s bearing is a roller bearing, whereas Dean teaches a needle bearing. Both Sitter and Dean teach a bearing. Such modification will achieve the predictable result of providing securing the cap of the handle, since both bearing of Sitter and Dean 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 one for the other in order to provide a bearing.
Regarding claim 16, Sitter further teaches the bearing is a ball bearing including an inner race engaged with drive spine (See Figure 7), an outer race engaged with the mounting hub (see Figure 7), and a plurality of rollers disposed between the inner race and the outer race (see Figure 7), allowing relative rotation between the inner race and the outer race (see Figure 7).
Sitter fails to teach the bearing is a needle bearing including an inner race engaged with the mounting hub, an outer race engaged with the drive wheel, and a plurality of rollers disposed between the inner race and the outer race, allowing relative rotation between the inner race and the outer race.
Dean teaches that a needle and roller bearing are common equivalent of each other.
Sitter differs from the claimed device due to Sitter’s bearing is a roller bearing, whereas Dean teaches a needle bearing. Both Sitter and Dean teach a bearing. Such modification will achieve the predictable result of providing securing the cap of the handle, since both bearing of Sitter and Dean 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 one for the other in order to provide a bearing.
It would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modified Sitter to have the bearing between the outside of the mounting hub and the drive wheel (because the drive wheel is still fixed to the drive spine and the rotation relationship would not change). Since the courts have held that a rearrangement of parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) MEPE 2144.04 VI. C.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-11 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.
In response to applicant's argument that Sitter fails to teach bearing is disposed on an outer periphery. The examiner disagrees and notes that as there is no direction of the outer required, the bottom of the mounting hub is considered as a bottom out periphery, thus meeting the limitation. The examiner suggest claiming radial outer periphery to overcome the rejection.
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 8/21/2026
Prosecution Insights