DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in Application No. 18808439, filed on 8/19/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/23/2025 was filed after the filing date of the application on 8/19/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
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, “a maximum distance a centroid of the reciprocating assembly moves is a first distance L1; a maximum distance a centroid of the balancing component moves is a second distance L2; a mass of the reciprocating assembly is a first mass M1, a mass of the balancing component is a second mass M2; a ratio of a product M2·L2 of the second mass M2 and the second distance L2 to a product M1-L1 of the first mass M1 and the first distance L1 is a first ratio, AND the first ratio is greater than 1.05” in claim 1, “a total mass of the working accessory and the reciprocating assembly is a third mass M3, and the product M2·L2 of the second mass M2 and the second distance L2 is greater than a product M3-L1 of the third mass M3 and the first distance L1” in claim 12, and “a maximum distance a centroid of the reciprocating assembly mounted with the working accessory moves is a first distance L1; a maximum distance a centroid of the balancing component moves is a second distance L2; a total mass of the working accessory and the reciprocating assembly is a third mass M3, a mass of the balancing component is a second mass M2, and a product M2·L2 of the second mass M2 and the second distance L2 is greater than a product M3-L1 of the third mass M3 and the first distance L1” in claim 14 (at least L1 and L2 must be shown in the Figures) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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 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 1-9 and 11-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feldmann (US 6357125 B1).
Regarding claims 1 and 7-9, Feldmann teaches a reciprocating power tool, comprising:
a housing (14); a power assembly comprising an electric motor (18, col. 1 lines 15-22);
a transmission assembly (assembly of 12, 26, 27 and 28, see Figure 1) connected to the power assembly;
a reciprocating assembly (56 and 54) connected to the transmission assembly and performing a reciprocating motion (see Figures 1-2); and
a balancing component (54) for balancing a motion of the reciprocating assembly; wherein a maximum distance a centroid of the reciprocating assembly moves is a first distance L1 (see Figures 1-2); a maximum distance a centroid of the balancing component moves is a second distance L2 (see Figures 1-2); a mass of the reciprocating assembly is a first mass M1, a mass of the balancing component is a second mass M2 (see Figure 1-2).
Feldmann fails to teach a ratio of a product M2·L2 of the second mass M2 and the second distance L2 to a product M1-L1 of the first mass M1 and the first distance L1 is a first ratio, AND the first ratio is greater than 1.05/1.07/1.1 or less than 1.5.
Furthermore, with respect to the specific ratio of a ratio of a product M2·L2 of the second mass M2 and the second distance L2 to a product M1-L1 of the first mass M1 and the first distance L1 is a first ratio, AND the first ratio is greater than 1.05/1.07/1.1 or less than 1.5, the courts have held that where the general conditions of the invention are met, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art., In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the device of Feldmann to have the specific ratio set forth in the claim and to have the range desired by the end user.
Regarding claim 2, modified Feldmann further teaches the balancing component moves along a direction substantially opposite to a motion direction of the reciprocating assembly to balance the reciprocating motion of the reciprocating assembly (see Figures 1-2).
Regarding claim 3, modified Feldmann further teaches the transmission assembly comprises a first transmission member (gear on 26), a transmission spindle (27), and an eccentric member (40), the transmission spindle extends along a spindle axis, the first transmission member is driven by the electric motor to rotate around the spindle axis, and the eccentric member rotates with the first transmission member to drive the reciprocating assembly to perform the reciprocating motion (See Figures 1-2).
Regarding claims 4-5, modified Feldmann further teaches a centroid of the transmission assembly is a third centroid C3, and a distance between the third centroid C3 and the spindle axis is less than an unknown value.
Modified Feldmann fails to teach less than 2 mm or 1 mm.
Furthermore, with respect to the specific value of less than 2 mm or 1 mm, the courts have held that where the general conditions of the invention are met, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art., In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the device of Feldmann to have the specific value set forth in the claim to have the desired stoke distance wanted by the end user.
Regarding claim 6, modified Feldmann further teaches the electric motor comprises a motor shaft rotatable around a first axis, and the first axis extends substantially along a front and rear direction of the reciprocating power tool (See Figures 1-2)..
Regarding claim 11, modified Feldmann further teaches the reciprocating assembly is mountable with a working accessory for an operation (such as the shoe in Figure 1).
Regarding claim 12, modified Feldmann further teaches a total mass of the working accessory and the reciprocating assembly is a third mass M3 (see Figure 1).
Feldmann fails to teach the product M2·L2 of the second mass M2 and the second distance L2 is greater than a product M3-L1 of the third mass M3 and the first distance L1.
Furthermore, with respect to the specific ratio of the product M2·L2 of the second mass M2 and the second distance L2 is greater than a product M3-L1 of the third mass M3 and the first distance L1, the courts have held that where the general conditions of the invention are met, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art., In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the device of Feldmann to have the specific ratio set forth in the claim and to have the range desired by the end user.
Regarding claim 13, modified Feldmann further teaches the reciprocating power tool is a reciprocating saw (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 14, Feldmann teaches a reciprocating power tool, comprising:
a housing (14); a power assembly comprising an electric motor (18, col. 1 lines 15-22);
a transmission assembly (assembly of 12, 26, 27 and 28, see Figure 1) connected to the power assembly;
a reciprocating assembly (56 and 54) connected to the transmission assembly and performing a reciprocating motion (see Figures 1-2); and
a balancing component (54) for balancing a motion of the reciprocating assembly; wherein a maximum distance a centroid of the reciprocating assembly moves is a first distance L1 (see Figures 1-2); a maximum distance a centroid of the balancing component moves is a second distance L2 (see Figures 1-2); a mass of the reciprocating assembly is a first mass M1, a total mass of the working accessory and the reciprocating assembly is a third mass M3 (see Figure 1); a mass of the balancing component is a second mass M2 (see Figure 1-2).
Feldmann fails to teach the product M2·L2 of the second mass M2 and the second distance L2 is greater than a product M3-L1 of the third mass M3 and the first distance L1.
Furthermore, with respect to the specific ratio of the product M2·L2 of the second mass M2 and the second distance L2 is greater than a product M3-L1 of the third mass M3 and the first distance L1, the courts have held that where the general conditions of the invention are met, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art., In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the device of Feldmann to have the specific ratio set forth in the claim and to have the range desired by the end user.
Regarding claim 15, modified Feldmann further teaches the balancing component moves along a direction substantially opposite to a motion direction of the reciprocating assembly to balance the reciprocating motion of the reciprocating assembly (see Figures 1-2).
Regarding claim 16, modified Feldmann further teaches the transmission assembly comprises a first transmission member (gear on 26), a transmission spindle (27), and an eccentric member (40), the transmission spindle extends along a spindle axis, the first transmission member is driven by the electric motor to rotate around the spindle axis, and the eccentric member rotates with the first transmission member to drive the reciprocating assembly to perform the reciprocating motion (See Figures 1-2).
Regarding claims 17-18, modified Feldmann further teaches a centroid of the transmission assembly is a third centroid C3, and a distance between the third centroid C3 and the spindle axis is less than an unknown value.
Modified Feldmann fails to teach less than 2 mm or 1 mm.
Furthermore, with respect to the specific value of less than 2 mm or 1 mm, the courts have held that where the general conditions of the invention are met, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art., In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the device of Feldmann to have the specific value set forth in the claim to have the desired stoke distance wanted by the end user.
Regarding claim 19, modified Feldmann further teaches the electric motor comprises a motor shaft rotatable around a first axis, and the first axis extends substantially along a front and rear direction of the reciprocating power tool (See Figures 1-2).
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feldmann (US 6357125 B1) in view of Kato (US 20150042254 A1).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, modified Feldmann further teaches all elements of the current invention as set forth claim 1 and 14 above.
Modified Feldmann fails to teach a detection device and a controller, wherein the detection device is configured to detect an electrical signal of the electric motor, and, when determining that the reciprocating power tool is in a no-load state, the controller reduces an idle speed of the electric motor.
Kato teaches a cutting tool including a detection device (22) and a controller (20), wherein the detection device is configured to detect an electrical signal of the electric motor, and, when determining that the reciprocating power tool is in a no-load state, the controller reduces an idle speed of the electric motor (paragraph 0055).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Feldmann to added the detection and the controller arrangement, as taught by Kato, in order to the power output of the device (abstract of Kato).
Conclusion
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 3/19/2026