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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/2/2026.
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.
(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 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gary Stroud et al. (US 20230150044 A1 – hereinafter Stroud).
Regarding claim 18, Stroud teaches a method for operating a guide dresser, the method comprising: mounting a saw guide (Fig. 1, Saw Guide 50) onto the guide dresser; providing a transmitter ([0012] – QR code/ bar code) on an exterior of the saw guide, transmitting, by the transmitter, an identifier for the saw guide ([0112] – identifier being the information displayed on the QR/bar code); receiving, by a scanner (Fig. 18, Laser Range Finder 120), the identifier; communicating, by the scanner, the identifier to a guide dresser server configured to control operations of the guide dresser ([0114]); and verifying, by the guide dresser server, of the settings for operating the guide dresser based, at least in part, on the identifier ([0115]).
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 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gary Stroud et al. (US 20230150044 A1 – hereinafter Stroud) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Kirk Williamson et al. (US 20190255668 A1 – hereinafter Williamson).
Regarding claim 19, Stroud does not teach the method of claim 18, wherein the transmitter comprises a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag.
However, Williamson teaches the use of RFID tags ([0050]) in a machining system.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Stroud such that the transmitter and scanner to comprise a RFID and RFID receiver as taught by Williamson. Doing so would have required only the simple substitution of the existing transmitter and scanner with the transmitter and scanner of Williamson, and the substitution would lead to the predictable result of being able to transmit a greater amount of data to the scanner without a direct line of sight.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Stroud and Williamson already teaches the method of claim 19, wherein the scanner comprises a RFID receiver (See the rejection of claim 19 above).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELLA LORRAINE KEENA whose telephone number is (571)272-1806. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am - 5:00 pm ET.
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.
/ELLA L KEENA/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 /BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights