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 .
Introduction
The Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s amendment of claims 1-8 in the preliminary amendment filed by Applicant on 11/07/2024. Claims 1-8 are currently pending in this application and are subject to examination herein.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/07/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The Examiner notes that Applicants have used the phrase “and/or” in claim 1 (and claims depending therefrom by their dependence). The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has held that use of the phrase "and/or” within a claim is not indefinite per se. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal No. 2011-004811 (Jan. 2014). Nevertheless, “[d]uring patent examination, the pending claims must be ‘given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification.’” MPEP § 2111; Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1316, 75 USPQ2d 1321, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2005). Based upon this guidance from the MPEP and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, the Examiner interprets the phrase "and/or" under its broadest reasonable interpretation of "or" for purposes of examination of the instant Application.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “a first transceiver of the wireless type”, “a second transceiver of the wireless type”, “a third transceiver of the wireless type” and “a fourth transceiver of the wireless type”. This language opens questions of lack of antecedent basis for the first instance of “wireless type”. Applicant may wish to amend Claim 1 to recite “a first wireless transceiver”, “a second wireless transceiver”, “a third wireless transceiver” and “a fourth wireless transceiver” in Claim 1.
Claims 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 2 utilizes the acronym “NFC” therein. However, the acronym is not defined within the claims. While the Examiner does not believe that the acronyms used give rise to indefiniteness, the Examiner strongly encourages Applicant to provide the full term in the first instance (e.g., “near field communication (NFC)”) of each independent claim, so that subsequent recitations of the acronyms are clear. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 includes an erroneous comment right before the final period in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 2-3 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.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the NFC type" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret “the NFC type” as “an NFC type”.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the Bluetooth type" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret “the Bluetooth type” as “a Bluetooth type”.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2022/0161449 to Savage et al. (hereinafter Savage) in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2021/0291400 to Heinzelmann et al. (hereinafter Heinzelmann).
Regarding claim 1, Savage discloses a landscaping apparatus comprising:
a tool (handpiece 38 and/or power tool 51) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0019], [0021], [0023], [0027]-[0028], [0030], [0038], [0040]),
an electronic control and command unit (controller in handpiece) (Fig. 3) associated with said tool (handpiece 38 and/or power tool 51) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0019], [0021], [0023], [0027]-[0028], [0030], [0038], [0040]) and configured to detect a value of an operating parameter (e.g., strength of signal generated by magnetic switch 42 (user input)) (Fig. 3; Para. [0034]) of the tool (handpiece 38 and/or power tool 51) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0019], [0021], [0023], [0027]-[0028], [0030], [0038], [0040]) and/or to command the tool (handpiece 38 and/or power tool 51) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0019], [0021], [0023], [0027]-[0028], [0030], [0038], [0040]) itself,
a first transceiver (RFID tag 46) (Fig. 3; Para. [0028]-[0029], [0038]-[0039]) of the wireless type (e.g., RFID or NFC) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0028], [0038]) and a second transceiver (wireless transceiver 40) (Fig. 3; Para. [0027], [0029], [0031]) of the wireless type (e.g., Bluetooth) (Paras. [0030]-[0031]) operatively connected to the electronic control and command unit (controller in handpiece) (Fig. 3) and fixed to a portion of the tool (handpiece 38 and/or power tool 51) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0019], [0021], [0023], [0027]-[0028], [0030], [0038], [0040]),
a portable remote device (power pack 10) (Fig. 1; Paras. [0019], [0021]) provided with an electronic control and command unit (controller in power pack and/or motor controller 16) (Figs. 1, 3; Paras. [0019]-[0020], [0024]-[0025], [0030], [0032]-[0037]),
a third transceiver (RFID reader 20) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0020], [0024], [0029], [0031]) of the wireless type (e.g., RFID or NFC) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0028], [0038]) and a fourth transceiver (wireless transceiver 48) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0029], [0031]-[0032], [0034]) of the wireless type (Paras. [0030]-[0031]) operatively connected to the electronic control and command unit (controller in power pack and/or motor controller 16) (Figs. 1, 3; Paras. [0019]-[0020], [0024]-[0025], [0030], [0032]-[0037]) of the portable device (power pack 10) (Fig. 1; Paras. [0019], [0021]) and fixed to a portion of the portable remote device (power pack 10) (Fig. 1; Paras. [0019], [0021]),
wherein the first transceiver (RFID tag 46) (Fig. 3; Para. [0028]-[0029], [0038]-[0039]) and the third transceiver (RFID reader 20) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0020], [0024], [0029], [0031]) are of a same type (e.g., RFID or NFC) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0028], [0038]) and have a maximum range of action lower than 0.15m (Paras. [0028], [0038]), wherein the second transceiver (wireless transceiver 40) (Fig. 3; Para. [0027], [0029], [0031]) and the fourth transceiver (wireless transceiver 48) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0029], [0031]-[0032], [0034]) are of a same type (e.g., Bluetooth) (Paras. [0030]-[0031]), which is different from the type (e.g., RFID or NFC) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0028], [0038]) of the first transceiver (RFID tag 46) (Fig. 3; Para. [0028]-[0029], [0038]-[0039]) and third transceiver (RFID reader 20) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0020], [0024], [0029], [0031]), and have a maximum range of action higher than 0.15m (Bluetooth range is higher than 0.15m),
and wherein the electronic control and command unit (controller in handpiece) (Fig. 3) of the tool (handpiece 38 and/or power tool 51) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0019], [0021], [0023], [0027]-[0028], [0030], [0038], [0040]) is configured to send a wireless signal containing an identification code (Paras. [0028]-[0029], [0044], [0049]) of the second transceiver (wireless transceiver 40) (Fig. 3; Para. [0027], [0029], [0031]) to the third transceiver (RFID reader 20) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0020], [0024], [0029], [0031]) via the first transceiver (RFID tag 46) (Fig. 3; Para. [0028]-[0029], [0038]-[0039]),
and wherein the electronic control and command unit (controller in power pack and/or motor controller 16) (Figs. 1, 3; Paras. [0019]-[0020], [0024]-[0025], [0030], [0032]-[0037]) of the portable remote device (power pack 10) (Fig. 1; Paras. [0019], [0021]) is configured to read said identification code (Paras. [0028]-[0029], [0044], [0049]) and then automatically establish a data connection (Paras. [0044], [0049]) with the electronic control and command unit (controller in handpiece) (Fig. 3) of the tool (handpiece 38 and/or power tool 51) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0019], [0021], [0023], [0027]-[0028], [0030], [0038], [0040]) via the fourth (wireless transceiver 48) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0029], [0031]-[0032], [0034]) and the second transceiver (wireless transceiver 40) (Fig. 3; Para. [0027], [0029], [0031]).
However, Savage does not expressly disclose that the apparatus is a landscaping apparatus or that the tool is a landscaping tool. Nevertheless, Heinzelmann teaches a landscaping apparatus that is a landscaping tool (garden processing device 1) (Fig. 1; Para. [0044]) having a similar motor to the handpiece disclosed in Savage. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the cutting tool and power pack disclosed in Savage with the ability to attach garden tools, such as the garden processing tool taught in Heinzelmann (or other types of electrical garden tools) with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide a variety of options for a battery pack and motor controller to facilitate different gardening and other cutting projects. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the cutting tool and power pack disclosed in Savage with the ability to attach garden tools, such as the garden processing tool taught in Heinzelmann (or other types of electrical garden tools) with a reasonable expectation of success, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Regarding claim 2, Savage in view of Heinzelmann teaches the landscaping apparatus according to claim 1 (see above). Furthermore, Savage discloses an apparatus wherein the first transceiver (RFID tag 46) (Fig. 3; Para. [0028]-[0029], [0038]-[0039]) and the third transceiver (RFID reader 20) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0020], [0024], [0029], [0031]) are of the NFC type (e.g., RFID or NFC) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0028], [0038]).
Regarding claim 3, Savage in view of Heinzelmann teaches the landscaping apparatus according to claim 1 (see above). Furthermore, Savage discloses an apparatus wherein the second transceiver (wireless transceiver 40) (Fig. 3; Para. [0027], [0029], [0031]) and the fourth transceiver (wireless transceiver 48) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0029], [0031]-[0032], [0034]) are of the Bluetooth type (Paras. [0030]-[0031]).
Regarding claim 4, Savage in view of Heinzelmann teaches the landscaping apparatus according to claim 1 (see above). Furthermore, Savage discloses an apparatus wherein the landscaping tool comprises a visual identification element (handle 52 and/or rectangular housing containing RFID tag 46 as depicted in Fig. 2) of the position of the first wireless transceiver device (RFID tag 46) (Fig. 3; Para. [0028]-[0029], [0038]-[0039]) with respect to the tool itself (handpiece 38 and/or power tool 51) (Fig. 2; Paras. [0019], [0021], [0023], [0027]-[0028], [0030], [0038], [0040]).
Regarding claim 5, Savage in view of Heinzelmann teaches the landscaping apparatus according to claim 4 (see above). Furthermore, Savage discloses an apparatus wherein the visual identification element comprises a display (wireless status LED 61 embedded in the housing of the handpiece 38) (Figs. 2-3; Para. [0040]). It should be noted that the claim does not require that the display/visual identification element must have any exact relation to the position of the first wireless receiver and the wireless status LED 61 would indicate the approximate position of the first wireless receiver and be within the wireless signal region. Alternatively, one having ordinary skill in the art could choose to locate the wireless signal LED 61 in close proximity to the first wireless transceiver device, if desired, to indicate the exact position of the first wireless transceiver.
Regarding claim 6, Savage in view of Heinzelmann teaches the landscaping apparatus according to claim 5 (see above). Furthermore, Savage discloses an apparatus wherein the first transceiver (RFID tag 46) (Fig. 3; Para. [0028]-[0029], [0038]-[0039]) is installed on an electronic control and command board of the display (wireless status LED 61 embedded in the housing of the handpiece 38) (Figs. 2-3; Para. [0040]). However, while Savage is silent on any boards used to mount the electronic components in handpiece 38, it is exceptionally well-known in the art to use circuit boards to mount components for ease of assembly and to avoid damage to the electronics due to vibration because this is a power saw with moving parts. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the wireless status LED 61 (along with any other components, such as battery status LED 64, wireless transceiver 40 and possibly battery 44 and/or its holder) on the same board, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(C); In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975).
Regarding claim 7, Savage in view of Heinzelmann teaches the landscaping apparatus according to claim 1 (see above). Furthermore, Savage discloses an apparatus wherein the electronic control and command unit (controller in power pack and/or motor controller 16) (Figs. 1, 3; Paras. [0019]-[0020], [0024]-[0025], [0030], [0032]-[0037]) is configured to keep the first transceiver (RFID tag 46) (Fig. 3; Para. [0028]-[0029], [0038]-[0039]) active at all times (by sending electromagnetic pulses to RFID tag 46) (Para. [0029]) and to automatically enable a manual adjustment command (user’s input causing signal strength of magnetic switch 42 to change depending on how much the user depresses the trigger) (Figs. 2-3; Para. [0034]) when it detects the third transceiver (RFID reader 20) (Fig. 3; Paras. [0020], [0024], [0029], [0031]) via the first transceiver (RFID tag 46) (Fig. 3; Para. [0028]-[0029], [0038]-[0039]), said manual adjustment command being configured to send signals (signals generated due to user’s input causing signal strength of magnetic switch 42 to change depending on how much the user depresses the trigger) (Figs. 2-3; Para. [0034]), following manipulation by a tool user (user’s depressing of the trigger) (Figs. 2-3; Para. [0034]), to the electronic control and command unit (controller in power pack and/or motor controller 16) (Figs. 1, 3; Paras. [0019]-[0020], [0024]-[0025], [0030], [0032]-[0037]), which, in response to such signals, adjusts the rotational speed of a motor shaft (Para. [0034]) or the torque delivered by the motor tool.
Regarding claim 8, Savage in view of Heinzelmann teaches the landscaping apparatus according to claim 1 (see above). Furthermore, Savage discloses an apparatus wherein after receiving an activation signal, sent via a remote device or via a user interface element placed on the tool itself, the electronic control and command unit (controller in power pack and/or motor controller 16) (Figs. 1, 3; Paras. [0019]-[0020], [0024]-[0025], [0030], [0032]-[0037]) is configured to activate (by sending electromagnetic pulses to RFID tag 46) (Para. [0029]) the first transceiver (RFID tag 46) (Fig. 3; Para. [0028]-[0029], [0038]-[0039]) and to cyclically send the wireless signal containing the identification code (Paras. [0028]-[0029], [0044], [0049]) of the second transceiver (wireless transceiver 40) (Fig. 3; Para. [0027], [0029], [0031]) via the first transceiver (RFID tag 46) (Fig. 3; Para. [0028]-[0029], [0038]-[0039]) itself.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. Pat. No. 10,798,540 to Ohgishi relates to a digital camera and smartphone that utilize both Bluetooth (or Bluetooth Low Energy) and Wi-Fi protocols to establish a connection and receive data and commands between the devices. U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 9,805,183 to Narasimha et al. relates to a method of utilizing radio frequency identification tags to display messages and notifications on peripheral devices and allow an RFID tag to initiate a Bluetooth or Wi-Fi connection. Canadian Pat. Pub. No. CA 3 142 233 to Van Tassel et al. relates to a system and method for utilizing radio frequency identification tags to display messages and notifications on peripheral devices and establish a Bluetooth or Wi-Fi connection.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAUDE J BROWN whose telephone number is (571)270-5924. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8AM-5PM.
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, Joseph M. Rocca can be reached at (571) 272-8971. 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.
/CLAUDE J BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights