+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 . This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 6/30/2026 in which claims 1-18 are pending, claim 18 is new and claims 1, 5-8, 10-12, and 17 are currently amended.
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 1-5, 8, 10, 13, 14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Furusawa et al. (U.S. Patent 9,545,699), herein referred to as Furusawa.
In regards to claim 1, Furusawa discloses a machine tool device, comprising: a clamping unit (clamp head 124) configured to fix a tool (10); a protective cover (front housing 101) which at least partly surrounds a tool holder region for the tool; and an actuation unit (cam lever 151) configured to actuate the clamping unit (124), wherein the actuation unit (150) has an operating element (e.g. rotating part 151/152)configured to be moved at least to some degree along an outer circumference (around the top) of the protective cover (101) for actuation.
In regards to claim 2, Furusawa discloses wherein: the operating element (151/152) is configured to be moved about an operating element rotation axis (center axis, best shown in Figure 5), and a movement of the operating element (151/152) about the operating element rotation axis generates a movement of an actuating element (ball 135) of the clamping unit which runs at least essentially parallel to the operating element rotation axis (fig. 13).
In regards to claim 3, Furusawa discloses wherein the actuation unit (150) has a ramp-shaped actuating mechanism (locking protrusions 153b).
In regards to claim 4, Furusawa discloses wherein the actuation unit (150) has an actuating mechanism (152) which at least partly surrounds the operating element rotation axis.
In regards to claim 5, Furusawa discloses wherein the clamping unit (124) is configured to be released by an actuation travel of the operating element (151/152) along the protective cover (101) of at least 40 deg. about the operating element rotation axis starting from an end position of the operating element in a fastened state of the clamping unit.
In regards to claim 8, Furusawa discloses wherein the operating element (151/152), viewed in a radial direction, is arranged on a side (top side) of the protective cover (101) facing away from the tool holder region.
In regards to claim 10, Furusawa discloses wherein, in a fastened state of the clamping unit (124), the operating element (151/152) is arranged in a fastened state of the clamping unit on a side of the protective cover (101) facing away from an operating side (top side).
In regards to claim 13, Furusawa discloses machine tool comprising the machine tool device according to claim 1 (oscillating tool).
In regards to claim 14, Furusawa discloses system, comprising: a tool (blade 10), and the machine tool according to claim 13 (oscillating tool).
In regards to claim 18, Furusawa discloses wherein the operating element (151/152) rotation axis is spaced apart from the actuating element (ball 135).
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 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furusawa et al. (U.S. Patent 9,545,699), herein referred to as Furusawa.
In regards to claims 5, 6 and 17, Furusawa does not expressly disclose that the actuation travel is at least 40 degrees and or a maximum of 75 degrees. However, the angular travel of Furusawa’s operating lever is a result effective variable because the selected travel determines the available axial displacement, mechanical advantage, operating clearance, and manipulation required to release the clamping unit. It would have been obvious to optimize the lever travel within the claimed range of 40 to 75 degrees through routine experimentation to provide sufficient release displacement while limiting the required manipulation and clearance of the lever.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furusawa et al. (U.S. Patent 9,545,699), herein referred to as Furusawa.
In regards to claim 7, Furusawa discloses rotational travel of the lever 151 and ball holding member 131 before ball 135 disengages from engagement projection 126 and releases the clamp shaft 123. Furusawa does not expressly disclose that this non-releasing portion of the actuation travel is at least 20 degrees. However, it would have been obvious to configured at least 20 degrees of Furusawa’s actuation travel as idel travel during which ball 135 remains in its clamped position and does not release clamp shaft 123. The amount of idle travel constitutes a results effective variable that would have been routinely optimized to prevent premature or inadvertent release of the tool while permitting intentional continued movement of lever 151 to actuate the clamping unit. Such a modification would have predictably provided a safety margin between initial movement of the operating element and release of the tool.
Claims 9, 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furusawa et al. (U.S. Patent 9,545,699), herein referred to as Furusawa in view of Bernardi et al. (U.S. Patent 10,011,009). .
In regards to claim 11 and 12, Furusawa discloses wherein the protective cover has at least one upper part of the protective cover but does not disclose one lower part of the protective cover, which is arranged rotatably relative to the upper part of the protective cover about a protective cover rotation axis. Attention is directed to the Bernardi oscillating power tool having a guide/protective member 30 having an attachment portion 34 and a guide portion 32 movably attached thereto, wherein the guide portion 32 including arms 74, 76 and leading-edge potion 38, pivots about pivot acle 78 between the retracted position of Fig. 5D and the extended position for Fig. 5E. The guide stabilizes the tool and helps produce a straight cut when using the oscillating blade. It would have been obvious to modify Furusawa’s protective cover according to Bernardi to include such a pivotable lower guide to stabilize the blade during cutting, and permitting the portion to be retracted when not required and extended to guide and protect the work area during operation. As illustrated in Figure 5D, pivot axle 78 defines a rotation axis spaced from and parallel to the rotation axis of Furusawa’s operating element 150/152.
In regards to claim 9, the modified device of Furusawa discloses a securing unit (locking projections 153b/ locking parts 102b/103b and spring 155) to block the actuation unit (151/152; from rotating) when the protective cover (as modified by Bernardi) is a least partly open (projections block rotation regardless of position of the cover).
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furusawa et al. (U.S. Patent 9,545,699), herein referred to as Furusawa.
In regards to claim 15-16, Furusawa discloses wherein the machine tool device is a hand-held saw device but exemplifies the device as an electric oscillating tool. Furusawa further expressly teaches that its invention may be applied to other power tools in which the tool accessory rotates, including circular saws (see col, 17, lines 39-42). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to apply Furusawa’s discloses tool clamping and actuating arrangement to a handheld circular saw, as expressly suggested by Furusawa to provide simplified tool free attachment and removal of the circular saw blade.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-18 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 LAURA M LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-8339. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a.m.- 5p.m..
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.
/LAURA M LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights