DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on December 19, 2025 has been entered. Claims 21-40 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on September 26, 2025. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 102(a)(1) rejections of claims 21-23, 27-30, and 34 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
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.
Claims 21-23, 27-30, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nishikawa et al. (WO 2015025677 A1), hereinafter Nishikawa.
Regarding claim 21, Nishikawa discloses a power tool (1 in Figure 1) comprising:
a power tool housing (2 in Figures 1 and 5);
a motor (3 in Figure 5) within the power tool housing (2) (apparent from Figure 5), the motor (3) including a rotor (3a in Figure 5) and a stator (3c in Figure 5), the rotor (3a) coupled to a motor shaft (3e in Figure 5) to produce a rotational output (Page 5 lines 34-36 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1);
an inertial measurement unit (IMU) (56 in Figure 8) within the power tool housing (2) (clear when Page 8 lines 28-30 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1 and Figure 6 are considered together), the IMU (56) configured to:
sense a free fall of the power tool (1) (Page 8 lines 30-33 and Page 10 lines 34-39 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1), and
generate an output signal related to the sensed free fall (inherent because 56 is an acceleration sensor which communicates with control unit 51 as stated in Page 8 lines 30-33 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1); and
a controller (51 in Figure 8) including a processor (the “CPU” or “processing program” described in Page 8 lines 1-4 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1) and a memory (the “ROM” or “RAM” described in Page 8 lines 1-4 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1), the controller (51) configured to:
receive the output signal from the IMU (56) (Page 8 lines 30-33 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1),
detect the free fall of the power tool (1) based on the output signal from the IMU (56) (Page 8 lines 30-33 and Page 10 lines 34-39 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1), and
disable, in response to detecting the free fall of the power tool (1), the motor (3) without collecting data related to a timing at which the power tool (1) hits an external object or a distance that the power tool (1) has fallen (Page 8 lines 30-33 and Page 10 lines 34-39 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1, collecting timing/distance data is not disclosed in any part of the specification of Nishikawa and an acceleration sensor such as 56 of Nishikawa is well known in the art to collect only acceleration data and not collect time/distance data).
Regarding claim 22, Nishikawa discloses that the power tool (1) is a router (because movement of power tool 1 guides, i.e. routes, movement of polisher main body 200, as is clear from Figure 1 and Page 4 lines 18-20 and Page 3 lines 53-60 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1).
Regarding claim 23, Nishikawa discloses that the power tool (1) further comprises:
at least one semiconductor switch (the “six FETs” described in Page 7 lines 49-51 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1; or FET 77 in Figure 8; or FET 78 in Figure 8); and
a plurality of motor coils (stator coils 3d in Figure 5).
Regarding claim 27, Nishikawa discloses:
a trigger switch (13 in Figure 5);
wherein the controller (51) is further configured to, responsive to detecting a switch recycle of the trigger switch (13), re-enable operation of the motor (3) (because Nishikawa discloses in Page 5 lines 54-58, Page 8 lines 13-15, and Page 8 line 52 – Page 9 line 12 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1 that operation of motor 3 is enabled/re-enabled whenever trigger 13a is pulled to actuate trigger switch 13).
Regarding claim 28, Nishikawa discloses a method for controlling a power tool (1 in Figure 1) during a free fall of the power tool (1) (Page 2 lines 26-29, Page 8 lines 30-33, and Page 10 lines 34-39 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1), the method comprising:
sensing, using an inertial measurement unit (IMU) (56 in Figure 8), the free fall of the power tool (1) (Page 8 lines 30-33 and Page 10 lines 34-39 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1);
generating, using the IMU (56), an output signal related to the free fall of the power tool (1) (inherent because 56 is an acceleration sensor which communicates with control unit 51 as stated in Page 8 lines 30-33 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1);
detecting the free fall of the power tool (1) based on the output signal from the IMU (56) (Page 8 lines 30-33 and Page 10 lines 34-39 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1); and
disabling, in response to detecting the free fall of the power tool (1), a motor (3 in Figure 5) without collecting data related to a timing at which the power tool (1) hits an external object or a distance that the power tool (1) has fallen (Page 8 lines 30-33 and Page 10 lines 34-39 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1, collecting timing/distance data is not disclosed in any part of the specification of Nishikawa and an acceleration sensor such as 56 of Nishikawa is well known in the art to collect only acceleration data and not collect time/distance data).
Regarding claim 29, Nishikawa discloses that the power tool (1) is a router (because movement of power tool 1 guides, i.e. routes, movement of polisher main body 200, as is clear from Figure 1 and Page 4 lines 18-20 and Page 3 lines 53-60 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1).
Regarding claim 30, Nishikawa discloses that the power tool (1) includes at least one semiconductor switch (the “six FETs” described in Page 7 lines 49-51 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1; or FET 77 in Figure 8; or FET 78 in Figure 8) and a plurality of motor coils (stator coils 3d in Figure 5).
Regarding claim 34, Nishikawa discloses:
detecting a switch recycle of a trigger switch (13 in Figure 5) (Page 8 lines 13-15 and 53-56 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1); and
re-enable operation of the motor (3) responsive to detecting the switch recycle of the trigger switch (13) (because Nishikawa discloses in Page 5 lines 54-58, Page 8 lines 13-15, and Page 8 line 52 – Page 9 line 12 of Machine Translation of WO 2015025677 A1 that operation of motor 3 is enabled/re-enabled whenever trigger 13a is pulled to actuate trigger switch 13).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24-26 and 31-33 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 35-40 are allowed.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 102(a)(1) rejections of claims 21-23, 27-30, and 34 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s argument that:
“Nishikawa does not disclose each and every feature of independent claim 21. Specifically, Nishikawa fails to disclose a controller configured to "disable...the motor without collecting data related to a timing at which the power tool hits an external object or a distance that the power tool has fallen."
…
Therefore, because Nishikawa neither expressly nor inherently discloses a controller configured to disable the motor without collecting any data related to impact timing, and the Examiner has not provided any factual basis or technical reasoning to support inherency, Nishikawa does not disclose each and every limitation of independent claim 21.”,
the examiner first asserts that detecting an impact does not necessarily require collecting data related to impact timing as asserted by the Applicant. Impact can also be detected strictly from the acceleration values measured by the acceleration sensor 56 of Nishikawa because an extremely and unusually high acceleration occurs at the moment of impact and a zero acceleration occurs a few seconds after the impact. Thus, the acceleration sensor 56 of Nishikawa can positively determine that an impact has occurred when it measures an extremely and unusually high acceleration that occurs at the moment of impact or when it measures a zero acceleration that occurs a few seconds after the impact. Therefore, contrary to Applicant’s assertion, acceleration sensor 56 of Nishikawa does not necessarily need to collect time data to determine that an impact has occurred, and can determine occurrence of an impact without any time data. Secondly, the examiner asserts that since Nishikawa explicitly states that 56 is an acceleration sensor, 56 of Nishikawa only measures acceleration, as acceleration sensors are well known in the art to only measure acceleration and not measure time/distance.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 TANZIM IMAM whose telephone number is (571)272-2216. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00AM - 4:00PM.
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, Shelley Self can be reached at 571-272-4524. 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.
/TANZIM IMAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731