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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following claim limitations are not identified in the specification with a corresponding reference number:
First mounting aperture
First knob
First recess
Workpiece support portion
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "second workpiece support surface" in lines 1-2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1, 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vallone (US 2004/0154450 A1) in view of Chang (US 2008/0022824 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Vallone teaches a jig (Vallone; Figs. 1-9) for supporting a piece of crown molding (Vallone; Figs. 6-9; 302) to be cut by a miter saw (Vallone; Figs. 2-3 and 8-9; 200) having a vertical fence (Vallone; Figs. 2-9; 202) having a first mounting aperture (Vallone; Figs. 2-3 and 8; 207) through the vertical fence, the jig comprising:
a workpiece support fence (Vallone; Figs. 1-9; 30 and 31) having a first wall (Vallone; Figs. 6-7; 46) having a first workpiece support surface (Vallone; Figs. 6; 44) and a second wall (Vallone; Figs. 6; 42) extending forward from the first wall;
a workpiece support fence mounting arrangement (Vallone; Figs. 1-9; 32) comprising:
a back plate (Vallone; Figs. 1-9; 32) configured to attach the workpiece support fence to the miter saw, the back plate having a first vertical slot (Vallone; Figs. 1-2; 82), the back plate having a front side (Vallone; Fig. 1; 68) facing the workpiece support fence in an assembled state and an opposite rear side (Vallone; Fig. 1; 70) facing away from the workpiece support fence in the assembled state, the rear side facing the vertical fence when mounted to the miter saw (Vallone; Fig. 3; 70 and 202);
a first connector (Vallone; Figs. 1 and 3; 34) attachable to the back plate within the first vertical slot securing the workpiece support fence to the back plate for vertically adjustably positioning the workpiece support fence relative to the back plate (Vallone; P. 0020, 0022 and 0027).
Vallone does not teach a first horizontal slot and a second connector extending rearward from the rear side of the back plate for extending through the first mounting aperture in the vertical fence, the second connector adjustably positionable within the first horizontal slot to allow for adjusting the horizontal position of the back plate relative to the vertical fence of the miter saw when mounted thereto.
Chang teaches a plate (Chang; Figs. 1-6; 30) comprising a first horizontal slot (Chang; Figs. 3 and 5; 32) and a connector (Chang; Figs. 1-6; 23) extending rearward from the rear side of the plate (Chang; Figs. 1-6; 30) for extending through a mounting aperture (Chang; Fig. 2; 24) in the vertical fence (Chang; Figs. 1-6; 20), the connector adjustably positionable within the horizontal slot to allow for adjusting the horizontal position of the back plate relative to the vertical fence of the miter saw when mounted thereto (Chang; P. 0021). Such structures allow for the jig to support longer pieces being cut by a miter saw (Chang; P. 0021).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention when building the device from the ground up to modify the backplate taught by Vallone to feature a first horizontal slot and a second connector like the horizontal slot and connector taught by Chang as these structures allow for the jig to support longer pieces to be cut by a miter saw.
Regarding claim 5, Vallone teaches a workpiece support fence mounting arrangement (Vallone; Figs. 1-9; 32) for mounting a workpiece support fence (Vallone; Figs. 1-9; 30 and 31) to a miter saw (Vallone; Figs. 2-3 and 8-9; 200), the workpiece support fence having a first wall (Vallone; Fig. 6; 44) having a first workpiece support surface (Vallone; Figs. 6; 44) and a second wall (Vallone; Figs. 6; 42) extending forward from the first wall, the miter saw having a vertical fence (Vallone; Figs. 2-9; 202) having a first mounting aperture (Vallone; Figs. 2-3 and 8; 207) through the vertical fence, the workpiece support fence mounting arrangement comprising:
a back plate (Vallone; Figs. 1-9; 32) configured to attach the workpiece support fence to the miter saw, the back plate having a first vertical slot (Vallone; Figs. 1-2; 82), the back plate having a front side (Vallone; Fig. 1; 68) facing the workpiece support fence in an assembled state and an opposite rear side (Vallone; Fig. 1; 70) facing away from the workpiece support fence in the assembled state, the rear side facing the vertical fence when mounted to the miter saw (Vallone; Fig. 3; 70 and 202);
a first connector (Vallone; Figs. 1 and 3; 34) attachable to the back plate within the first vertical slot configured for securing the workpiece support fence to the back plate for vertically adjustably positioning the workpiece support fence relative to the back plate (Vallone; P. 0020, 0022 and 0027).
Vallone does not teach a first horizontal slot and a second connector extending rearward from the rear side of the back plate for extending through the first mounting aperture in the vertical fence, the second connector adjustably positionable within the first horizontal slot to allow for adjusting the horizontal position of the back plate relative to the vertical fence of the miter saw when mounted thereto.
Chang teaches a plate (Chang; Figs. 1-6; 30) comprising a first horizontal slot (Chang; Figs. 3 and 5; 32) and a connector (Chang; Figs. 1-6; 23) extending rearward from the rear side of the plate (Chang; Figs. 1-6; 30) for extending through a mounting aperture (Chang; Fig. 2; 24) in the vertical fence (Chang; Figs. 1-6; 20), the connector adjustably positionable within the horizontal slot to allow for adjusting the horizontal position of the back plate relative to the vertical fence of the miter saw when mounted thereto (Chang; P. 0021). Such structures allow for the jig to support longer pieces being cut by a miter saw (Chang; P. 0021).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention when building the device from the ground up to modify the backplate taught by Vallone to feature a first horizontal slot and a second connector like the horizontal slot and connector taught by Chang as these structures allow for the jig to support longer pieces to be cut by a miter saw.
Regarding claim 15, Vallone in view of Chang teaches the jig of claim 1, wherein the second wall (Vallone; Figs. 6; 42) of the workpiece support fence (Vallone; Figs. 1-9; 30 and 31) provides a second workpiece support surface (Vallone; Figs. 6; 42), the second workpiece support surface (Vallone; Figs. 6; 42) being orthogonal to the first workpiece support surface (Vallone; Figs. 6-7; 46).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vallone (US 2004/0154450 A1) in view of Chang (US 2008/0022824 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Liu (US 2015/0102194 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Vallone in view of Chang teaches the jig of claim 1, wherein: the first connector (Vallone; Figs. 1 and 3; 34) is a first bolt (Vallone; Figs. 1 and 3; 75) having a shaft portion (Vallone; Figs. 1 and 3; 76) connected to a head portion (Vallone; Figs. 1 and 3; 78) receivable in the first vertical slot (Vallone; Figs. 1-2; 82), the first vertical slot configured to prevent the head portion of the first bolt from freely rotating relative to the back plate when received in the first vertical slot (Vallone; P. 0025); and the second connector is a second bolt having a shaft portion connected to a head portion receivable in the first horizontal slot, the first horizontal slot configured to prevent the head portion of the second T-bolt from freely rotating relative to the back plate when received in the first horizontal slot.
Vallone in view of Chang does not teach wherein the first connector and second connector are T-bolts and the first horizontal slot configured to prevent the head portion of the second T-bolt from freely rotating relative to the back plate when received in the first horizontal slot.
Liu teaches a slot (Liu; Fig. 5, 33) and a connectors (Liu; Fig. 5; 21), wherein the connectors are T-bolts (Liu; P. 0025) and wherein the slot is configured to prevent the head portion of the T-bolt from freely rotating relative to a plate (Liu; Figs. 2-5; 11, 17 and 19) when received in the slot (Liu; P. 0004). This helps to lock the plate into place and ensure unwanted movement of the plate (Liu; P. 0004 and 0034).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention when building the device from the ground up to modify the device taught by Vallone in view of Chang such that the first and second connectors were T-bolts and such that the first horizontal slot configured to prevent the head portion of the second T-bolt from freely rotating relative to the back plate when received in the first horizontal slot like the connectors and slot taught by Liu as such features allow for a plate to be locked into plate and to ensure unwanted movement.
Regarding claim 3, Vallone in view of Chang and Liu teaches the jig of claim 2, wherein the back plate (Vallone; Figs. 1-9; 32) includes: a back plate body (Vallone; Fig. 1; 68) that defines the first horizontal slot (Chang; Figs. 3 and 5; 32); and a back plate vertical bar (Vallone; Fig. 1; 74) attached to the back plate body, the back plate vertical bar defining the first vertical slot (Vallone; Figs. 1-2; 82).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vallone (US 2004/0154450 A1) in view of Chang (US 2008/0022824 A1) and Liu (US 2015/0102194 A1) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Sasaki et al. (US 5,392,678 A).
Regarding claim 4, Vallone in view of Chang and Liu teaches the jig of claim 2, wherein: the first connector (Vallone; Figs. 1 and 3; 34) includes a first knob (Vallone; Fig. 1; 80) threadedly attached to shaft of the first T-bolt, the first knob being located in a first recess in the first workpiece support surface of the first wall of the workpiece support fence such that the first knob does not protrude forward beyond the first workpiece support surface.
Vallone in view of Chang and Liu does not teach the first knob being located in a first recess in the first workpiece support surface of the first wall of the workpiece support fence such that the first knob does not protrude forward beyond the first workpiece support surface.
Sasaki teaches a knob (Sasaki; Fig. 7; 48) located in a recess (Sasaki; Fig. 7; 47) such that the knob does not protrude beyond the surface (Sasaki; Fig. 7; 47 and 48). Such an arrangement allows the knob to be out of the way during use to prevent unwanted operation of the knob.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention when building the device from the ground up to modify the device taught by Vallone in view of Chang to include a recess for a knob like that taught by Sasaki as such an arrangement allows the knob to be out of the way during use to prevent unwanted operation of the knob
Claims 6-9, 11 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagyzalancy (US 2007/0137450 A1) in view of Vallone (US 2004/0154450 A1), Panko (US 7,726,224 B1) and Courtney (US 10,105,865 B2).
Regarding claim 6, Nagyzalancy teaches a jig (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 6-13) for supporting a piece of crown molding (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 8-13; 10) to be cut by a miter saw (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 5 and 12-13; 30) having a vertical fence (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 5 and 12-13; 40), the jig comprising:
a workpiece support fence portion (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 6-13; 100) having a first wall (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 6-7; 104) having a first workpiece support surface (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 6-7; 116) and a second wall (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 6-7; 108) extending forward from the first wall;
a first workpiece support block assembly (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 6-13; 106) attached to the second wall (Nagyzalancy; P. 0046), the workpiece support block assembly configurable relative to the workpiece support fence portion to selectively provide:
in a first configuration, a third workpiece support surface (Nagyzalancy; Fig. 7; 118) that extends at a first angle relative to the first workpiece support surface, as can be seen in Fig. 7 of Nagyzalancy the third workpiece support surface would be parallel with the first; and
in a second configuration, as the workpiece support block assembly of Nagyzalancy can be moved a position where the block assembly is closer to the first wall would be a second configuration, a fourth workpiece support surface (Nagyzalancy; Fig. 7; 118) that extends at a second angle relative to the first workpiece support surface, as can be seen in Fig. 7 of Nagyzalancy the fourth workpiece support surface would be parallel with the first.
Nagyzalancy does not teach the vertical fence having a first mounting aperture through the vertical fence, a first workpiece support block assembly removably attachable to the second wall, wherein the workpiece support block assembly in a first configuration the first angle is non-perpendicular and non-parallel orientation relative to the first workpiece support surface, and in a second configuration the second angle is non-perpendicular and non-parallel relative to the first workpiece support surface, the second angle is different than the first angle.
Vallone teaches a vertical fence (Vallone; Figs. 2-9; 202) having a first mounting aperture (Vallone; Figs. 2-3 and 8; 207) through the vertical fence. This allows for a block assembly to be securely attached to the vertical fence (Vallone; P. 0027).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention when building the device from the ground up to modify the miter saw taught by Nagyzalancy such that the vertical fence included a first mounting aperture like that taught by Vallone as such structure allows for a block assembly to be securely attached to the vertical fence.
Panko teaches a workpiece support block assembly (Panko; Figs. 1-2; 12) removably attachable (Col. 2; lines 52-57) to a second wall (Panko; Fig. 3; 44). This allows for the assembly to be removed when not needed for cutting.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention when building the device from the ground up to modify the workpiece support fence portion taught by Nagyzalancy to allow the workpiece support block assembly taught by Nagyzalancy to be removable like the assembly taught by Panko as it is well within the ordinary skill of a working in the art to design a component of a device to be removable as long as there is a reason it would be desirable to do so (see MPEP 2144.04(V)(C)). Here it would allow for the assembly to be removed when not needed but may also be desirable to allow replacement for a damaged component.
Courtney teaches a workpiece support block assembly (Courtney; Figs. 1-8; 10) wherein the workpiece support block assembly in a first configuration (Courtney; Fig. 2; 10), a third workpiece support surface (Courtney; Fig. 2; 12) that extends at a first angle (see annotated image of Fig. 2 (Courtney) below) is non-perpendicular and non-parallel orientation relative to the first workpiece support surface (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 2 (Courtney) below), and in a second configuration, a fourth workpiece support surface (Courtney; Fig. 3; 12) that extends at the second angle (see annotated image of Fig. 3 (Courtney) below) is non-perpendicular and non-parallel relative to the first workpiece support surface (see annotated image of Fig. 3 (Courtney) below), the second angle is different than the first angle (see annotated images 1 of Fig. 2 and 1 of Fig. 3 (Courtney) below). This allows for the cutting angle for the crown molding to be desirably adjusted (Courtney; Col. 4; line 18-36).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention when building the device from the ground up to modify the workpiece support block assembly taught by Nagyzalancy such that in a first configuration, a third workpiece support surface that extends at a first angle is non-perpendicular and non-parallel orientation relative to the first workpiece support surface, and in a second configuration, a fourth workpiece support surface that extends at the second angle is non-perpendicular and non-parallel relative to the first workpiece support surface, the second angle is different than the first angle like that taught by Courtney as such a workpiece support block assembly allows for the cutting angle for the crown molding to be desirably adjusted.
PNG
media_image1.png
421
632
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
407
648
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Nagyzalancy in view of Vallone, Panko and Courtney teaches the jig of claim 6, wherein: the first workpiece support block assembly (Courtney; Figs. 1-8; 10) includes: a first body (Courtney; Fig. 2; 12) movably attachable to the second wall of the workpiece support fence portion, the first body providing the third workpiece support surface when in the first configuration (see annotated image of Fig. 2 (Courtney) above); and a second body (Courtney; Fig. 3; 13) removably attachable to the first body (Col. 3 line 63 – Col. 4 line 7), the second body attached to the first body in the second configuration (Courtney; Fig. 3; 12 and 13), the second body providing the fourth workpiece support surface in the second configuration (see annotated image of Fig. 3 (Courtney) above).
Regarding claim 8, Nagyzalancy in view of Vallone, Panko and Courtney teaches the jig of claim 7, wherein the second body (Courtney; Fig. 3; 13) attaches to the third workpiece support surface of the first body (Courtney; Fig. 3; 12) when in the second configuration (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 3 (Courtney) above).
Regarding claim 9, Nagyzalancy in view of Vallone, Panko and Courtney teaches the jig of claim 6, wherein: in the first configuration (see annotated image of Fig. 2 (Courtney) above), the third workpiece support surface faces the first workpiece support surface (see annotated image of Fig. 2 (Courtney) above); in the second configuration (see annotated image of Fig. 3 (Courtney) above), the fourth workpiece support surface faces the first workpiece support surface (see annotated image of Fig. 3 (Courtney) above).
Regarding claim 11, Nagyzalancy in view of Vallone, Panko and Courtney teaches the jig of claim 7, wherein: the first workpiece support block assembly (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 6-13; 106) is adjustably positionable relative to the first wall (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 6-7; 104) such that a position of the workpiece support block relative to the first wall is adjustable along an adjustment axis being generally perpendicular to the first workpiece support surface (Nagyzalancy; Fig. 7; 116 and 130; P. 0048); further including a connector (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 6-13; 132) for selectively securing the first body (Courtney; Fig. 3; 12) to the second wall (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 6-7; 108), the second wall having a slot (Nagyzalancy; Fig. 7; 130) extending along the adjustment axis, the connector (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 6-13; 132) having a head portion received in the slot to secure the first workpiece support block to the second wall (Nagyzalancy; P. 0048).
Regarding claim 13, Nagyzalancy in view of Vallone, Panko and Courtney teaches the jig of claim 6, further comprising a second workpiece support block (Courtney; Fig. 4) having a fifth workpiece support surface (Courtney; Fig. 4; 12), when the second workpiece support block is attached to the second wall (Nagyzalancy; P. 0046), the fifth workpiece support surface extends at a third angle relative to the first workpiece support surface (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 4 (Courtney) below), the third angle being different than the first and second angles (see annotated images (Courtney) 1 of Fig. 2 and 1 of Fig. 3 above and image 1 of Fig. 4 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
423
654
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Nagyzalancy in view of Vallone, Panko and Courtney teaches the jig of claim 13, wherein the third angle is such that the fifth workpiece support surface is more parallel to the first workpiece support surface than the third or fourth workpiece support surfaces when assembled (see annotated images (Courtney) 1 of Fig. 2, 1 of Fig. 3 and 1 of Fig. 4 above).
Claims 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagyzalancy (US 2007/0137450 A1) in view of Vallone (US 2004/0154450 A1), Panko (US 7,726,224 B1) and Courtney (US 10,105,865 B2) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Fontana (US 2022/0118641 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Nagyzalancy in view of Vallone, Panko and Courtney teaches the jig of claim 7, wherein the third workpiece support surface (see annotated image of Fig. 3 (Courtney) above) and second body (Courtney; Fig. 3; 13) have a bolt (Courtney; Fig. 1; 15 and 16) and slot (Courtney; Fig. 1; 19 and 20) connection for selectively attaching the first body (Courtney; Fig. 2; 12) to the second body in the second configuration (Courtney; Fig. 1).
Nagyzalancy in view of Vallone, Panko and Courtney does not teach wherein the third workpiece support surface and second body have a cooperating slot and tab connection for selectively attaching the first body to the second body in the second configuration.
Fontana teaches a body (Fontana; Fig. 2; 32) and another body (Fontana; Fig. 2; 34) that have a cooperating slot (Fontana; Figs. 2-3; 50) and tab (Fontana; Figs. 2-3; 40) connection for selectively attaching the body to another body (Fontana; Fig. 3; 32 and 34). This allows for the body to be easily removed from the other body (Fontana; P. 0083).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention when building the device from the ground up to modify the connection type between the first and second body taught by Nagyzalancy in view of Vallone, Panko and Courtney from a bolt and slot connection to a slot and tab connection like that taught by Fontana as such a connection type allows for the body to be easily removed from the other body.
Regarding claim 12, Nagyzalancy in view of Vallone, Panko and Courtney teaches the jig of claim 7, wherein a bottom side of the first body (see annotated image of Fig. 2 (Courtney) above) and a second workpiece support surface (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 6-7; 108) have cooperating slots (Nagyzalancy; Fig. 7; 130) and bolts (Nagyzalancy; Figs. 6-13; 132) for aligning the first body relative to the workpiece support fence portion and permitting sliding of the first body relative to the workpiece support fence portion along an adjustment axis being orthogonal to the first workpiece support surface (Nagyzalancy; P. 0048).
Nagyzalancy in view of Vallone, Panko and Courtney does not teach a slot and rib connection.
Fontana teaches a body (Fontana; Fig. 2; 32) and another body (Fontana; Fig. 2; 34) that have a cooperating slot (Fontana; Figs. 2-3; 50) and rib (Fontana; Figs. 2-3; 40) connection for selectively attaching the body to another body (Fontana; Fig. 3; 32 and 34) to permit sliding. This allows for the body to be easily removed from the other body (Fontana; P. 0083).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention when building the device from the ground up to modify the connection type between the first and second body taught by Nagyzalancy in view of Vallone, Panko and Courtney from a bolt and slot connection to a slot and rib connection like that taught by Fontana as such a connection type allows for the body to be easily removed from the other body.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert D Cornett whose telephone number is (571) 270-0182. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 am-5:30 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, 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.
/ROBERT D CORNETT/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 /BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights