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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the first end and second end of claim 16 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 17-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Larsen et al. (US 2024/0399608 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Larsen discloses a chainsaw (Larsen; Figs. 1A-4; 10) comprising:
a housing (Larsen; Figs. 1A-2; 12);
a bar (Larsen; Figs. 1A-2 and 4; 18) extending from the housing and defining a track (Larsen; Fig. 4; 18);
a chain (Larsen; Figs. 1A-2 and 4; 16) movable relative to the track;
an electric power source (Larsen; Fig. 1A; 20);
a motor (Larsen; Fig. 1A; 22) configured to receive power from the electric power source (Larsen; P. 0102) and drive an output shaft (Larsen; Figs. 6A-6B and 7D; 30);
a sprocket (Larsen; Figs. 3A and 6A-7D; 32) operably coupled to the chain and configured to drive the chain on the track (Larsen; Fig. 1A; 16 and 18), wherein the sprocket comprises a receiving area (Larsen; Figs. 7A and 7D; 38a) defining a drive surface (Larsen; Figs. 7A and 7D; 38a) on a radially inner surface of the receiving area;
a clutch (Larsen; Figs. 3A-3B and 6A-7D; 34) disposed at least partially in the receiving area of the sprocket (Larsen; Figs. 7A; 38a), wherein the clutch comprises:
a first centrifugal weight (Larsen; Figs. 7A and 7D; 68a) including a first drive feature (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7D (Larsen) below) on a radially outer surface, wherein the first drive feature is configured to selectively interface with the drive surface of the sprocket when the output shaft is rotating above a threshold rotational speed (Larsen; P. 0007 and 0106); and
a second centrifugal weight (Larsen; Figs. 7A and 7D; 68b) including a second drive feature (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7D (Larsen) below) on a radially outer surface, wherein the second drive feature is configured to selectively interface with the drive surface of the sprocket when the output shaft is rotating above the threshold rotational speed (Larsen; P. 0007 and 0106), wherein the first and second centrifugal weights translate in a radial direction between an inner position and an outer position (Larsen; P. 0106),
wherein the first and second centrifugal weights (Larsen; Figs. 7A and 7D; 68a and 68b) are biased to the inner position by a spring (Larsen; Fig. 7A; 70a and 70b), and wherein the first and second centrifugal weights are configured to translate towards the outer position when the output shaft is driven by the motor to speeds above the threshold rotational speed (Larsen; P. 0007 and 0106).
PNG
media_image1.png
424
572
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18, Larsen discloses the chainsaw of claim 17, wherein the clutch (Larsen; Figs. 3A-3B and 6A-7D; 34) further comprises a hub (Larson; Fig. 7A; 72) including a first tracking feature (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7C (Larsen) below) extending in a direction oriented parallel with the radial direction, wherein the first and second centrifugal weights (Larsen; Figs. 7A and 7D; 68a and 68b) each comprise a second tracking feature (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7C (Larsen) below) complementary to the first tracking feature, and wherein the first and second centrifugal weights are guided by an interface formed between the first and second tracking features (Larsen; P. 0106).
PNG
media_image2.png
388
502
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, Larsen discloses the chainsaw of claim 17, wherein the clutch (Larsen; Figs. 3A-3B and 6A-7D; 34) is configured to provide an indication to a user that the motor is overloaded (Larsen; P. 0117 and 0128), and wherein the indication occurs while the motor is driving the clutch (Larsen; P. 0128).
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 13, 15-16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsen (US 2024/0399608 A1) in view of Spase (GB 756,648 A).
Regarding claim 13, Larsen teaches a clutch (Larsen; Figs. 3A-3B and 6A-7D; 34) for an electric chainsaw (Larsen; Figs. 1A-4; 10), the clutch comprising:
a hub (Larson; Figs. 3A and 6A-7D; 72) comprising:
a major surface (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 6A (Larsen) below) defining a central opening (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 6A (Larsen) below) configured to receive an output shaft (Larsen; Figs. 6A-6B and 7D; 30) of a motor (Larsen; Fig. 1A; 22) and key the hub to the output shaft (Larsen; Fig. 7A; 30);
a first tracking feature (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7C (Larsen) above) extending across the major surface;
a first centrifugal weight (Larsen; Figs. 7A and 7D; 68a) movable in a radial direction relative to the central opening (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7C (Larsen) above), the first centrifugal weight comprising:
a body (Larsen; Figs. 7A and 7D; 68a) defining a second tracking feature (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7C (Larsen) above) configured to interface with the first tracking feature to guide movement of the first centrifugal weight relative to the hub in the radial direction (Larsen; P. 0106); and
a drive feature (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7D (Larsen) above) configured to interface with a driven surface (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 6A (Larsen) below) of a sprocket (Larsen; Figs. 3A and 6A-7D; 32; P. 0007) of the electric chainsaw;
a second centrifugal weight (Larsen; Figs. 7A and 7D; 68b) movable in a radial direction relative to the central axis, the second centrifugal weight comprising:
a body (Larsen; Figs. 7A and 7D; 68b) defining the second tracking feature (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7C (Larsen) above) configured to interface with the first tracking feature to guide movement of the second centrifugal weight relative to the hub in the radial direction (Larsen; P. 0106); and
a drive feature (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7D (Larsen) above) configured to interface with a driven surface (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 6A (Larsen) below) of a sprocket (Larsen; Figs. 3A and 6A-7D; 32; P. 0007) of the electric chainsaw;
wherein the first and second centrifugal weights are each configured to selectively move from a disengaged position to a drive position when hub is rotated about the central axis above a threshold rotational speed (Larsen; P. 0007 and 0106).
Larsen does not teach a first spring compressed between the rim of the hub and the first centrifugal weight to bias the first centrifugal weight in a radial direction towards the central axis; and a second spring compressed between the rim of the hub and the second centrifugal weight to bias the second centrifugal weight in a radial direction towards the central axis,
Spase teaches a clutch (Spase; Figs. 3-4) comprising a hub (Spase; Fig. 3; 23) with a rim, a plurality of centrifugal weights (Spase; Fig. 3; 30), and a plurality of springs (Spase; Fig. 3; 31), wherein the springs are compressed between the rim of the hub and the centrifugal weights to bias the centrifugal weight in a radial direction towards the central axis (Spase; Fig. 3; 23, 30, and 31).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the filing date of the instant invention, when building the device from the ground up, to modify the hub taught by Larsen to have a rim and the springs taught by Larsen to be compressed between the rim of the hub and centrifugal weights like the springs taught by Spase instead of the springs held between the centrifugal weights taught by Larsen as the configuration taught by Spase is a reversal of parts. Here the springs of Larsen acts in tension between the weights while the springs of Spase are in compression, such a modification would not change the function of the spring but would require some structural modification to allow for compression of the spring instead of tension. According to In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955) (see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(A)) a mere reversal of moment would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. As Spase shows that it is known in the art to have a compressed spring between a hub and a weight in a clutch such a modification is thus obvious over the prior art.
PNG
media_image3.png
327
563
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Larsen in view of Spase teaches the clutch of claim 13, wherein the body (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7A (Larsen) below) of the first centrifugal weight (Larsen; Figs. 7D; 68a) comprises a first portion and a second portion (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7A (Larsen) below) forming a stepped outer surface of the first centrifugal weight, wherein the drive feature is disposed on the second portion (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7A (Larsen) below), and wherein the spring is compressed between the hub and the first portion (Spase; Fig. 3; 23, 30, and 31).
PNG
media_image4.png
397
614
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Larsen in view of Spase teaches the clutch of claim 13, wherein the first tracking feature (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7C (Larsen) above) extends continuously between a first end and a second end (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7C (Larsen) above).
Larsen in view of Spase does not teach wherein the first and second ends of the first tracking feature are contiguous with the rim. However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the filing date of the instant invention, when building the device from the ground up, to modify the first tracking features and rim taught by Larsen in view of Spase such that the first and second ends were contiguous with the rim as it is well known in the art for a worker in the art to shape a structure however may be desirable or expedient at the time (see MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A)).
Regarding claim 19, Larsen teaches the chainsaw of claim 18, wherein the first centrifugal weight (Larsen; Figs. 7A and 7D; 68a) comprises a first portion (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7A (Larsen) above) and a second portion (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7A (Larsen) above) forming a stepped outer surface of the first centrifugal weight, and wherein the drive feature is disposed on the second portion (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7A (Larsen) above).
Larsen does not teach wherein the spring is compressed between the hub and the first portion of the first centrifugal weight.
Spase teaches a clutch (Spase; Figs. 3-4) comprising a hub (Spase; Fig. 3; 23), a centrifugal weight (Spase; Fig. 3; 30) with a portion, the portion being the area where the spring contacts the weight, and a spring (Spase; Fig. 3; 31), wherein the spring is compressed between the hub and a portion of the centrifugal weight (Spase; Fig. 3; 23, 30, and 31).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the filing date of the instant invention, when building the device from the ground up, to modify the spring taught by Larsen in view of Eaton to be compressed between the hub and centrifugal weight like the spring taught by Spase instead of the spring held between the centrifugal weights taught by Larsen as the configuration taught by Spase is a reversal of parts. Here the springs of Larsen acts in tension between the weights while the springs of Spase are in compression, such a modification would not change the function of the spring but would require some structural modification to allow for compression of the spring instead of tension. According to In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955) (see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(A)) a mere reversal of moment would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. As Spase shows that it is known in the art to have a compressed spring between a hub and a weight in a clutch such a modification is thus obvious over the prior art.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsen (US 2024/0399608 A1) in view of Spase (GB 756,648 A) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Densow (US 3,970,178 A).
Regarding claim 14, Larsen in view of Spase teaches the clutch of claim 13.
Larsen in view of Spase does not teach wherein the hub further comprises a third tracking feature oriented parallel with the first tracking feature, wherein the first and second centrifugal weights each comprise a fourth tracking feature configured to guide movement of the first and second centrifugal weights relative to the hub in the radial direction.
Densow teaches a hub (Densow; Figs. 5-7; 219) comprising first and third tracking features (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 5 (Densow) below), the third tracking feature oriented parallel with the first tracking feature (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 5 (Densow) below), wherein the first and second centrifugal weights (Densow; Fig. 5; 227 and 229) each comprise a first and a fourth tracking feature (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 5 (Densow) below) configured to guide movement of the first and second centrifugal weights relative to the hub in the radial direction (Densow; Col. 9; lines 12-17). This arrangement provides better alignment of the weights when not extended.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the filing date of the instant invention, when building the device from the ground up, to modify the hub and the first and second centrifugal weights taught by Larsen in view of Spase such that the hub had a third tracking features and the weights had a fourth tracking feature as such an arrangement provides better alignment of the weights when not extended.
PNG
media_image5.png
432
605
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claims 1-5 and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsen (US 2024/0399608 A1) in view of Densow (US 3,970,178 A) and Spase (GB 756,648 A).
Regarding claim 1, Larsen teaches an electric chainsaw (Larsen; Figs. 1A-4; 10) comprising:
a housing (Larsen; Figs. 1A-2; 12);
a bar (Larsen; Figs. 1A-2 and 4; 18) extending from the housing and defining a track (Larsen; Fig. 4; 18);
a chain (Larsen; Figs. 1A-2 and 4; 16) movable relative to the track;
an electric power source (Larsen; Fig. 1A; 20);
a motor (Larsen; Fig. 1A; 22) configured to receive power from the electric power source (Larsen; P. 0102);
a sprocket (Larsen; Figs. 3A and 6A-7D; 32) operably coupled to the chain and configured to drive the chain on the track (Larsen; Fig. 1A; 16 and 18), wherein the sprocket comprises a receiving area (Larsen; Figs. 7A and 7D; 38a) defining a drive surface (Larsen; Figs. 7A and 7D; 38a) on a radially inner surface of the receiving area;
a clutch (Larsen; Figs. 3A-3B and 6A-7D; 34) disposed at least partially in the receiving area of the sprocket,
wherein the clutch comprises:
a hub (Larson; Fig. 7A; 72) defining a central axis (Larsen; Fig. 7A; A), the hub being rotationally keyed to an output shaft (Larsen; Fig. 6A; 58) of the motor;
a centrifugal weight (Larsen; Figs. 7A and 7D; 68a and 68b) disposed on the hub and movable in a radial direction relative to the central axis (Larsen; P. 0106); and
a spring (Larsen; Fig. 7A; 70a and 70b) compressed by the centrifugal weight to bias the centrifugal weight in a radial direction towards the central axis (Larsen; P. 0106);
wherein the centrifugal weight comprises a drive feature (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7D (Larsen) above) on a radially outer surface, and wherein the drive feature is configured to selectively interface with the drive surface of the sprocket when the output shaft is rotating above a threshold rotational speed (Larsen; P. 0007 and 0106).
Larsen does not teach a centrifugal weight disposed between the hub and the sprocket a spring compressed between the hub and the centrifugal weight.
Densow teaches a hub (Densow; Figs. 5-7; 219) with tracking features (Densow; Fig. 5; 221) which allows for a centrifugal weight (Densow; Fig. 5; 227 and 229) to be disposed between the hub and the sprocket (Densow; Fig. 5; 213) which allows secure attachment of the weight and improves alignment of the attached weight (Densow; Col. 9; lines 12-17).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the filing date of the instant invention, when building the device from the ground up, to modify the hub taught by Larsen to have structure similar to that of the hub taught by Densow which allows for a centrifugal weight to be disposed between the hub and the sprocket as such an arrangement allows for secure attachment while providing improved alignment for the attached weight.
Spase teaches a clutch (Spase; Figs. 3-4) comprising a hub (Spase; Fig. 3; 23), a centrifugal weight (Spase; Fig. 3; 30), and a spring (Spase; Fig. 3; 31), wherein the spring is compressed between the hub and the centrifugal weight (Spase; Fig. 3; 23, 30, and 31).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the filing date of the instant invention, when building the device from the ground up, to modify the spring taught by Larsen in view of Densow to be compressed between the hub and centrifugal weight like the spring taught by Spase instead of the spring held between the centrifugal weights taught by Larsen in view of Densow as the configuration taught by Spase is a reversal of parts. Here the springs of Larsen in view of Densow acts in tension between the weights while the springs of Spase are in compression, such a modification would not change the function of the spring but would require some structural modification to allow for compression of the spring instead of tension. According to In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955) (see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(A)) a mere reversal of moment would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. As Spase shows that it is known in the art to have a compressed spring between a hub and a weight in a clutch such a modification is thus obvious over the prior art.
Regarding claim 2, Larsen in view of Densow and Spase teaches the electric chainsaw of claim 1, wherein the centrifugal weight (Larsen; Figs. 3A and 7A; 68a and 68b) comprises a plurality of centrifugal weights (Larsen; Figs. 3A and 7A; 68a and 68b) disposed around the central axis (Larsen; Fig. 7A; A), wherein the hub (Densow; Figs. 5-7; 219) comprises a first and third tracking features (Densow; Fig. 5; 221; see annotated image 1 of Fig. 5 (Densow) above) extending in a direction oriented parallel with the radial direction.
Larsen in view of Densow and Spase as modified does not teach wherein at least two of the plurality of centrifugal weights comprise a second tracking feature complementary to the first tracking feature, and wherein the centrifugal weights are guided by an interface formed between the first and second tracking features.
Densow further teaches two centrifugal weights (Densow; Fig. 5; 227 and 229) that comprise a second and fourth tracking features (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 5 (Densow) above) complementary to the first tracking feature (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 5 (Densow) above), wherein the centrifugal weights are guided by an interface formed between the first and second tracking features (Densow; Col. 9; lines 12-17). This arrangement provides better alignment of the weights when not extended.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the filing date of the instant invention, when building the device from the ground up, to modify at least two of the plurality of centrifugal weights taught by Larsen in view of Densow and Spase such that the weights had a second tracking feature as such an arrangement provides better alignment of the weights when not extended.
Regarding claim 3, Larsen in view of Densow and Spase teaches the electric chainsaw of claim 2, wherein the hub (Densow; Figs. 5-7; 219) further comprises a third tracking (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 5 (Densow) above) feature extending parallel with the first racking feature, wherein the at least two of the plurality of centrifugal weights (Larsen; Figs. 3A and 7A; 68a and 68b) comprise a fourth tracking feature (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 5 (Densow) above) complementary to the third tracking feature, and wherein the centrifugal weights are guided by an interface formed between the third and fourth tracking features (Densow; Col. 9; lines 12-17).
Regarding claim 4, Larsen in view of Densow and Spase teaches the electric chainsaw of claim 3, wherein the first and third tracking features (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 5 (Densow) above) each comprise a rail (Densow; Fig. 5; 221) and the second and fourth tracking features (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 5 (Densow) above) each comprise a cutout section.
Larsen in view of Densow and Spase does not teach the second and fourth tracking features each comprise a groove.
Densow further teaches shoes (Densow; Fig. 5; 207 and 209) that comprises tracking features (see annotated image 2 of Fig. 5 (Densow) below) that comprising grooves that interfaces with other tracking features (see annotated image 2 of Fig. 5 (Densow) below) which comprise rails.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the filing date of the instant invention, when building the device from the ground up, to modify the second and fourth tracking features taught by Larsen in view of Densow and Spase to be a groove like the other tracking features further taught by Densow as it is well known in the art for a worker in the art to shape a structure however may be desirable or expedient at the time (see MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A)). Here, Densow shows two different pairs of sliding structures that use similar sets of rails to help with alignment with two different structures for the complementary elements which perform similar functions, one being a set of grooves and the other being a set of cut out spaces. As such, it would have only required a routine level of skill in the art for a worker in the art to shape the second and fourth tracking features as grooves or as any other desirable shape.
PNG
media_image6.png
321
407
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Larsen in view of Densow and Spase teaches the electric chainsaw of claim 1, wherein the centrifugal weight is disengaged from the sprocket when the output shaft is rotating below the threshold rotational speed (Larson; P. 0111), and wherein the clutch is configured to rotate without driving the sprocket when the centrifugal weight is disengaged (Larson; P. 0111).
Regarding claim 8, Larsen in view of Densow and Spase teaches the electric chainsaw of claim 1, wherein the centrifugal weight (Larsen; Figs. 7A and 7D; 68a and 68b) comprises a first portion (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7A (Larsen) above) and a second portion (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7A (Larsen) above) forming a stepped outer surface of the centrifugal weight, wherein the drive feature is disposed on the second portion (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7A (Larsen) above), and wherein the spring is compressed between the hub (Densow; Figs. 5-7; 219) and the first portion (Spase; Fig. 3; 23, 30, and 31).
Regarding claim 9, Larsen in view of Densow and Spase teaches the electric chainsaw of claim 8, wherein the outer surface of the first portion has a first shape (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7A (Larsen) above) as viewed in a direction parallel to the central axis, wherein the outer surface of the second portion has a second shape (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7A (Larsen) above), as viewed in a direction parallel with the central axis, and wherein the first shape is different than the second shape (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 7A (Larsen) above).
Regarding claim 10, Larsen in view of Densow and Spase teaches the electric chainsaw of claim 1, wherein efficiency of the clutch remains constant at all speeds and powers of the motor when the drive feature is interfaced with the drive surface of the sprocket (Larson; P. 0007).
Regarding claim 11, Larsen in view of Densow and Spase teaches the electric chainsaw of claim 1, wherein the clutch is configured to provide an indication to a user that the motor is overloaded (Larsen; P. 0117 and 0128), and wherein the indication occurs while the motor is driving the clutch (Larsen; P. 0128).
Regarding claim 12, Larsen in view of Densow and Spase teaches the electric chainsaw of claim 11, wherein the indication comprises a tactile indication transmitted to a handle of the electric chainsaw (Larsen; P. 0128).
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsen (US 2024/0399608 A1) in view of Densow (US 3,970,178 A) and Spase (GB 756,648 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Barker et al. (US 2024/0035527 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Larsen in view of Densow and Spase teaches the electric chainsaw of claim 1, wherein the drive surface comprises a cylindrical surface.
Larsen in view of Densow and Spase does not teach where the drive surface includes a projection extending radially inward towards the central axis, the projection comprising an engagement surface configured to selectively interface with the drive feature, and wherein the engagement surface is angularly offset from the radial direction.
Barker teaches a sprocket (Barker; Figs. 4-7B; 210) with a drive surface (Barker; Figs. 4-7B; 220) comprises a cylindrical surface including a projection (Barker; Figs. 4-7B; 222) extending radially inward towards the central axis (Barker; Figs. 4-7B; 222), the projection comprising an engagement surface (Barker; Figs. 4-7B; 222) configured to selectively interface with the drive feature (Barker; Fig. 6; 222 and 230; P. 0043), and wherein the engagement surface is angularly offset from the radial direction (Barker; Figs. 4-7B; 222). Such a mechanism allows for a more space-efficient operation (Barker; P. 0005).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the filing date of the instant invention, when building the device from the ground up, to modify the drive surface of the sprocket and drive feature of the centrifugal weights taught by Larsen in view of Densow and Spase such that the drive surface featured a projection and the drive feature selectively interfaces with such a projection like those taught by Barker as such structure allows for a more space-efficient operation of the clutch.
Regarding claim 7, Larsen in view of Densow, Spase and Barker teaches the electric chainsaw of claim 6.
Larsen in view of Densow, Spase and Barker as modified does not teach wherein the receiving area defines a depth, wherein the projection defines a height, as measured in a direction parallel with the depth, and wherein the height is less than the depth.
Barker further teaches wherein a receiving area (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 3C (Barker) below) defines a depth (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 3C (Barker) below), wherein the projection defines a height (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 3C (Barker) below), as measured in a direction parallel with the depth, and wherein the height is less than the depth (see annotated image 1 of Fig. 3C (Barker) below). This creates a space between the sprocket and the centrifugal weights which allows the centrifugal weights to rotate without unwanted interference from the sprocket.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the filing date of the instant invention, when building the device from the ground up, to modify the projection of the centrifugal weights such that the height of the projection was smaller than the depth of the receiving area like that further taught by Barker as to create space between the sprocket and the centrifugal weights which allows the centrifugal weights to rotate without unwanted interference from the sprocket
PNG
media_image7.png
723
543
media_image7.png
Greyscale
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