DETAILED ACTION
This application is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are acceptable.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2 and 4-5 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1: The Office recommends inserting the word “wherein” after the comma recite in Line 10. The Office further recommends amending the limitation “and” (Line 11) to recite “and, wherein.”
Claim 1: The Office does not understand Applicant’s disclosure to provide support for a distinct “flattened arc travel path portion” of a “workpiece attachment mechanism” (which the Office understands corresponds to the disclosed “workpiece securement portion 92”). Rather, Paragraph [0035] of Applicant’s disclosure provides “a dwell occurs so that the workpiece mounting assembly 36 follows a somewhat linear, flattened arc, path along the ring gear 106 before moving to the other side of plate 66.” This is the only portion of Applicant’s disclosure which contains the words “flattened arc” and/or “dwell(s).” Accordingly, the Office recommends deleting the word “portion” (Line 12 of Claim 1).
Claims 2 and 5: The limitation “stroke adjuster” (Lines 1-2 of Claim 2 and Line 2 of Claim 5) needs to correspond to whatever element Applicant decides to maintain in Claim 1 (i.e., a “stroke adjuster” or a “stroke adjuster assembly”).
Claim 4: The Office recommends amending the limitation “base plate, the base plate rotatable” (Line 2) to recite “base plate, wherein the base plate is rotatable.”
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1: The “stroke adjuster assembly” (Lines 10-11) lacks clear antecedent basis. The Office recommends amending the limitation “stroke adjuster assembly” (Lines 10-11) to recite “stroke adjuster” or amending the limitation “stroke adjuster” (Line 9) to recite “stroke adjuster assembly.”
Claim 1: The “shaft” (Line 13) lacks clear antecedent basis. It is unclear whether the “shaft” (Line 13) is related in any way to the “shaft portion” introduced at Line 5.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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 1-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0120413 to McLain et al.
Claim 1: McLain discloses an automatic adjustable stroke device for a random orbital machine (intended use) comprising:
a housing 102 having a central axis and a wall 104 defining a cavity 106;
a counterbalance shaft assembly 128, 148 rotatably disposed at least partially within the cavity 106 and a shaft portion 148 of the counterbalance shaft assembly 128, 148 aligned with the central axis;
a mounting assembly 136 disposed at least partially within the cavity 106, the mounting assembly 136 including a workpiece attachment mechanism 151 (see Paragraph [0084] “Additionally, FIG. 10 shows an inner thread 151 disposed within the backing plate mount 152, in order to assist with coupling the adjustable stroke mechanism 100 to a tool”); and
a stroke adjuster 114 coupling the counterbalance shaft assembly 128, 148 with the mounting assembly 136, and the workpiece attachment mechanism 151 dwells to provide a flattened arc travel path portion of the workpiece attachment mechanism 151 during rotation of the shaft (the Office understands that the shaft portion 148 moves in a substantially linear/slightly arcuate path).
Because the workpiece attachment mechanism 151 is not directly driven rotationally (e.g., a pinion is not directly connected to the workpiece attachment mechanism 151 to transmit rotational motion to the workpiece attachment mechanism 151), and the adjuster ring 114 (analogized in this Office Action as a "stroke adjuster") is configured to be driven to rotate, the Office finds that it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of filing that the mounting assembly 136 rotates at a slower speed than the stroke adjuster 114.
Claim 2: The automatic adjustable stroke device of Claim 1, wherein the stroke adjuster 114 includes a bore 118 for receiving the mounting assembly 136.
Claim 3: The automatic adjustable stroke device of Claim 1, wherein the counterbalance shaft assembly 128, 148 includes a counterweight portion 128.
Claim 4: The automatic adjustable stroke device of Claim 1, wherein the counterweight portion 128 is coupled with a base plate 110, the base plate 110 rotatable with respect to the housing 102.
Claim 6: The automatic adjustable stroke device of Claim 4, wherein the mounting assembly 136 extends through the base plate 110 (see FIG. 10) to couple the workpiece attachment mechanism 151.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is 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, and rewritten to overcome the pending clarity issues under 35 U.S.C. 112.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0120413 to McLain et al. is the closest prior art.
Claim 5: McLain does not disclose or suggest wherein the counterbalance shaft assembly includes a bore for receiving the stroke adjuster.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RANDELL J KRUG whose telephone number is (313) 446-6577. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9:00-14:00 AZ time.
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, Minnah Seoh can be reached on 571-270-7778. 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.
/RANDELL J KRUG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618