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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 5 and 6 are objected to because recitation of “at least one adjustment knob” in claims 5 and 6 is not clearly differentiate from the “at least one adjustment knob” claimed in claim 4. Claim 5 will be interpreted as claiming “at least one second adjustment knob” to differentiate the knob from the knob claimed in claim 4. Claim 6 will be interpreted as claiming “at least one guide hole through which said at least one adjustment knob and at least one second adjustment knob are disposed.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informality: the word “notches” in the first line of the claim is misspelled as “notices”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
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.
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "said adaptor fence" in the first line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 14 appears to incorporate the adaptor fence claimed in claim 18 into the jig base, as disclosed in paragraph [0051] of applicant’s specification. Considerable speculation and assumptions would be required to examine claim 18’s compliance with 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 at this time such that it would be improper to reject the claim based upon prior art. See M.P.E.P. 2173.06,II.
Claim 19 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) because of its dependency from claim 18.
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 1-2 and 4-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by ROCKLER, “Perfect Fit Dado Jig Instructions”, August 2020, Rockler Companies, Inc., hereinafter “Rockler Instructions”.
Regarding claim 1, the Rockler Instructions disclose a router jig configured to be secured to a straightedge tool (router jig shown in Figs. 1-11 of the Rockler instructions configured to be secured to a straightedge tool as shown in Figs. 4-7), comprising:
a jig base with a jig base plate (jig base plate 2 in Figs. 1 and 2 on page 4) having a top surface configured to connect to a router (Fig. 4 on page 5 shows a router connected to the top surface of plate 2) and from which extends a spacer shield (see “Spacer Shield” annotation to Fig. 2 on page 4 of Rockler Instructions as reproduced below);
an adaptor fence (adaptor Perfect Fit Fence 4 in Fig. 2 on page 4), which is removably fastened to said jig base plate (Fig. 2 sows fence 4 is removably fastened to jig base plate 2), and which is linearly movable with respect to said jig base plate (The slots in fence 4 and jig base plate 2 in Fig. 2 allow fence 4 to be linearly movable with respect to jig base plate 2. See instruction number 2 of “Setting Jig for Your Material” at the bottom of page 5.), said adaptor fence including a horizontal plate (reference number 4 in Fig. 2 points to the horizontal plate portion of fence 4) and a vertical wall, said vertical wall including a stable surface that contacts the straightedge tool (see “Vertical Wall Stable Surface” annotation to Fig. 2 of the Rockler Instructions reproduced below) and a front face on an opposite side of said vertical wall as said stable surface (see “Vertical Wall Front Face” annotation below); and
a rail fence which is removably fastened to said adaptor fence (rail tension fence 5 in Fig. 3 on page 5 is removably secured to fence 4 as shown in Fig. 4 on page 5), which is linearly movable with respect to said adaptor fence (fence 5 is linearly movable with respect to fence 4 by way of the slots in fence 4 as disclosed in instruction number 5 of “Assembly and Mounting Router” at the top of page 5), and which is rotatable relative to said adaptor fence (fence 5 is capable of being rotated 180 degrees with respect to fence 4 and be removably fastened to fence 4), said rail fence including a horizontal surface (see “Horizontal Surface” annotation to Fig. 3 of the Rockler Instructions reproduced below) and a vertical guide bar disposed at an end of said horizontal surface (see “Vertical Guide Bar” annotation to Fig. 3 below), said vertical guide bar including:
a first contacting surface which defines a first distance between said first contacting surface and said stable surface when said rail fence is rotated such that said first contacting surface faces said stable surface (see “First Surface” annotation below); and
a second contacting surface on an opposite side of said vertical guide bar as said first contacting surface, said second contacting surface defining a second distance between said second contacting surface and said stable surface when said rail fence is rotated such that said second contacting surface faces said stable surface (see “Second Surface” annotation below).
PNG
media_image1.png
925
1190
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
862
1230
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the Rockler Instructions anticipate the router jig of claim 1 as explained above. The Rockler Instructions further disclose a cutting mark disposed on a leading edge of said jig base plate (“Bit location indicators” in Figs. 8 and 9 on page 7 of the instructions are cutting marks), said cutting mark including a center mark (a downward pointing arrow on the Bit location indicators marks the center mark), a right side toolpath mark (the Bit location indicators are placed on projections which project from the sidewall of jig base 2 such that the right edge of the projection makes a right side toolpath mark), and a left side toolpath mark (the left edge of the projection makes a left side toolpath mark), which are aligned with a left edge and a right edge, respectively, of a toolpath generated by the router (the left edge and right edge are alignable with a toolpath generated by a router during use).
Regarding claim 4, the Rockler Instructions anticipate the router jig of claim 1 as explained above. The Rockler Instructions further disclose said jig base plate (jig base plate 2 in Figs. 1 and 2) further comprises:
at least one adjustment knob, such that fastening said adjustment knob fixes a relative linear position of said jig base plate and said adaptor fence (adjustment knob Tall Five-Star Knob 9 in Fig. 2 on page 4 fixes a relative linear position of jig base plate 2 and fence 4); and
at least one limit setting knob which sets a limit on the relative linear motion between said jig base plate and said adaptor fence (limit setting knobs Knurled Knob 11 in Fig. 2 sets a limit on the relative linear motion between jig base plate 2 and fence 4).
Regarding claim 5, the Rockler Instructions anticipate the router jig of claim 4 as explained above. The Rockler Instructions further disclose said adaptor fence (fence 4 in Fig. 2) further comprises:
at least one second adjustment knob, such that fastening said second adjustment knob fixes a relative linear position of said adaptor fence and said rail fence (second adjustment knob Socket Cap Screw 6 in Fig. 3 on page 5 fixes the relative linear position of fence 4 and fence 5 when fastened).
Regarding claim 6, the Rockler Instructions anticipate the router jig of claim 4 as explained above. The Rockler Instructions further disclose said adaptor fence (fence 4 in Fig. 2) and said rail fence (fence 5 in Fig. 3) each include at least one guide hole through which said at least one adjustment knob and at least one second adjustment knob are disposed (Fig. 3 shows fence 4 and fence 5 each have at least one guide hole through which adjustment knobs 9 and Socket Cap Screw 6 are disposed and shown in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 7, the Rockler Instructions anticipate the router jig of claim 1 as explained above. The Rockler Instructions further disclose said first distance is greater than said second distance. Fence 5 is capable of being rotated during use and fastened to fence 4 such that the first distance is greater than the second distance.
Regarding claim 8, the Rockler Instructions anticipate the router jig of claim 1 as explained above. The Rockler Instructions further disclose said front face of said vertical wall (Vertical Wall Front Face as annotated to Fig. 2 in the rejection of claim 1 above) includes a plurality of steps which define different distances between said steps of said front face and said spacer shield (The front face of the Vertical wall includes a plurality of steps. See “Plurality of Steps” annotation to Fig. 2 reproduced below.).
PNG
media_image3.png
925
949
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, the Rockler Instructions anticipate the router jig of claim 1 as explained above. The Rockler Instructions further disclose said adaptor fence (fence 4 in Fig. 2) includes a plurality of grooves which mate with a corresponding ridge on said jig base plate, such that when said ridge engages one of said plurality of grooves, a relative position of said adaptor fence and said jig base plate is fixed (Figs. 6 and 7 show fence 4 has a plurality of grooves which mate with a corresponding ridge on jig base plate 2, to carry out the intended use recited).
Regarding claim 10, the Rockler Instructions anticipate the router jig of claim 9 as explained above. The Rockler Instructions further disclose said plurality of grooves are disposed on a leg of said adaptor fence and are vertically oriented (Figs. 6 and 7 show the plurality of grooves are disposed on a leg of fence 4 and are vertically oriented) and said ridge of said jig base plate is disposed upon a lip which extends from said jig base plate, such that said ridge is directed toward a center line of said jig base (Figs. 6 and 7 show the ridge on jig base plate 2 is disposed upon a lip which extends from said jig base plate, such that said ridge is directed toward a center line of said jig base).
Regarding claim 11, the Rockler Instructions anticipate the router jig of claim 9 as explained above. The Rockler Instructions further disclose said jig base plate (jig base plate 2 in Figs. 1 and 2) further comprises:
at least one limit setting knob which sets a limit on the relative linear motion between said jig base plate and said adaptor fence (limit setting knobs Knurled Knob 11 in Fig. 2 sets a limit on the relative linear motion between jig base plate 2 and fence 4).
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Rockler Instructions in view of U.S. Patent No. 6,070,626 to Tully, hereinafter “Tully”.
Regarding claim 3, the Rockler Instructions anticipate the router jig of claim 2 as explained above. However, the Rockler Instructions do not disclose the right side toolpath mark and the left side toolpath mark each include a plurality of steps corresponding to different diameter router bits of the router.
In the same field of router jig attachments, Tully teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to position toolpath cutting marks on a leading edge of the jig attachment base with right and left toolpath marks corresponding to different diameter router bits of the router. See column 4, line 15-24.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Tully’s cutter guide marks with Rockler’s jig base 2 bit location indicators to improve Rockler’s jig toolpath location indication in the same way Tully teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Tully to Rockler’s jig base would achieve the predictable result of adding toolpath indicators to Rockler’s jig base.
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Rockler Instructions in view of U.S. Patent No. US 7,337,812 B2 to Williams, hereinafter “Williams”.
Regarding claim 12, the Rockler Instructions anticipate the router jig of claim 1 as explained above. However, the Rockler Instructions do not disclose said adaptor fence includes a plurality of notches which mate with a corresponding clip on said rail fence, such that when said clip engages one of said plurality of notches, a relative position of said adaptor fence and said rail fence is fixed.
In the same field of router attachments, Williams teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a notch-and-tooth type interference fit between parts of a router attachment to fix the relative position of the parts. See column 4, line 36-58.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a plurality of notches on Rockler’s fence 4 and a plurality of interference-fit teeth on Rockler’s fence 5 to fix the relative position of the two fences in the same way Williams teaches using the interference-fit to fix relative position. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Williams to the router jig disclosed by the Rockler Instructions would achieve the predictable result of improving the Rockler Instructions disclosed router jig by adding a fine-tuning system as Williams teaches to fix the relative position of fences 4 and 5.
Regarding claim 13, the prior art reference combination of the Rockler Instructions in view of Williams renders the router jig of claim 12 unpatentable as explained above. When using William’s fine-tuning system to fix the relative position of fences 4 and 5 as explained in the rejection of claim 12 above, the notches would be positioned on one of the fences and the teeth would be positioned on the other. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to position the notches on fence 4 and the teeth on fence 5 as one of two possible alternatives.
Claims 14-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Rockler Instructions.
Regarding claim 14, the Rockler Instructions disclose a router jig configured to be secured to a straight edge tool (router jig shown in Figs. 1-11 of the Rockler instructions configured to be secured to a straightedge tool as shown in Figs. 4-7), comprising:
a jig base including:
a jig base plate having a top surface configured to connect to a router (jig base plate 2 in Figs. 1 and 2 on page 4 connects to a router as shown in Fig. 4; see “Assembly and Mounting Router” section of the instructions starting on page 4);
a vertical plate which extends from said top surface of said jig base plate (a vertical plate, see “Vertical Plate” annotation to Fig. 1 of the Rockler Instructions reproduced below, extends downwardly from the top surface of jig base plate 2 in Fig. 1), said vertical plate including a stable surface which may be used to contact the straight edge tool; and
a horizontal plate which is vertically displaced from said jig base plate and which is connected to said vertical plate (a horizontal plate, see “Horizontal Plate” annotation to Fig. 1 below, is vertically displaced from the bottom of jig base plate 2 in Fig. 1 and is connected to the Vertical Wall as annotated below); and
a rail fence which is removably fastenable to said horizontal plate (rail tension fence 5 in Fig. 3 on page 5 is removably fastenable to the Horizontal Plate of jig base plate 2 by fastening socket cap screws 6 in Fig. 3 into fence 5 through the slots in the jig base where knurled knobs 11 are shown being fastened), which is linearly movable with respect to said jig base (fence 5 is linearly movable with respect to jig base 2 during use by fastening cap screws 6 into fence 5 through the slots in jig base 2 and linearly moving cap screws 6 along the slots to adjust the distance between fence 5 and the Vertical Plate to secure the jig to a straightedge), and which is rotatable relative to said horizontal plate (fence 5 is capable of being rotated 180 degrees with respect to jig base 2), said rail fence including a horizontal surface (see “Horizontal Surface” annotation to Fig. 3 of the Rockler Instructions reproduced in the rejection of claim 1 above) and a vertical guide bar disposed at an end of said horizontal surface (see “Vertical Guide Bar” annotation to Fig. 3 in the rejection of claim 1 above), said vertical guide bar including:
a first contacting surface which defines a first distance between said first contacting surface and said stable surface when said rail fence is rotated such that said first contacting surface faces said stable surface (see “First Surface” annotation above); and
a second contacting surface on an opposite side of said vertical guide bar compared to said first contacting surface, said second contacting surface defining a second distance between said second contacting surface and said stable surface when said rail fence is rotated such that said second contacting surface faces said stable surface (see “Second Surface” annotation above).
PNG
media_image4.png
911
1017
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The Rockler Instructions do not disclose fastening rail fence 5 directly to jig base 2 during use to arrive at the router jig as claimed in claim 14. However, the “Setting Fences to Fit Your Clamp Guide” section on page 5 of the instructions teaches testing the fit of the fences with respect to the clamp guide. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to directly fasten rail fence 5 to jig base 2 when the clamp guide used in conjunction with the claimed router jig is narrow such that fastening rail fence 5 directly to jig base 2 is required to allow the router jig to slide along the clamp guide easily without side-to-side play as the instructions teach.
Regarding claim 15, the Rockler instructions render the router jig of claim 14 unpatentable as explained above. The Rockler Instructions further disclose a cutting mark disposed on a leading edge of said jig base plate (“Bit location indicators” in Figs. 8 and 9 on page 7 of the instructions are cutting marks), said cutting mark including a center mark (a downward pointing arrow on the Bit location indicators marks the center mark), a right side toolpath mark (the Bit location indicators are placed on projections which project from the sidewall of jig base 2 such that the right edge of the projection makes a right side toolpath mark), and a left side toolpath mark (the left edge of the projection makes a left side toolpath mark), which are aligned with a left edge and a right edge, respectively, of a toolpath generated by the router (the left edge and right edge are alignable with a toolpath generated by a router during use).
Regarding claim 17, the Rockler instructions render the router jig of claim 14 unpatentable as explained above. Fence 5 is capable of being rotated during use and fastened to jig base 2 such that the first distance is greater than the second distance.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Rockler Instructions as applied to claims 14 and 15 in view of Tully.
Regarding claim 16, the Rockler instructions renders the router jig of claim 15 unpatentable over the Rockler Instructions as explained above. However, the Rockler Instructions do not disclose the right side toolpath mark and the left side toolpath mark each include a plurality of steps corresponding to different diameter router bits of the router.
In the same field of router jig attachments, Tully teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to position toolpath cutting marks on a leading edge of the jig attachment base with right and left toolpath marks corresponding to different diameter router bits of the router. See column 4, line 15-24.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Tully’s cutter guide marks with Rockler’s jig base 2 bit location indicators to improve Rockler’s jig toolpath location indication in the same way Tully teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Tully to Rockler’s jig base would achieve the predictable result of adding toolpath indicators to Rockler’s jig base.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. Patent No. 4,718,468 to Cowman.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL DEREK PRESSLEY whose telephone number is (313)446-6658. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am to 3:30pm Eastern.
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, Christopher Templeton can be reached at (571) 270-1477. 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.
/P DEREK PRESSLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/Christopher L Templeton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights