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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 02/18/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-26 are pending in the application.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraph [0049, 0051, 0065, 0177, 0298, 0301], recites “pocket 240” and “auxiliary housing 140” [0036-0039, 0049, 0051, 0065, 0177] which is not clear if they are the same member or different members. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-26 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1-27 of U.S. Patent No. US 9256988 B2/US 20140070924 A1. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both sets of claims are directed to an auxiliary wireless device/usage attachment configured to attach to a power tool and having sensor data including at least one of 3-axis acceleration data and 3-axis angular rate data (claim 21) that senses a usage characteristic of the power tool and generates usage data for the sensed usage characteristic, a memory that stores the usage data/operational time generated by the sensor, a transmitter that transmits the usage data generated by the sensor, and a controller in data communication with the sensor, the memory and the transmitter; an identification subsystem configured to receive the usage data/operational time via a wireless data link (claims 1 and 9-10) and operable to identify the type of power tool from the usage data, where the identification subsystem is implemented on a computing device located remotely from the power tool and the usage attachment and the loaded operational time corresponds to time periods during which the power tool experiences mechanical loading during powered operation (claims 3 and 22-23).
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(s) 1, 8-10, and 16-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Wenger et al. (US 20140070924 A1) in view of Sprague et al. (US 20210194316 A1) in view of Abbott et al. (US 20240217082 A1) and further in view of Kanack et al. (US 20160363510 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 16, and 21, Wenger et al. discloses an auxiliary wireless device (302), comprising: a body removably attachable to a housing of a power tool (250, [0041-0044], fig. 3); a wireless communication unit (WCU), supported by the body, the WCU including a wireless transceiver (282/382, claims 1 and 9-10);
an inertial measurement unit (IMU), supported by the body, the IMU configured to output IMU sensor data including at least one of 3-axis acceleration data and 3-axis angular rate data (vibration sensor 272/372 [0036, 0043, 0055], figs. 1-9) and speed/rate data and a type of operation being performed by the power tool, and a type of output accessory mounted to the power tool ([0023-0030, 0034-0036, 0043, 0049-0071], figs. 4-9);
a controller (352 [0044]), in communication with the WCU and the IMU, the controller configured to: determine a loaded operational time of the power tool over a time period based on the IMU sensor data (record respective start and stop times), determine a cumulative loaded operational time of the power tool based on loaded operational times within a cumulative time period, and send the cumulative loaded operational time to the WCU for transmission to a remote device, wherein the power tool is activated in a loaded condition during the loaded operational time (usage sensor 270/usage module 716, the total tool usage=SUMM OF ALL USAGE, TABLE 3 [0034, 0040, 0049, 0064-0070], figs. 7-9) and the controller is configured to determine the type of power tool by: determining a peak absolute value for each axis of the 3-axis acceleration data; comparing the peak absolute value for each axis of the 3-axis acceleration data to an acceleration threshold; processing the 3-axis angular rate data to determine a frequency of at least one sinusoidal waveform (fig. 6); comparing the frequency to an unloaded output shaft speed; and determining the type of power tool based on the comparison of the peak absolute values to the acceleration threshold and the comparison of the frequency to the unloaded output shaft speed [0049]. Wenger et al. also teaches having monitoring the vibration (vibration sensor 272, (e.g. an accelerometer) [0024, 0033, 0036]) of the tool when the tool is operated to determine if the tool is in a load condition or no-load condition ([0043-0064], Tables 1-2, figs. 4-7).
Wenger et al. states: “tool usage module 716 may determine the power tool switch ON time (at 908) by comparing the vibration data with predetermined vibration data that corresponds with the power tool being switched ON. The tool usage module 716 may determine a power tool switch OFF time (at 912) by comparing the vibration data with predetermined vibration data that corresponds with the power tool being switched OFF” [0064].
Wenger et al. fails to explicitly disclose the loaded operational time corresponds to time periods during which the power tool experiences mechanical loading during powered operation, determine a cumulative loaded operational time of the power tool based on loaded operational times within a cumulative time period, and send an indication of the cumulative loaded operational time to the WCU for transmission to a remote device.
Abbott et al. also teaches an power tool (100) with accelerometers and gyroscope sensors (250) to track operation of the tool [0109] having a loaded operational time ([0042, 0105, 0124-0127]) with wireless controller (255, [0117]), tracking position and operation/use of the tool [0143, 0153, 0187-0190, 0199] and using sensors to determine loaded operational time corresponds to time periods during which the power tool experiences mechanical loading during powered operation ([0104], figs. 29-30).
Sprague et al. also teaches a motor unit (36) for a power tool [0184, 0232-0244] using sensors (314, accelerometers [0147, 0211, 0250-0251]) to determine the loaded operational time corresponds to time periods during which a power tool/motor experiences mechanical loading during powered operation, determine a cumulative loaded operational time of the power tool based on loaded operational times within a cumulative time period, and send an indication of the cumulative loaded operational time to a WCU for transmission to a remote device (electronic processor 302, user equipment/network 334 ([0135, 0147-0149, 0154-0160, 0251], figs. 20-22)
Kanack et al. further teaches a power tool (302) with sensors and a processor (100) that measures loaded operational time corresponds to time periods during which the power tool experiences mechanical loading during powered operation (loaded stroke time (i.e., stroke time of the tool 302 when the tool does act on a workpiece), determine a cumulative loaded operational time of the power tool based on loaded operational times within a cumulative time period (total number of cycles performed by tool and overload times), and send an indication of the cumulative loaded operational time to a WCU (164 [0080-0082]) for transmission to a remote device (312/communication system 300 [0070-0077, 0080-0082, 0098-0102], figs. 10-11 and 24-26).
Given the teachings of Wenger et al. to have an auxiliary wireless device monitoring system obtaining maximum magnitudes during an operation time period, it 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 to modify the controller being configured to determine loaded operational time wherein the loaded operational time corresponds to time periods during which the power tool experiences mechanical loading during powered operation, determine a cumulative loaded operational time of the power tool based on loaded operational times within a cumulative time period, and send an indication of the cumulative loaded operational time to the WCU for transmission to a remote device for more precise operation of the tool and more precise action on a workpiece (avoid overshoot/damage to the workpiece), safety/security monitoring purposes, tool tracking, load monitoring (avoid overload) and/or for user/tool feedback purposes as taught by Sprague et al., Abbott et al. and further taught and evidenced by Kanack et al.
Regarding claims 8-10 and 17-20, Wenger et al. discloses the IMU sensor data includes at least one of:3-axis acceleration data when the power tool is activated in a loaded condition; 3-axis angular rate data when the power tool is activated in the loaded condition; 3-axis acceleration data when the power tool is activated in an unloaded condition; and 3-axis angular rate data when the power tool is activated in the unloaded condition [0049-0061] and the controller is further configured to: store, in a memory, the IMU sensor data as timestamped IMU sensor data; and send the timestamped IMU sensor data to the WCU for communication over a wireless communication link the controller is further configured to: determine, based on the timestamped IMU sensor data, at least one timestamped tool operational event including at least one of a total operational time, a high loaded operational time, a low loaded operational time, a trigger press time, a trigger release time, and an idle time; and send the timestamped tool operational events to the WCU for transmission to the remote device (individual tool use times, tool usage “stop time of the power tool 250 in the power tool usage table”:- TABLE 3 [0034-0040, 0049, 0064-0073], figs. 7-9) and determine tool type with high and low loaded operation time [0043-0047, 0064, 0070-0071] and wherein the power tool is a drill, a driver, an impact driver, an impact wrench, a grinder, a miter saw, or a rotary hammer, wherein the type of operation includes at least one of drilling, driving, impact driving, heavy grinding, light grinding, polishing, removing material, and cutting and wherein the type of output accessory includes at least one of a drill bit, a driver bit, a socket, a grinding wheel, a cutting wheel, and a circular saw blade ([0047-0064, fig. 1, Tables 2-3).
Regarding claim 2, Wenger et al. taches auxiliary wireless device (302) for monitoring the power tool for a predefined time period on all three axis/axes and obtaining values and comparing measured usage/loaded operational time with predertmined usage, usage table and peak/maximum acceleration magnitudes ([0023-0030, 0034-0036, 0043, 0049-0071], figs. 4-9) and teaches determining usage and vibration data with the 3-axis acceleration (vibration sensor/3-axis accelerometer 372 [0036, 0043, 0055]).
Wenger et al. fails to discloses the loaded operational time includes:determine, based on the 3-axis acceleration data, a peak absolute acceleration (PAA) for each axis over the time period;compare the PAA for each axis to a first acceleration threshold; andset the loaded operational time of the power tool to the time period when the PAA for at least two axes are greater than the first acceleration threshold.
Abbott et al. also teaches an power tool (100) with accelerometers and gyroscope sensors (250) to track operation of the tool [0109] having a loaded operational time ([0042, 0105, 0124-0127]) with wireless controller (255, [0117]), tracking position and operation/use of the tool [0143, 0153, 0187-0190, 0199] and using sensors to determine loaded operational time corresponds to time periods during which the power tool experiences mechanical loading during powered operation ([0104], figs. 29-30) and teaches determining usage and fastening operation tracking data with a 3-axis acceleration [0145, 0180-0187], see table at [0180]) and the loaded operational time includes:determine, based on the 3-axis acceleration data, a peak absolute acceleration (PAA) for each axis over the time period;compare the PAA for each axis to a first acceleration threshold; andset the loaded operational time of the power tool to the time period when the PAA for at least two axes are greater than the first acceleration threshold [0145-0154, 0182].
Given the teachings of Wenger et al. to have an auxiliary wireless device monitoring system obtaining maximum magnitudes during an operation time period, it 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 to modify the auxiliary wireless device 302 to include loaded operational time includes: determine, based on the 3-axis acceleration data, a peak absolute acceleration (PAA) for each axis over the time period; compare the PAA for each axis to a first acceleration threshold; and set the loaded operational time of the power tool to the time period when the PAA for at least two axes are greater than the first acceleration threshold to have precise adjustment of speed/torque for more precise operation of the tool and more precise action on a workpiece (avoid overshoot/damage to the workpiece), safety/security monitoring purposes and/or for user/tool feedback purposes as taught by Abbott et al.
Regarding claims 11-15, Wenger et al. discloses an auxiliary wireless device (302), comprising: a body removably attachable to a housing of a power tool (250, [0041-0044], fig. 3); a wireless communication unit (WCU), supported by the body, the WCU including a wireless transceiver (282/382, claims 1 and 9-10);
an inertial measurement unit (IMU), supported by the body, the IMU configured to output IMU sensor data including at least one of 3-axis acceleration data and 3-axis angular rate data (vibration sensor 272/372 [0036, 0043, 0055], figs. 1-9); and
a controller (352 [0044]), in communication with the WCU and the IMU, the controller configured to: determine a loaded operational time of the power tool over a time period based on the IMU sensor data (record respective start and stop times), determine a cumulative loaded operational time of the power tool based on loaded operational times within a cumulative time period, and send the cumulative loaded operational time to the WCU for transmission to a remote device, wherein the power tool is activated in a loaded condition during the loaded operational time (usage sensor 270/usage module 716, the total tool usage=SUMM OF ALL USAGE, TABLE 3 [0034, 0040, 0064-0070], figs. 7-9).
Wenger et al. fails to explicitly disclose the loaded operational time corresponds to time periods during which the power tool experiences mechanical loading during powered operation, determine a cumulative loaded operational time of the power tool based on loaded operational times within a cumulative time period, and send an indication of the cumulative loaded operational time to the WCU for transmission to a remote device and the controller is configured to: execute a machine learning (ML) model to determine a loaded operational time of the power tool over a time period based on the IMU sensor data,determine a cumulative loaded operational time of the power tool based on loaded operational times within a cumulative time period, andsend the cumulative loaded operational time to the WCU for transmission to a remote device, wherein the power tool is activated in a loaded condition during the loaded operational time and wherein: the ML model is trained to determine an unloaded operational time of the power tool based on historical IMU sensor data that include one or more power tools operating in an unloaded condition; and the controller is further configured to: execute the ML model to determine an unloaded operational time of the power tool over the time period based on the IMU sensor data, determine a cumulative unloaded operational time of the power tool based on unloaded operational times within the cumulative time period, andsend the cumulative unloaded operational time to the WCU for transmission to the remote device, wherein the power tool is activated in the unloaded condition during the unloaded operational time wherein: the ML model is trained to determine a movement time of the power tool based on historical IMU sensor data that include one or more power tools that are not activated or activated in the unloaded condition; and the controller is further configured to:execute the ML model to determine a non-operating movement time of the power tool over the time period based on the IMU sensor data, determine a cumulative non-operating movement time of the power tool based on non-operating movement times within the cumulative time period, and send the cumulative non-operating movement time to the WCU for transmission to the remote device,wherein the power tool is not activated or activated in the unloaded condition during the non-operating movement time.
Abbott et al. also teaches an power tool (100) with accelerometers and gyroscope sensors (250) to track operation of the tool [0109] having a loaded operational time ([0042, 0105, 0124-0127]) with wireless controller (255, [0117]), tracking position and operation/use of the tool [0143, 0153, 0187-0190, 0199] and using sensors to determine loaded operational time corresponds to time periods during which the power tool experiences mechanical loading during powered operation ([0104], figs. 29-30) and a controller configured to: execute a machine learning (ML) model ([0088]) to determine a loaded operational time of the power tool over a time period based on a IMU sensor data, determine a cumulative loaded operational time of the power tool based on loaded operational times within a cumulative time period, and send the cumulative loaded operational time to a WCU ([0088, 0095-0116, 0122-0126]]) for transmission to a remote device, wherein the power tool is activated in a loaded condition during the loaded operational time and wherein: the ML model is trained to determine an unloaded operational time of the power tool based on historical IMU sensor data that include one or more power tools operating in an unloaded condition ([0127-0131]); and the controller is further configured to: execute the ML model to determine an unloaded operational time of the power tool over the time period based on the IMU sensor data,determine a cumulative unloaded operational time of the power tool based on unloaded operational times (trains after task complete [0131-0132]) within the cumulative time period, andsend the cumulative unloaded operational time to the WCU for transmission to the remote device, wherein the power tool is activated in the unloaded condition during the unloaded operational time wherein: the ML model is trained to determine a movement time of the power tool based on historical IMU sensor data that include one or more power tools that are not activated or activated in the unloaded condition; and the controller is further configured to:execute the ML model to determine a non-operating movement time of the power tool over the time period based on the IMU sensor data, determine a cumulative non-operating movement time of the power tool based on non-operating movement times (tool usage data, time between fastening events, times between successive operations of the power tool) within the cumulative time period, and send the cumulative non-operating movement time to the WCU for transmission to the remote device, wherein the power tool is not activated or activated in the unloaded condition during the non-operating movement time (start a re-training process of the self-updating machine learning when tool is unloaded, “controller 200 continuously collects data from the sensors 250, regardless of usage of the power tool 100” and regardless of order lug nuts attached [0054-0055, 0113, 0123-0169, 0177, 0190-0203], figs. 13-25).
Sprague et al. also teaches a motor unit (36) for a power tool [0184, 0232-0244] using sensors (314, accelerometers [0147, 0211, 0250-0251]) to determine the loaded operational time corresponds to time periods during which a power tool/motor experiences mechanical loading during powered operation, determine a cumulative loaded operational time of the power tool based on loaded operational times within a cumulative time period, and send an indication of the cumulative loaded operational time to a WCU for transmission to a remote device (electronic processor 302, user equipment/network 334 ([0135, 0147-0149, 0154-0160, 0251], figs. 20-22)
Kanack et al. further teaches a power tool (302) with sensors and a processor (100) that measures loaded operational time corresponds to time periods during which the power tool experiences mechanical loading during powered operation (loaded stroke time (i.e., stroke time of the tool 302 when the tool does act on a workpiece), determine a cumulative loaded operational time of the power tool based on loaded operational times within a cumulative time period (total number of cycles performed by tool and overload times), and send an indication of the cumulative loaded operational time to a WCU (164 [0080-0082]) for transmission to a remote device (312/communication system 300 [0070-0077, 0080-0082, 0098-0102], figs. 10-11 and 24-26).
Given the teachings of Wenger et al. to have an auxiliary wireless device monitoring system obtaining maximum magnitudes during an operation time period, it 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 to modify the to modify the controller being configured to determine loaded operational time wherein the loaded operational time corresponds to time periods during which the power tool experiences mechanical loading during powered operation, determine a cumulative loaded operational time of the power tool based on loaded operational times within a cumulative time period, and send an indication of the cumulative loaded operational time to the WCU for transmission to a remote device and the auxiliary wireless device the controller configured to: execute a machine learning (ML) model to determine a loaded operational time of the power tool over a time period based on the IMU sensor data,determine a cumulative loaded operational time of the power tool based on loaded operational times within a cumulative time period, andsend the cumulative loaded operational time to the WCU for transmission to a remote device, wherein the power tool is activated in a loaded condition during the loaded operational time and wherein: the ML model is trained to determine an unloaded operational time of the power tool based on historical IMU sensor data that include one or more power tools operating in an unloaded condition; and the controller is further configured to: execute the ML model to determine an unloaded operational time of the power tool over the time period based on the IMU sensor data,determine a cumulative unloaded operational time of the power tool based on unloaded operational times within the cumulative time period, andsend the cumulative unloaded operational time to the WCU for transmission to the remote device, wherein the power tool is activated in the unloaded condition during the unloaded operational time wherein: the ML model is trained to determine a movement time of the power tool based on historical IMU sensor data that include one or more power tools that are not activated or activated in the unloaded condition; and the controller is further configured to:execute the ML model to determine a non-operating movement time of the power tool over the time period based on the IMU sensor data, determine a cumulative non-operating movement time of the power tool based on non-operating movement times within the cumulative time period, andsend the cumulative non-operating movement time to the WCU for transmission to the remote device,wherein the power tool is not activated or activated in the unloaded condition during the non-operating movement time to have precise adjustment of speed/torque, automation purposes, for more precise operation of the tool and more precise action on a workpiece (avoid overshoot/damage to the workpiece), safety/security monitoring purposes, tool tracking, load monitoring (avoid overload), and/or for user/tool feedback purposes as taught by Sprague et al., Abbott et al. and further taught and evidenced by Kanack et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7 and 22-26 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and if a proper and if a Terminal Disclaimer is filed for US 9256988 B2.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Reasons for Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art of record fails to teach or render obvious an tool tracking wireless device attachable to a power tool with a wireless communication unit comprising all the structural and functional limitations and further comprising, amongst other limitations/features, a controller configured to: determine a loaded operational time of the power tool over a time period based on the IMU sensor data, determine a cumulative loaded operational time of the power tool based on loaded operational times within a cumulative time period; the controller configured to: determine an unloaded operational time of the power tool over the time period, including: compare the PAA for each axis to a second acceleration threshold that is less than the first acceleration threshold, and set an unloaded operational time of the power tool to the time period when the PAA for at least two axes are less than the first acceleration threshold and greater than the second acceleration threshold, determine a cumulative unloaded operational time of the power tool based on unloaded operational times within the cumulative time period, and send the cumulative unloaded operational time to the WCU for transmission to the remote device; and the power tool is activated in an unloaded condition during the unloaded operational time. Though Wenger et al. (US 20140070924 A1) teaches a controller configured to: determine a loaded operational time of the power tool over a time period based on the IMU sensor data, determine a cumulative loaded operational time of the power tool based on loaded operational times within a cumulative time period one of ordinary skill would recognize that a controller configured to compare the PAA for each axis to provide precise data of loaded operational time of the power tool over cumulative time period based on loaded operational times for a number of time periods would require substantial modification. Having the efficiency and precise data of loaded operational time of the power tool over cumulative time period based on loaded operational times for a number of time periods provides an effective tool tracking device for enhanced feedback.
While various features of the claimed subject matter are found individually in the prior art, a skilled artisan would have to include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure to combine or modify the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed subject matter, and thus obviousness would not be proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). There is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine or modify the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention, and thus obviousness would not be proper. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-26 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on all references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. With respect to the nonstatutory double patenting rejection, examiner contends that the loaded operational time corresponds to time periods during which the power tool experiences mechanical loading during powered operation corresponds to the vibration duration in claims 3 and 22-23 of U.S. Patent No. US 9256988 B2/US 20140070924 A1 since vibration is a loaded condition.
Conclusion
Additional prior art considered pertinent: See form 892.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT LONG whose telephone number is (571)270-3864. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-5pm, 8-9pm (EST).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, SHELLEY SELF can be reached at (571) 272-4524. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ROBERT F LONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731