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 .
This action is in response to the application filed on 03/17/25.
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/17/25 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-8, 11 and 13-20 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.
In claim 1, lines 11-12; and claim 2, lines 4-5, the limitations of “directly or indirectly rotated via the bevel gear” and “directly or indirectly impacted” render the claims indefinite in that it is unclear which are the claimed components capable of perform the function of “indirectly” rotate the spindle and “indirectly” impact the hammer?
In claim 11, lines 5-6, the limitation of “to directly or indirectly support” renders the claim indefinite in that it is unclear what are the claimed components capable of perform the function of “indirectly” support?
In claim 13, lines 7-11, the limitation of “directly or indirectly rotated” renders the claim indefinite in that it is unclear what are the claimed components capable of perform the function of “indirectly” rotate the gear?
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-10 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seith et al., (9,550,284) in view of Aoki et al. (2023/0398665).
Regarding claims 1-3, Seith discloses an electric power tool comprising: a grip (24) extending in a front-rear direction; a motor housing (18) disposed forward of the grip; a motor (16) disposed inside the motor housing and including a rotor (40); a bevel gear (62) configured to rotate integrally with the rotor and including a shaft (as shown in Fig. 4) extending in the front-rear direction; a spindle (94) rotated via the bevel gear and extending in a direction intersecting the front rear direction (Fig. 4); a tool accessory holder (88) rotated by the spindle (94); a case (14; Fig. 3) to accommodate the bevel gear (62) and the spindle (94); and a bearing (64; Fig. 4) held by the case and configured to hold the bevel gear to be rotatable; a hammer (100) rotated by the spindle (94); and an anvil (110) to be impacted in a rotation direction by the hammer, wherein the tool accessory holder (88) is disposed at a lower end of the anvil, and the case (14) accommodates the bevel gear (62), the spindle (94), and the hammer (100; figs. 3-4); wherein the rotor (40) includes a rotor shaft extending in the front-rear direction (Fig. 4), the rotor shaft extends from the motor housing to an internal space of the case, and the bevel gear is fixed to the rotor shaft (Fig. 4); but fails to disclose wherein the motor (16) includes a stator, wherein the rotor being rotatable with respect to the stator. Aoki discloses an impact tool comprising a brushless motor (6; par. 52) including a rotor (27) and a stator (26), wherein the rotor is rotatable with respect to the stator (par. 52; Fig. 5) for the purposes of providing an effective prime mover to operate the tool. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided Seith’s motor as a brushless motor including a rotor and a stator in order to provide an effective prime mover to operate the tool.
Regarding claim 4, Aoki also discloses a bearing in contact with the rotor shaft (as shown in fig. 5).
Regarding claims 6-8, Seith discloses an intermediate shaft (68) disposed between the bevel gear (62) and the spindle (94) and configured to transmit rotation of the bevel gear to the spindle, wherein the intermediate shaft (68) is accommodated in the case and extends in a direction intersecting the front-rear direction (Fig. 4); a first intermediate shaft (68) that includes a driven gear (66) meshing with the bevel gear (62) and that is configured to decelerate rotation of the bevel gear; and a second intermediate shaft (80) configured to decelerate rotation of the first intermediate shaft and transmits the rotation to the spindle (Fig. 4); and, wherein the spindle (94) extends in a direction orthogonal to the front-rear direction.
Regarding claim 9, Seith discloses an electric power tool comprising: a grip (24) extending in a front-rear direction; a motor housing (18) disposed forward of the grip; a motor (16) disposed inside the motor housing and including a rotor (40); a pinion gear (62; the term “pinion” refers to the gear size; note that gear 62 is smaller than gear 66) configured to rotate integrally with the rotor; a speed reducing mechanism (intermediate 68 and gear 66; Fig. 4) connected to the pinion gear (62); a spindle (94) connected to the speed reducing mechanism and extending in a direction intersecting the front-rear direction; a tool accessory holder (88) rotated by the spindle; a case (14) to accommodate the pinion gear, the speed reducing mechanism, and the spindle; and a bearing (64) held by the case and configured to hold the bevel gear to be rotatable, but fails to disclose wherein the motor (16) includes a stator, wherein the rotor being rotatable with respect to the stator. Aoki discloses an impact tool comprising a brushless motor (6; par. 52) including a rotor (27) and a stator (26), wherein the rotor is rotatable with respect to the stator for the purposes of providing an effective prime mover to operate the tool (pars. 52-53). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided Seith’s motor as a brushless motor including a rotor and a stator in order to provide an effective prime mover to operate the tool.
Regarding claim 10, Seith discloses wherein the motor housing (18) and the case (14) are connected to each other in a front-rear direction (Fig. 1), and the bearing (64) is clamped between the motor housing and the case (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 12, Seith discloses wherein the speed reducing mechanism includes: a first speed reducer (68) connected to the pinion gear (62) and configured to rotate to decelerate the rotation of the pinion gear; and a second speed reducer (80) configured to decelerate the rotation of the first speed reducer and transmit the rotation to the spindle (Fig. 4)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 13-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter. The prior art does not disclose or make obvious the claimed combination including the following features:
Regarding claim 5, wherein the case includes: a radial support surface to support a radial load acting on the bearing and a front support surface to support a forward thrust load acting on the bearing, and the motor housing includes a rear support surface to support a rearward thrust load acting on the bearing.
Regarding claim 11, wherein the case has an accommodating recess being recessed forward from a rear portion of the case and configured to accommodate the bearing, and the motor housing includes a support wall to support a rear surface of the bearing on a front surface of the motor housing.
Regarding claim 13, an intermediate support member having a front surface coming in contact with the bearing; and a fixing member coming in contact with a rear surface of the intermediate support member to fix the intermediate support member, together with the case, only by clamping
The combinations of the claimed limitations are novel and found to be allowable over prior art. The cited references taken singly or in combination do not anticipate or make obvious the Applicant’s claimed invention.
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.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHELLE LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4464. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8:30 am to 4:30 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, Anna Kinsaul can be reached at (571) 270 - 1926. 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.
/MICHELLE LOPEZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731