DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined
under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Examiner’s Comments
2. This office action is in response to the application filed on 2/18/2025.
Claims 23-55 have been canceled by applicant.
Claims 1-22 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/19/2025 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 § 102
4. 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.
5. Claims 1 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)(a)(2) as
anticipated by Dey, IV et al. (US2017/0173768) hereinafter (Dey)or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Dey.
With regard to claims 1 and 12, Dey discloses a power tool (104 fig.2) and method comprising: a housing (202); a motor (214) within the housing; a power switching circuit (216) that provides a supply of power from a battery pack (215) to the motor; an impact mechanism (1200) connected to the motor, the impact mechanism including: a hammer (1205) driven by the motor, an anvil (1210) configured to receive an impact from the hammer, an output drive device configured to be driven by the impact mechanism; a position sensor (218) configured to generate an output signal indicative of a position of the hammer; and an electronic controller (226) configured to: determine the position of the hammer (Par 0003) based on the output signal received from the position sensor, determine whether the position of the hammer is at a hammer rebound threshold (The controller detects an impact of the impact mechanism, calculates a drive angle of the anvil caused by the impact based on output from the position sensor, and controls the brushless DC motor based on the drive angle. Abstract); and adjust (The controller 226 adjusts the speed of the motor 214 based on an angle detection method that calculates an inferred position of the output drive device 210.Par 0068, lines 1-3) in response to determining that the position of the hammer is not at the hammer rebound threshold, an average power supplied to the motor.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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 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 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over Dey, IV et al. (US 2017/0173768) hereinafter (Dey).
With regard to claims 1 and 12, if it can be argued that Dey does not disclose all claimed function/method, it is the position of the Office that Dey discloses similar tool with identical structure including a controller, controlling the motor and hammer, and detecting an impact of the impact mechanism, calculates a drive angle of the anvil caused by the impact based on output from the position sensor, and controls the brushless DC motor based on the drive angle, in effect reducing the power to motor. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing to provide Dey with the function/method of adjusting the power to the motor for the benefit of monitoring the battery usage.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-11 and 13-22 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to claims 2 and 13, the prior art of record (US 2017/0173768) disclosed the basic elements, but fails to disclose including the method, wherein the electronic controller is further configured to: determine that the position of the hammer is less than the hammer rebound threshold; and increase a conduction angle of the motor to increase the average power supplied to the motor.
With respect to claims 4 and 15, the prior art of record (US 2017/0173768) disclosed the basic elements, but fails to disclose including the method, wherein the electronic controller is further configured to: determine that the position of the hammer is less than the hammer rebound threshold; and increase a phase advance angle of the motor to increase the average power supplied to the motor.
With respect to claims 6 and 17, the prior art of record (US 2017/0173768) disclosed the basic element, but fails to disclose including the method, wherein the electronic controller is further configured to: determine that the position of the hammer is less than the hammer rebound threshold; and increase a duty cycle of a pulse-width modulated (PWM) signal supplied to the motor to increase the average power supplied to the motor.
With respect to claims 8 and 19, the prior art of record (US 2017/0173768) disclosed the basic elements, but fails to disclose including the method, wherein the electronic controller is further configured to: determine that the position of the hammer is less than the hammer rebound threshold; and increase a torque current signal associated with the motor to increase the average power supplied to the motor.
With respect to claims 10 and 21, the prior art of record
(US 2017/0173768) disclosed the basic elements, but fails to disclose including the method, wherein the electronic controller is further configured to: determine that the position of the hammer is less than the hammer rebound threshold; and increase a flux current signal associated with the motor to increase the average power supplied to the motor.
Conclusion
Refer to attachment for notice of references cited and recommended for
consideration based on their disclosure of limitations of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANIEL C. CHUKWURAH whose telephone number is (571)272-4457. The examiner can normally be reached M-F & T-F 7-4:30 IFP.
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 571-260-1926. 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.
/NATHANIEL C CHUKWURAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
6/17/2026
Prosecution Insights