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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“impact assembly” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informality: “assembly, the” in line 4 should read “assembly, wherein the”.
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.
Claim 4 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the gear" in line 1. There is ambiguous antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear whether the limitation is referring to the drive gear first mentioned in line 4 of claim 1 or one of the planet gears first mentioned in line 14 of claim 1. For examination purposes, the examiner is interpreting the limitation as if it instead reads “the drive gear”.
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.
(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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu et al. (CN 218639511 U), hereinafter Xu.
Regarding claim 1, Xu discloses an impact wrench (1 in Figure 1), comprising:
a housing (15 in Figures 1-30);
an electric motor (11 in Figures 3-6) accommodated in the housing (15) (apparent from Figure 3) and comprising a stator assembly (115 in Figures 6 and 8) and a rotor assembly (114 in Figures 4, 6, and 8), the rotor assembly (114) comprising a rotor shaft (111 in Figures 3-10) and a drive gear (121 in Figures 8 and 9), driven by the rotor shaft (111) (Page 7 lines 42-43 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U), disposed at a front end of the rotor shaft (111) (apparent from Figures 8 and 10);
an anvil (141 and 1411 collectively in Figures 3 and 5) for mounting a tool head (one of the “working heads” described in Page 3 lines 55-57 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U) to output power externally (Page 3 lines 55-57 and Page 6 lines 48-54 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U);
a grip (151 in Figure 1) connected to or formed on the housing (15) (apparent from Figure 1);
an impact assembly (134 in Figures 3-5) disposed in the housing (15) and used for providing an impact force to the anvil (141 and 1411 collectively) (Page 6 lines 48-50 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U); and
a transmission assembly (131, pins 1223, gears 1222, 1221, and 123 collectively in Figure 5), disposed in the housing (15) between the electric motor (11) and the impact assembly (134) (apparent when Figures 3-5 are viewed in relation to one another), configured for transmitting power outputted by the rotor shaft (111) to the impact assembly (134) (Page 8 lines 45-55 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U) and comprising:
a main shaft (131, pins 1223, and gears 1222 in Figure 5, collectively), disposed in an extension direction of the rotor shaft (111) (apparent from Figure 3), comprising a plurality of planetary shafts (pins 1223) and a plurality of planet gears (gears 1222), driven by the drive gear (121), disposed around the plurality of planetary shafts (pins 1223), respectively (Page 8 lines 45-55 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U); and
a rear cover (1221 and 123 collectively in Figure 4; or 1221 in Figure 4), surrounding at least part of the main shaft (131, pins 1223, and gears 1222, collectively) from rear to front (apparent when Figures 3-5 are viewed in relation to one another), formed with an inner ring gear (1221; or the radially inner portion/half of 1221 which comprises gear teeth) that meshes with the plurality of planet gears (gears 1222) (Page 8 lines 50-52 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U);
wherein, when the plurality of planet gears (gears 1222) rotate in the inner ring gear (1221; or the radially inner portion/half of 1221 which comprises gear teeth), the rear cover (1221 and 123 collectively; or 1221) is in sliding contact with the main shaft (131, pins 1223, and gears 1222, collectively) (at least because gears 1222 of the main shaft slide on ring gear 1221 of the rear cover when gears 1222 rotate, Page 8 lines 50-52 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U).
Regarding claim 2, Xu discloses that the rear cover (1221) and the inner ring gear (the radially inner portion/half of 1221 which comprises gear teeth) are integrally formed (apparent from Figures 4 and 5).
Regarding claim 4, Xu discloses that an outer diameter of the gear (121) is greater than a diameter of the rotor shaft (111) (apparent from Figure 8).
Regarding claim 5, Xu discloses that the electric motor (11) is an inner rotor motor (because rotor 114 is located internally of stator 115 of motor 11, as is apparent from Figures 6 and 8).
Regarding claim 9, in accordance to MPEP 2113, the method of making a product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself. Therefore, the limitation “wherein the rear cover is made through powder metallurgy” does not patentably distinguish the claimed rear cover from the rear cover of Xu which meets all the structural limitations. Please note that even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of the product, i.e. the rear cover, does not depend on its method of production, i.e. powder metallurgy. In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Federal Circuit 1985).
Claims 1 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lottes et al. (US 2023/0405775), hereinafter Lottes.
Regarding claim 1, Lottes discloses an impact wrench (10 in Figure 1), comprising:
a housing (14 in Figure 1);
an electric motor (42 in Figure 2) accommodated in the housing (14) (apparent from Figure 2) and comprising a stator assembly (46 in Figure 2) and a rotor assembly (the “rotor” described in Paragraph 0029 and 82 in Figures 2 and 3, collectively) (Paragraph 0029), the rotor assembly (“rotor” and 82, collectively) comprising a rotor shaft (50 in Figures 2 and 3) and a drive gear (82), driven by the rotor shaft (50) (Paragraph 0035), disposed at a front end of the rotor shaft (50) (apparent from Figures 2 and 3);
an anvil (126 in Figure 2) for mounting a tool head (the “tool element” described in Paragraph 0041) to output power externally (Paragraph 0041);
a grip (45 in Figures 1 and 2) connected to or formed on the housing (14) (Paragraphs 0025 and 0023);
an impact assembly (130 in Figure 2) disposed in the housing (14) (apparent from Figure 2) and used for providing an impact force to the anvil (126) (Paragraphs 0041 and 0042); and
a transmission assembly (94, pins 88, gears 86, and 90 collectively in Figures 2 and 3), disposed in the housing (14) between the electric motor (42) and the impact assembly (130) (apparent from Figures 2 and 3), configured for transmitting power outputted by the rotor shaft (50) to the impact assembly (130) (Paragraphs 0037, 0054, and 0055) and comprising:
a main shaft (94, pins 88, and gears 86 in Figures 2 and 3, collectively), disposed in an extension direction of the rotor shaft (50) (apparent from Figures 2 and 3), comprising a plurality of planetary shafts (pins 88) and a plurality of planet gears (gears 86), driven by the drive gear (82) (Paragraphs 0035 and 0037), disposed around the plurality of planetary shafts (pins 88), respectively (apparent from Figures 2 and 3); and
a rear cover (90 in figure 3), surrounding at least part of the main shaft (94, pins 88, and gears 86 collectively) from rear to front (apparent from Figure 3), formed with an inner ring gear (90; or the radially inner portion/half of 90 which comprises gear teeth) that meshes with the plurality of planet gears (gears 86) (Paragraph 0035);
wherein, when the plurality of planet gears (gears 86) rotate in the inner ring gear (90; or the radially inner portion/half of 90 which comprises gear teeth), the rear cover (90) is in sliding contact with the main shaft (94, pins 88, and gears 86 collectively) (at least because gears 86 of the main shaft slide on ring gear 90 of the rear cover when gears 86 rotate, Paragraph 0035).
Regarding claim 7, Lottes discloses that the impact wrench (10) has no bearing for the main shaft (94, pins 88, and gears 86 collectively) (a bearing for the main shaft is not described or shown in any part of the specification of Lottes).
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 of this title, 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 3, 11-13, and 17-20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu.
Regarding claim 3, Xu discloses all the limitations of the claim as stated above but does not expressly disclose: an axial overlap length of a contact region between the rear cover and the main shaft is greater than or equal to 1.5 mm.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have made the axial overlap length of the contact region between the rear cover of Xu and the main shaft of Xu be greater than or equal to 1.5 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Please note that in Paragraphs 0008 and 0116 of the Patent Application Publication of the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Regarding claim 11, Xu discloses that the impact assembly (134) comprises an impact block (134) driven by the electric motor (11) (Page 6 lines 46-50 and Page 10 lines 9-31 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U), and the impact block (134) is configured to reciprocate along an axial direction and impact the anvil (141 and 1411 collectively) along a rotational direction (Page 10 lines 9-31 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U).
However, Xu does not expressly disclose: a ratio of an axial movement distance of the impact block to a diameter of the impact block is less than or equal to 0.3, and a distance between a rearmost edge of the housing and a frontmost edge of the anvil is less than or equal to 95 mm.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have made the ratio of the axial movement distance of the impact block of Xu to the diameter of the impact block of Xu be less than or equal to 0.3, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Please note that in Paragraphs 0008 and 0116 of the Patent Application Publication of the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
It would further have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have made the distance between the rearmost edge of the housing of Xu and the frontmost edge of the anvil of Xu be less than or equal to 95 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Please note that in Paragraphs 0016-0018, 0057, and 0058 of the Patent Application Publication of the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Regarding claim 12, Xu discloses that the impact assembly (134) comprises an impact block (134) driven by the electric motor (11) (Page 6 lines 46-50 and Page 10 lines 9-31 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U).
However, Xu does not expressly disclose: a ratio of a distance between a rearmost edge of the housing and a frontmost edge of the anvil to a diameter of the impact block is less than or equal to 2.5, and the distance between the rearmost edge of the housing and the frontmost edge of the anvil is less than or equal to 95 mm.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have made the ratio of the distance between the rearmost edge of the housing of Xu and the frontmost edge of the anvil of Xu to the diameter of the impact block of Xu be less than or equal to 2.5, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Please note that in Paragraphs 0017 and 0129 of the Patent Application Publication of the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
It would further have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have made the distance between the rearmost edge of the housing of Xu and the frontmost edge of the anvil of Xu be less than or equal to 95 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Please note that in Paragraphs 0016-0018, 0057, and 0058 of the Patent Application Publication of the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Regarding claim 13, Xu discloses that the impact assembly (134) comprises an impact block (134) driven by the electric motor (11) (Page 6 lines 46-50 and Page 10 lines 9-31 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U).
However, Xu does not expressly disclose: a ratio of a distance between a rearmost edge of the housing and a frontmost edge of the anvil to a front-to-rear length of the impact block is less than or equal to 4.7, and the distance between the rearmost edge of the housing and the frontmost edge of the anvil is less than or equal to 95 mm.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have made the ratio of the distance between the rearmost edge of the housing of Xu and the frontmost edge of the anvil of Xu to the front-to-rear length of the impact block of Xu be less than or equal to 4.7, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Please note that in Paragraphs 0018 and 0129 of the Patent Application Publication of the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
It would further have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have made the distance between the rearmost edge of the housing of Xu and the frontmost edge of the anvil of Xu be less than or equal to 95 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Please note that in Paragraphs 0016-0018, 0057, and 0058 of the Patent Application Publication of the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Regarding claim 17, Xu discloses a power tool (1 in Figure 1), comprising:
a housing (15 in Figures 1-30);
an electric motor (11 in Figures 3-6) accommodated in the housing (15) (apparent from Figure 3) and comprising a stator assembly (115 in Figures 6 and 8) and a rotor assembly (114 in Figures 4, 6, and 8), the stator assembly (115) comprises stator windings (1152 in Figure 9) and a stator core (1151 in Figure 9), the stator windings (1152) are wound onto the stator core (1151) (Page 7 lines 4 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U), the stator core (1151) is disposed on an outer circumference of the rotor assembly (114) (Page 7 lines 5 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U), the rotor assembly (114) comprises a rotor core (1141 in Figure 9) and a rotor shaft (111 in Figures 3-10) protruding from end surfaces of the rotor core (1141) in a front and rear direction (apparent when Figure 9 is viewed in relation to Figure 10), and the rotor shaft (111) is supported by a front bearing (112 in Figure 8) and a rear bearing (113 in Figure 8) (Page 7 lines 10-13 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U) and drives a drive gear (121 in Figures 8 and 9) (Page 7 lines 42-43 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U) disposed at a front end of the rotor shaft (111) (apparent from Figures 8 and 10); and
a transmission assembly (131, pins 1223, gears 1222, 1221, and 123 collectively in Figure 5) comprising:
a main shaft (131, pins 1223, and gears 1222 in Figure 5, collectively), disposed in an extension direction of the rotor shaft (111) (apparent from Figure 3), comprising a plurality of planetary shafts (pins 1223) and a plurality of planet gears (gears 1222), driven by the drive gear (121), disposed around the plurality of planetary shafts (pins 1223), respectively (Page 8 lines 45-55 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U); and
a support portion (1221 and 123 collectively in Figure 4) disposed on a rear part of the main shaft (131, pins 1223, and gears 1222, collectively) and used for supporting the main shaft (apparent when Figures 3-5 and 8 are viewed in relation to one another, Page 8 lines 50-55 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U);
wherein axial positions of the support portion (1221 and 123 collectively), the stator assembly (115), and the front bearing (112) at least partially overlap (apparent from Figure 8).
However, Xu does not expressly disclose: an outer diameter of the front bearing is greater than or equal to 8 mm and less than or equal to 16 mm.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have made the outer diameter of the front bearing of Xu be greater than or equal to 8 mm and less than or equal to 16 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Please note that in Paragraphs 0024 and 0101 of the Patent Application Publication of the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Regarding claim 18, Xu discloses that the support portion (1221 and 123 collectively) is a rear cover (1221 and 123 collectively) of a gearbox (formed by gears 1222 and gear 121 collectively in Figure 4) (apparent when Figures 305 are viewed in relation to one another, Page 7 lines 22-25 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U), the rear cover (1221 and 123 collectively) of the gearbox is formed with an inner ring gear (1221) (apparent from Figure 4), and the inner ring gear (1221) meshes with the plurality of planet gears (gears 1222) (Page 8 lines 50-52 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U).
Regarding claim 19, Xu discloses that, when the plurality of planet gears (gears 1222) rotate in the inner ring gear (1221), the rear cover (1221 and 123 collectively) of the gearbox is in sliding contact with the main shaft (131, pins 1223, and gears 1222, collectively) (at least because gears 1222 of the main shaft slide on ring gear 1221 of the rear cover when gears 1222 rotate, Page 8 lines 50-52 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U).
Regarding claim 20, Xu discloses all the limitations of the claim as stated above but does not expressly disclose: the outer diameter of the front bearing is less than or equal to 1.5 times an outer diameter of the rear bearing.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have made the outer diameter of the front bearing be less than or equal to 1.5 times an outer diameter of the rear bearing, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Please note that in Paragraph 0105 of the Patent Application Publication of the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu in view of Liu et al. (US 2018/0206410), hereinafter Liu.
Regarding claim 8, Xu discloses all the limitations of the claim as stated above but does not expressly disclose: material hardness of a contact region of the rear cover is greater than or equal to 20 HRC.
Liu teaches that it was known to make a material hardness of a contact region (bottom or top surface of 45 in Figure 6) of a rear cover (45 in Figures 5 and 6) be greater than or equal to 30 HRC (Paragraph 0048 lines 17-18), in order to provide the rear cover (45) with good wear resistance and prevent the rear cover (45) from being worn (Paragraph 0048 lines 17-20).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Xu to incorporate the teachings of Liu by making a material hardness of a contact region of the rear cover be greater than or equal to 30 HRC, because doing so would achieve the predictable result of providing the rear cover with good wear resistance and prevent the rear cover from being worn. KSR Int’l Co. V. Teleflex Inc. 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ 2d 1385 (Supreme Court 2007) (KSR).
Regarding claim 16, Xu discloses a power tool (1 in Figure 1), comprising:
a housing (15 in Figures 1-30);
an electric motor (11 in Figures 3-6) accommodated in the housing (15) (apparent from Figure 3) and comprising a stator assembly (115 in Figures 6 and 8) and a rotor assembly (114 in Figures 4, 6, and 8), the rotor assembly (114) comprising a rotor shaft (111 in Figures 3-10) and a drive gear (121 in Figures 8 and 9), driven by the rotor shaft (111) (Page 7 lines 42-43 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U), disposed at a front end of the rotor shaft (111) (apparent from Figures 8 and 10); and
a transmission assembly (131, pins 1223, gears 1222, 1221, and 123 collectively in Figure 5) comprising:
a main shaft (131, pins 1223, and gears 1222 in Figure 5, collectively), disposed in an extension direction of the rotor shaft (111) (apparent from Figure 3), comprising a plurality of planetary shafts (pins 1223) and a plurality of planet gears (gears 1222), driven by the drive gear (121), disposed around the plurality of planetary shafts (pins 1223) (Page 8 lines 45-55 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U); and
a rear cover (1221 and 123 collectively in Figure 4), surrounding at least part of the main shaft (131, pins 1223, and gears 1222, collectively) from rear to front (apparent when Figures 3-5 are viewed in relation to one another), formed with an inner ring gear (1221) that meshes with the plurality of planet gears (gears 1222) (Page 8 lines 50-52 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U);
wherein, when the plurality of planet gears (gears 1222) rotate in the inner ring gear (1221), the rear cover (1221 and 123 collectively) is in sliding contact with the main shaft (131, pins 1223, and gears 1222, collectively) (at least because gears 1222 of the main shaft slide on ring gear 1221 of the rear cover when gears 1222 rotate, Page 8 lines 50-52 of Machine Translation of CN 218639511 U).
However, Xu does not expressly disclose: material hardness of a contact region of the rear cover is greater than or equal to 20 HRC.
Liu teaches that it was known to make a material hardness of a contact region (bottom or top surface of 45 in Figure 6) of a rear cover (45 in Figures 5 and 6) be greater than or equal to 30 HRC (Paragraph 0048 lines 17-18), in order to provide the rear cover (45) with good wear resistance and prevent the rear cover (45) from being worn (Paragraph 0048 lines 17-20).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Xu to incorporate the teachings of Liu by making a material hardness of a contact region of the rear cover be greater than or equal to 30 HRC, because doing so would achieve the predictable result of providing the rear cover with good wear resistance and prevent the rear cover from being worn. KSR Int’l Co. V. Teleflex Inc. 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ 2d 1385 (Supreme Court 2007) (KSR).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu in view of Breitbach et al. (US 2024/0342888), hereinafter Breitbach.
Regarding claim 10, Xu discloses all the limitations of the claim as stated above but does not expressly disclose: a contact region between the rear cover and the main shaft is carburized.
Breitbach teaches that it was known to carburize a contact region (outer surface of 38 in Figure 4, which contacts the “tool bit” as described in Paragraph 0065) between a first part (the “tool bit” described in Paragraph 0065) and a shaft (38 in Figure 4) (Paragraph 0084), in order to increase the hardness, strength, and wear resistance of the contact region (Paragraph 0084 lines 1-7 and Paragraph 006 lines 15-17).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Xu to incorporate the teachings of Breitbach by carburizing a contact region between the rear cover and the main shaft, because doing so would achieve the predictable result of increasing the hardness, strength, and wear resistance of the contact region. KSR Int’l Co. V. Teleflex Inc. 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ 2d 1385 (Supreme Court 2007) (KSR).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 14, and 15 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:
Regarding claim 6, the closest prior art reference, Xu (see 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above), discloses a front bearing (112 in Figure 3).
However, Xu, taken alone or in combination with the prior art as a whole, fails to teach or render obvious that: axial positions of the front bearing, the stator assembly, the rear cover, and the main shaft at least partially overlap.
Regarding claim 14, the closest prior art reference, Xu (see 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above), discloses a chuck bushing (shown in an annotated version of Figure 3 of Xu, hereinafter Figure 3x, below) and an anvil bushing (shown in Figure 3x below).
PNG
media_image1.png
780
1323
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 3x: an annotated version of Figure 3 of Xu
However, Xu, taken alone or in combination with the prior art as a whole, fails to teach or render obvious that: axial positions of the chuck bushing and the anvil bushing at least partially overlap.
Regarding claim 15, the closest prior art reference, Xu (see 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above), discloses a battery pack (16 in Figure 1).
However, Xu, taken alone or in combination with the prior art as a whole, fails to teach or render obvious: a gear button, wherein the gear button is used for controlling a working gear of the impact wrench, and the gear button is disposed on a side of the battery pack.
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).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The patent documents listed on the PTO-892 form teach limitations of the claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANZIM IMAM whose telephone number is (571)272-2216. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri 8:00AM - 4:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Shelley Self can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TANZIM IMAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731