On 9/28/2011 11:17 PM, Mike Paulsen wrote:
advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

A rebuttal to Mr Gass by the PTI issued today 10/18 ... if you're going
to argue either way, you still need to read it:


http://www.protoolreviews.com/news/i...ble-saw-safety

Interesting section, copied he

Stephen Gass, a patent attorney, has filed more than 120 U.S. patent
applications, and has over 70 issued U.S. patents which pertain to the
SawStop technology.

quote

Stephen Gass told the U.S. government that it should assume that no
manufacturer will be able to introduce injury mitigation technology that
does not infringe on his patents.

After the PTI-JV technology became known, SawStop amended one of their
then-pending patent applications to purportedly cover any table saw that
retracts the blade rapidly within 14 milliseconds – using any retraction
technique after detecting contact. This patent application which was
subsequently allowed by the U.S. Patent Office, is arguably not limited
to SawStop's blade brake technology for retracting the blade, but rather
is designed to cover any retraction technique, hindering the development
of alternative blade retraction technologies and blocking competing
inventors from using their own inventions.

/quote

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop