HANDLE FOR A PERSONAL-CARE IMPLEMENT AND PERSONAL-CARE IMPLEMENT

§103 §112

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 . 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 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. Status of Claims Below is the Final Action on the Merits for claims 1 – 2 and 6 – 17. Claims 3 – 5 are cancelled. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Response to Amendment The amendment filed October 28, 2025 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: the motor may be directly attached to the distal end of the pivot lever; the motor comprising the eccentric weight being directly attached at the distal end of the pivot lever; and a motor, 34 comprising an eccentric weight for operating the personal-care implement, 10 is directly attached to the distal end, 32 of the pivot lever, 28. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Amended claim 1 recites the limitation “the motor is directly attached to the pivot lever at the distal end of the pivot lever” in lines 22 – 23. Applicant relies on Figure 1 for support of the limitation, however, the figure cannot be relied upon to teach “a directly attached”. A direct attachment implies physical contact between two elements without intermediate components or material. Although Figure 1 shows the motor positioned adjacent the pivot lever, there is no way to ascertain from the figure that the elements are directly attached. Adjacency alone does not imply direct attachment. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that attachment/connection means are not always shown in details in the figures; therefore, based on the absence of support in the specification/claims at the time of the application being filed, the limitation is deemed new matter. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action. Claims 2 and 6 – 17 are further rejected as being dependents of rejected claim 1. 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. Claims 1 and 13 – 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jungnicket et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No 2013/0000059 A1) in view of Braun et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2010/0325828 A1) and Doll et al. (U. S. Patent Publication No. 2012/0112566 A1). PNG media_image1.png 860 500 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding Independent Claim 1, Jungnickel teaches a handle (handle, 12) for an electrically operated personal-care implement (toothbrush, 10), the handle comprising: a housing (outer shell, 212 with chassis, 35 ) comprising an inner cavity (Annotated Fig. 2), the inner cavity being defined by an inner surface of the housing (Annotated Fig. 2), the housing (212/35) further comprising an outer surface (Annotated Fig. 2) opposite the inner surface (Annotated Fig. 2) of the housing (212/35; Fig. 2), wherein the outer surface (Annotated Fig. 2) provides a surface by which a user may grip the handle (12; Fig. 2), the housing (212/35) having a proximal end (Annotated Fig. 2) closest to a head (head, 14) repeatably attachable to and detachable from the handle (12; Fig. 2), and a distal end (Annotated Fig. 2), the distal end (Fig. 2) being opposite the proximal end (Annotated Fig. 2), a swivel-mounted connector-pressure-sensor unit (rocker, 39; Fig. 2) unitarily made as a one piece body (Fig. 2) comprising a connector (Annotated Fig. 2) extending through an opening (Annotated Fig. 2) at the proximal end (Annotated Fig. 2) of the housing (212/35), and a pivot lever (Annotated Fig. 2) accommodated within the inner cavity of the housing (212/35), the pivot lever having a distal end (Annotated Fig. 2) and extending towards the distal end (Annotated Fig. 2) of the housing (212/35); wherein the pivot lever (Annotated Fig. 2) is attached to the housing (212/35) via a pivot axis (40; Paragraph [0048] – the pivot lever is formed in one piece with the rocker, 39 and is attached to the outer shell via the chassis, 35), near the proximal end of the housing (212/35) wherein the housing (212/35 further comprises a motor (drive motor, 36) comprising an eccentric weight (cam, 47; Paragraph [0052]) accommodated within the housing (212/35), the motor (36) is attached to the pivot lever (Annotated Fig. 2) at the distal end (Annotated Fig. 2) of the pivot lever (Annotated Fig. 2; Paragraph [0051]), a Printer Circuit Board Assembly (PCB, 242) and a battery (battery, 37) disposed in the inner cavity (Annotated Fig. 2) of the housing (212/35). Jungnickel does not explicitly teach a pressure sensor switch arranged on a Printed Circuit Board Assembly, wherein when a predefined level of force is applied onto the head of the personal-care implement, the pivot lever pivots and comes in contact with the PCBA to trigger a light signal visible to a user. Braun, however, teaches a pressure sensor switch (Paragraph [0002])) arranged on a Printed Circuit Board Assembly (circuitry, 275), wherein when a predefined level of force is applied onto the head of the personal-care implement (10), the pivot lever (load member, 210) pivots and comes in contact with the PCBA (275) to trigger a light signal visible to a user (Paragraphs [[0036] – [0038]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handle of Jungnickel to further include a pressure sensor switch arranged on a Printed Circuit Board Assembly, wherein when a predefined level of force is applied onto the head of the personal-care implement, the pivot lever pivots and comes in contact with the PCBA to trigger a light signal visible to a user, as taught by Braun, to provide a device that can determine the optimal force required for cleaning, thus avoiding damaging the gums of the user. Jungnickel, further, does not explicitly teach the motor is directly attached to the pivot lever. Doll, however, teaches a toothbrush wherein the motor (motor, 10 with armature, 28 as described in Paragraphs [0046] – [0050]) is directly attached to the pivot lever (rocker, 46, Fig. 5). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handle of Jungnickel to further include the motor is directly attached to the pivot lever, as taught by Doll, to provide a device that has greater efficiency and less maintenance due to the absence of intermediate components. Regarding Claim 13, Jungnickel, as modified, teaches a personal-care implement comprising a handle (12) of claim 1 (Fig. 1). Regarding Claim 14, Jungnickel, as modified, teaches the personal-care implement (Fig. 1), wherein the personal-care implement is an electrically operated toothbrush (toothbrush, 10; Fig. 1) having a head (14) comprising cleaning elements (contact field element, 20). Regarding Claim 15, Jungnickel, as modified, teaches the personal-care implement (Fig. 1), wherein the head (14) is repeatedly attachable to and detachable from the handle (12; Fig. 2). Regarding Claim 16, Jungnickel, as modified, teaches the handle of claim 1 as discussed above. Jungnickel does not teach a predefined level of force is 5N or more. Braun teaches a level of force (determined by force sensors, 32) but does not explicitly teach a predefined level of force is 5N or more, however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handle of Jungnickel to further include a predefined level of force is 5N or more, as claimed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known level on the basis of its suitability for the intended use of the connector. Regarding Claim 17, Jungnickel, as modified, teaches the handle of claim 13 as discussed above. Jungnickel does not teach a predefined level of force is 5N or more. Braun teaches a level of force (determined by force sensors, 32) but does not explicitly teach a predefined level of force is 5N or more, however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handle of Jungnickel to further include a predefined level of force is 5N or more, as claimed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known level on the basis of its suitability for the intended use of the connector. Claims 2 and 6 – 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jungnicket et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No 2013/0000059 A1) in view of Braun et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2010/0325828 A1), Doll et al. (U. S. Patent Publication No. 2012/0112566 A1) and Reinbold (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2008/0120795 A1). Regarding Claim 2, Jungnickel, as modified, teaches the handle of claim 1 as discussed above. Jungnickel does not explicitly teach the swivel-mounted connector-pressure-sensor unit is molded from a hard plastic material. Reinbold, however, teaches the swivel-mounted connector-pressure-sensor unit (213) is made from a hard plastic material (Paragraph [0056]) but does not explicitly teach molding, however, “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 a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” Further, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handle of Jungnickel to further include the swivel-mounted connector-pressure-sensor unit is made from a hard plastic material, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use of the connector. Regarding Claim 6, Jungnickel, as modified, teaches the handle of claim 1 as discussed above. Jungnickel further teaches the handle (12) wherein the housing (212) comprises a ring structure (30) connected to the housing (212) at the proximal end (Annotated Fig. 2) of the pivot lever (Annotated Fig. 2). Jungnickel does not teach the ring structure connected to the housing by two flexible hinges, thereby leaving a circular gap between the ring structure and the housing. Reinbold, however, teaches the ring structure (28; Fig. 1) connected to the housing (21) by two flexible hinges (212), thereby leaving a circular gap (210) between the ring structure (28) and the housing (21; Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handle of Jungnickel to further include the ring structure connected to the housing by two flexible hinges, thereby leaving a circular gap between the ring structure and the housing, as taught by Reinbold, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape/size of a component. A change in shape/size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Regarding Claim 7, Jungnickel, as modified, teaches the handle (12) wherein the ring structure (30) is unitarily formed with the housing (212) or provided as a separate chassis component (30; Fig. 3A), the chassis being inserted into the housing (212) at the proximal end (Fig. 3A and 2). Regarding Claim 8, Jungnickel, as modified, teaches the handle of claim 6 as discussed above. Jungnickel further teaches the ring structure (30) being made of a soft elastomeric material (Paragraph [0049] and [0050]). Jungnickel does not teach wherein the gap between the ring structure and the housing is filled by a soft elastomeric material. Reinbold, however, teaches the gap (210) between the ring structure (28) and the housing (21) is filled by a soft elastomeric material (Paragraphs [0053]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handle of Jungnickel to further include the ring structure and the housing is filled by a soft elastomeric material, as taught by Reinbold, to provide additional waterproofing tot the handle, thus preventing damage to the motor. Regarding Claim 9, Jungnickel, as modified, teaches the handle (12) wherein ring structure (30) is unitarily formed with a transparent light guide component (Paragraph [0050]). Regarding Claim 10, Jungnickel, as modified, teaches the handle (12) wherein the soft elastomeric material is transparent and/or translucent to communicate light signals (Paragraph [0050]). Regarding Claim 11, Jungnickel, as modified, teaches the wherein the pivot lever (Annotated Fig. 2) is connected to the ring structure (30; Fig. 2). Jungnickel does not teach the pivot lever is connected to the ring structure by gluing, however, “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 a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” Regarding Claim 12 Jungnickel, as modified, teaches the handle (12) wherein the soft elastomeric material (Paragraph [0049] and [0050]) seals the housing (212) in a substantially watertight manner (Paragraph [0049] and [0050]). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks made in amendment, filed February 2, 2026 with respect to objection to new matter under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) have been fully considered and they are not persuasive. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: the motor may be directly attached to the distal end of the pivot lever; the motor comprising the eccentric weight being directly attached at the distal end of the pivot lever; and a motor, 34 comprising an eccentric weight for operating the personal-care implement, 10 is directly attached to the distal end, 32 of the pivot lever, 28. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action. Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks made in amendment, filed February 2, 2026 with respect to rejected claims 1 – 2 and 6 – 17 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) have been fully considered and they are not persuasive. Applicant relies on Figure 1 for support of the limitation, however, the figure cannot be relied upon to teach “a directly attached”. A direct attachment implies physical contact between two elements without intermediate components or material. Although Figure 1 shows the motor positioned adjacent the pivot lever, there is no way to ascertain from the figure that the elements are directly attached. Adjacency alone does not imply direct attachment. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that attachment/connection means are not always shown in details in the figures; therefore, based on the absence of support in the specification/claims at the time of the application being filed, the limitation is deemed new matter. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action. Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks made in amendment, filed February 2, 2026 with respect to rejected claims 1 – 2 and 6 – 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and they are not persuasive. Applicant argues “1. Jungnickel '059's motor is fastened to the chassis, not to the rocker/pivot lever”. [AltContent: oval] PNG media_image2.png 612 288 media_image2.png Greyscale Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner could use the rationale of the Applicant and simply state that motor, 36 is adjacent to rocker/pivot lever, 42 – thus they are directly fastened. However, as stated above, that is improper to assume without factual evidence. Jungnickel clearly states in Paragraph [0051] - A first drive shaft 42 is disposed within the interior of the rocker 39. In embodiments having a detachable head 14 and neck 16, when the neck 16 is attached to the handle 12, the first drive shaft 42 engages in a rotationally fixed manner with a second drive shaft 43. The second drive shaft 43 then drives the contact field element 20 in rotation about the axis of rotation 31 via a bevel-gear stage 44. The motor end of first drive shaft 42 is connected to drive motor 36 via a gear mechanism 45. The powered toothbrush 10 further includes, within the handle 12, a motor shaft 46 that projects out from drive motor 36. The continuous rotary movement of motor shaft 46 is converted into a rotary, oscillating movement of first drive shaft 42 by means of gear mechanism 45. The result is that contact field element 20 is driven in rotation in a reciprocating manner. Clearly, the motor is attached to the pivot lever. Applicant argues “2. Jungnickel '059's ring structure is a light indicator, not a hinged mechanical ring as claimed. First and foremost, Examiner notes that this argument is not directed toward a limitation of independent claim 1. This limitation isn’t introduced until claim 6, however, Jungnickel isn’t relied upon in the rejection to teach said limitations of claim 6, thus Applicant’s arguments are moot. Applicant argues “3. Doll does not teach a motor "directly attached" to a rocker in the sense of claim 1. Examiner is unclear as to what is meant by “in the sense of claim 1’. What exactly is “the sense”? The claim limitation is explicit – the motor directly attached to the pivot lever. Doll explicitly teaches the electric motor, 10 comprising the amateur, 28 and rocker 46 directly attached to said electric motor as discussed in in Paragraphs [0046] – [0050] and [0052]). Further, The limitation does not find support in the Specifications or the Figures, thus the limitation needs to be cancelled. Applicant argues “4. Braun's sensor arrangement is structurally different and not integrated with a lever-mounted motor”. Applicant’s arguments are moot as Braun teaches what Jungnickel lacks. Jungnickel already teaches a lever mounted motor with the PCB, 242 connected as shown in Fig. 2. Jungnickel further teaches a visible signal may be provided to the user when too much force is applied to the brush head and therewith a chance is given that the user can damage his gums. In such embodiments, a first signal may be provided where the user has successfully brushed for a requisite period of time, for example two minutes, for a predetermined number of brushing routines. A second signal may be provided to the user where the user has not brushes the requisite time for each and every of the predetermined number of brushing routines; but is silent in regards to a predefined level of force. Braun is simply relied upon to teach that predefined level of force and further a pressure sensor switch (Paragraph [0002])) arranged on a Printed Circuit Board Assembly (circuitry, 275), wherein when a predefined level of force is applied onto the head of the personal-care implement (10), the pivot lever (load member, 210) pivots and comes in contact with the PCBA (275) to trigger a light signal visible to a user (Paragraphs [[0036] – [0038]), as claimed. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATINA N HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8024. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday; 5:30am to 3:30pm. 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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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. /KATINA N. HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723