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.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on October 28, 2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 – 2 and 6 – 17 are pending. 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 October 28, 2025 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; however, to be clear and on the record, the limitation has been examined and rejected in view of Dolls. Applicant is arguing limitation of the specification that constitute new matter; thus the arguments are moot. As stated above, Examiner notes that the amendment to the specification and the claims fails to find support in the specification/claims and thus Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Examiner lastly notes that the arguments related to the figures presented on the art of record are moot as these are not the figures as laid out in the Patent publication but rather illustrations provided by Applicant and hold no weight. If Applicant would like to present arguments in reference to the art of record, Examiner requests the figured be limited to the figures provided in the Patent Publication.
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