The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor
DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/9/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-12, 15 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ulmen (DE 4304225) in view of Elstner (DE 2933975).
Regarding claim 1, Ulmen discloses a cleaning assembly comprising:
a shaft defining a longitudinal axis, the shaft extending from a first end to a second end opposite the first end (15);
a first cleaning element disposed at the first end of the shaft (14) ; and
a second cleaning element disposed at the second end of the shaft (12);
wherein the first cleaning element comprises a proximal portion and a distal portion adjacent to the proximal portion (proximal portion and distal portion of 14);
Ulmen discloses the shape, size and material of the brushes can be adapted for different cleaning purposes (col. 1, lines 48-51; page 2 of the translation). Ulmen does not expressly discloses shape wherein the proximal portion has a greater cross section in the direction perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the shaft than the distal portion; Elstner discloses a cleaning assembly with a cleaning element disposed at the end of the shaft wherein the cleaning element has a shape comprises a proximal portion (12, fig. 2) and distal portion (13, fig. 2) adjacent to the proximal portion; and the proximal portion has a greater cross section in the direction perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the shaft than the distal portion for cleaning different parts of a smoking device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the first cleaning element of Ulmen with proximal portion having a greater cross section than that of the distal portion in the direction perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the shaft as taught by Elstner for cleaning different parts of a smoking device.
Furthermore, Ulmen discloses the shape, size and material of the brushes can be adapted for different cleaning purposes (col. 1, lines 48-51; page 2 of the translation). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the distal portion and the proximal portion from different materials and the proximal portion is harder than the distal portion so that they can be adapted for different cleaning purposes (e.g. different parts of a smoking device).
Regarding claim 2, Elstner discloses the proximal portion and the distal portion are coaxially arranged (see figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 3, Elstner discloses the proximal portion, the distal portion, and the shaft are coaxially arranged (see figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 4, Elstner discloses wherein the proximal portion and the distal portion are joined at an interface surface, the interface surface being on a plane that is perpendicular to the longitudinal axis (see part between 12 and 13 of figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 5, Ulmen discloses the size of the first cleaning element can be adapted to for cleaning purposes (col. 1, lines 48-51); therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to perform routine experimentation to arrive to the claimed range.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Ulmen and Elstner discloses wherein at least one of the proximal portion, the distal portion, and the second cleaning element is substantially cylindrical (see drawing of Ulmen and figs.1-2 of Elstner).
Regarding claim 8, since Ulmen discloses the shape, size and material of the brushes can be adapted for different cleaning purposes (col. 1, lines 48-51; page 2 of the translation); it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the distal portion and the second cleaning element are both substantially cylindrical and have substantially equal diameters.
Regarding claim 9, since Ulmen discloses the shape, size and material of the brushes can be adapted for different cleaning purposes (col. 1, lines 48-51), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to perform routine experimentation to arrive to the claimed range.
Regarding claim 10, since Ulmen discloses the shape, size and material of the brushes can be adapted for different cleaning purposes (col. 1, lines 48-51; page 2 of the translation), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to perform routine experimentation to arrive to the claimed range.
Regarding claim 11, since Ulmen discloses the shape, size and material of the brushes can be adapted for different cleaning purposes (col. 1, lines 48-51; page 2 of the translation), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to perform routine experimentation to arrive to the claimed range.
Regarding claim 12, since Ulmen discloses the shape, size and material of the brushes can be adapted for different cleaning purposes (col. 1, lines 48-51), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to perform routine experimentation to arrive to the claimed range.
Regarding claim 15, since Ulmen discloses the shape, size and material of the brushes can be adapted for different cleaning purposes (col. 1, lines 48-51; page 2 of the translation), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to perform routine experimentation to arrive to the claimed range.
Regarding claim 18, since Ulmen discloses the shape, size and material of the brushes can be adapted for different cleaning purposes (col. 1, lines 48-51; page 2 of the translation), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make at least one of the proximal portion, the distal portion, and the second cleaning element is elliptical or ridged.
Regarding claim 19, Ulmen discloses in a preferred embodiment that the second cleaning element can comprise cotton capable of being impregnated with a cleaning fluid. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the cleaning element impregnated with a cleaning fluid.
Regarding claim 20, Ulmen discloses wherein the at least the part of at least one of the first and second cleaning elements is absorbent (cotton) (Abstract).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 4/9/2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHU H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-5931. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Michael H Wilson can be reached at 5712703882. 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.
/PHU H NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1747
Prosecution Insights