DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is responsive to the Amendment filed November 24, 2025. The examiner acknowledges the amendments to claim 1 and the cancellation of claim 38. Claims 1, 2, 6, 7,10, 11, 13, 21, 22, 27, 29, 30 and 32-37 are pending, while claims 21, 22, 27, 29 and 30 remain withdrawn from consideration.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 38 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.
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.
Claims 1, 6, 10, 11, 32 and 35-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chang (U.S. 9,943,157). Chang teaches a personal hygiene swab comprising an elongate handle (118, 204, 302) with a first end and a second end; and an absorbent material (120, 218) heat bonded or adhered to the handle (see column 4, lines 28-37) and comprising an open-cell foam (see column 4, lines 25-27). The absorbent material covers a first end of the handle, and the second end of the handle extends from the absorbent material (see at least Figures 1C and 2A). The length of absorbent material is capable of being trimmed with scissors making it adjustable. The handle is retractable within container (102). A cross section of the handle along its length is nonuniform (see at least Figures 1, 2A, 2B and 3). The absorbent material is cylindrical or tubular (see at least column 4, lines 6-14). The handle is elongated (see at least Figures 1A, 2A and 3) and cylindrical or tubular (see at least Figure 4). The handle may comprise polypropylene (see column 4, lines 2-5).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang. Chang appears to teach that the absorbent material surrounds at least half of the length of the handle (see Figure 1C), but there is no indication that the figures are drawn to scale. It appears that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had reasonable expectation of success in modifying the swab of Chang to have the length of the absorbent material extend at least half the length of the handle, as it involves only adjusting the dimension of a component disclosed to required length. Therefore, 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 device of Chang by making the absorbent material to surround half of the length of the handle as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that "where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang in view of Bivins (US 2008/0300527). Chang teaches the absorbent tip may take any number of shapes and contours depending upon functional, aesthetic or other considerations (see column 4, lines 12-14), but Chang does not expressly disclose that absorbent material comprises grooves, ridges, or both. Bivins teaches a swab with a plurality of ridges and grooves (See at least Figures 2-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to form of the absorbent material of Chang with a plurality of ridges and grooves similar to those of Bivins as it is known to use different shapes of absorbent material dependent on functional, aesthetic or other considerations, like cleaning body orifices, with predictable results.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang in view of Khademhosseini (US 2016/0361203). Chang teaches all of the limitations of the claim except that the second end of the handle comprises a gripping portion in the shape of a spherical knob. Khademhosseini teaches a swab device with a handle for moving fluid through the absorbent tip with a spherical bulb to be gripped at the second end of the handle (see at least Figures 5-7). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the handle of the device of Chang with a spherical gripping knob handle similar to that of Khademhosseini in place of the container of Chang as an alternative means for moving fluids through the absorbent material of the swab with predictable results.
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang in view of JP-S61177656-U. Chang teaches the absorbent tip may take any number of shapes and contours depending upon functional, aesthetic or other considerations (see column 4, lines 12-14), but Chang does not expressly disclose that a cross section of the absorbent material normal to a longitudinal axis of the handle is hexagonal. However, JP S61177656 U teaches a swab with a cross section of the absorbent material normal to a longitudinal axis of the handle being hexagonal (and another side [of a cotton body part] comprises the shape of a section polygon such as a section triangle, a quadrangle, a pentagon, and a hexagon. (see highlighted portion from previously presented translation)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to form of the absorbent material of Chang with a hexagonal shape similar to that taught be JP-S61177656-U as it is known to use different shapes of absorbent material dependent on functional, aesthetic or other considerations with predictable results.
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang in view of Donovan et al. (US 2018/0161019). Chang teaches that the absorbent material comprises open cell foam (see column 4, lines 25-27) but does not teach that the absorbent material comprises polyurethane. Donovan et al. teaches that polyurethane foams are medical grade polymeric foams useful in forming swabs that absorb fluid (see at least paragraph [0076]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use polyurethane foams similar to those taught by Donovan et al. as the open cell foam in the swab of Chang in order to effectively absorb fluids.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Charles A Marmor, II whose telephone number is (571)272-4730. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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, Jonathan Moffat can be reached at (571) 272-4390. 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.
/CHARLES A MARMOR II/Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3791