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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strickler (US 3446563) in view of Hayakawa (US 11667146) and Sobel (US 8696228).
Regarding claim 1, Strickler teaches a writing instrument (10), comprising: a writing nib assembly, comprising; a writing nib (40), comprising: a first end configured to emit ink, and a second end; and a hollow nib collar (28) configured to receive the writing nib, the hollow nib collar comprising a first end and a second end; wherein the writing nib is disposed in the hollow nib collar such that the first end of the writing nib extends from the first end of the hollow nib collar and the second end of the writing nib extends from the second end of the hollow nib collar (Fig. 1); and a writing nib adapter (24) comprising: a hollow frustoconical portion (see annotated Figs. 1 and 2 below) having a first inner diameter at a first end, a first outer diameter at a first end, a second inner diameter at a second end, and a second outer diameter at a second end (Fig. 1); and a substantially cylindrical portion (see annotated Figs. 1 and 2 below) having an outer surface, an inner surface, and an inner diameter substantially equal to the second inner diameter (Fig. 1); wherein the hollow nib collar is configured to receive the writing nib adapter, and the hollow frustoconical portion is configured to receive the writing nib assembly through the first end.
PNG
media_image1.png
279
316
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Strickler does not teach that the second end of the nib comprises an elliptical surface, the hollow frustoconical portion is configured to receive a feeder rod through the second end or that the substantially cylindrical portion comprises a plurality of slots extending linearly from the outer surface of the substantially cylindrical portion to the inner surface of the substantially cylindrical portion, wherein individual slots of the plurality of slots are separated from ends of the substantially cylindrical portion and extend along a majority of a length of the writing nib adapter, or that the substantially cylindrical portion has an outer diameter that is smaller than the second outer diameter.
While Strickler does not teach that the hollow frustoconical portion is configured to receive a feeder rod through the second end, Strickler does teach that the cylindrical portion adjacent the hollow frustoconical portion is configured to receive a feeder rod (32).
At the time the invention was made, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have rearranged the device of Strickler such that the feeder rod extends into the hollow frustoconical portion because Applicant has not disclosed that the location of the end of the feeder rod relative to the nib adapter provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Strickler’s pen and the applicant’s invention to perform equally well with either the feeder rod location taught by Strickler or the claimed feeder rod received in the hollow frustoconical portion because both feeder rod locations are equally capable of contacting the second end of the nib and providing a flow of ink thereto.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the feeder rod location of Strickler to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1 because such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over the prior art of Strickler.
Hayakawa teaches writing nib adapter (205) with a plurality of slots (254) extending linearly from an outer surface of a substantially cylindrical portion (252) to the inner surface of the substantially cylindrical portion, wherein individual slots of the plurality of slots are separated from ends of the substantially cylindrical portion and extend along a majority of a length of the writing nib adapter (Fig. 8A).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the writing nib adapter of Strickler with a plurality of slots extending linearly from the outer surface of the substantially cylindrical portion to the inner surface of the substantially cylindrical portion, wherein individual slots of the plurality of slots are separated from ends of the substantially cylindrical portion and extend along a majority of a length of the writing nib adapter as taught by Hayakawa for the purpose of easily setting an appropriate fitting force for connecting the writing nib adapter to a pen body (Hayakawa, col. 13, ll. 18-32).
Sobel teaches a writing nib adapter (5) with a substantially cylindrical portion that has an outer diameter that is smaller than a second outer diameter.
PNG
media_image2.png
492
588
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have to have modified the substantially cylindrical portion of Strickler such that the a substantially cylindrical portion that has an outer diameter that is smaller than the second outer diameter as taught by Sobel for the purpose of enabling the nib adapter to be inserted into a pen barrel (as in Sobel, Fig. 5).
Sobel further teaches a nib with a second end that comprises an elliptical surface (col. 4, ll. 47-56).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the nib of Strickler such that the nib has a second end that comprises an elliptical surface for the purpose of increasing the effectiveness of the absorption of ink (Sobel, col. 4, ll. 53-56).
Regarding claim 30, the combination of Strickler, Hayakawa and Sobel teaches the writing instrument of claim 1, wherein the plurality of slots are configured to allow for the passage of gas therethrough to vent the passage of ink between the writing nib adapter and the writing nib assembly (the slots of Hayakawa are large enough to allow for the passage of gas).
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strickler, Hayakawa and Sobel as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Otake (US 3932044).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Strickler, Hayakawa, and Sobel teaches the writing instrument of claim 1, wherein the hollow nib collar comprises: a second substantially cylindrical portion at the second end of the hollow nib collar having a second diameter (Fig. 1), and a frustoconical portion adjacent the second substantially cylindrical portion (Fig. 1).
Strickler does not teach that the hollow nib collar comprises a first substantially cylindrical portion at the first end of the hollow nib collar having a first diameter.
Otake teaches a nib collar with a first substantially cylindrical portion at the first end of a hollow nib collar (7) having a first diameter.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the nib collar of Strickler to include a first substantially cylindrical portion at the first end of the hollow nib collar having a first diameter as taught by Otake, wherein doing so would merely be a matter of selecting a known shape suitable for use as a nib collar.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Strickler, Hayakawa, Sobel, and Otake teaches the writing instrument of claim 11, wherein the frustoconical portion has a diameter at its largest end which is greater than the second diameter, such that the hollow nib collar may receive the writing nib adapter about the second substantially cylindrical portion which will not extend beyond the frustoconical portion (Strickler, Fig. 1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 18 August 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Nagai does not teach the plurality of slots as recited in claim 1.
In response, it is noted that the newly cited Hayakawa reference is relied upon to teach the claimed slots.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY S OLIVER whose telephone number is (571)270-3787. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7-3 ET.
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, David Angwin can be reached at (571)270-3735. 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.
/BRADLEY S OLIVER/Examiner, Art Unit 3754
/DAVID P ANGWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights