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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/01/2026 has been entered.
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.
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smellie (US 2536776) in view of You (US 2006/0150448).
Regarding claim 1, Smellie teaches an electrical appliance (claims 1 and 6) comprising a main body (fig. 5, base 12’), a handle portion (fig. 1, handle 13), a power cord (fig. 5, cord 15), an engagement part (figs. 4-5, groove 14) is provided around an outer periphery of the main body, an engagement counterpart (fig. 5, tongue 23) is engaged with the engagement part, and the power cord is detachably fastened by the engagement counterpart (fig. 5, the togue is dimensioned to wedge into the groove 14 and secure the plug 18’ against the side of the base structure), the engagement counterpart is arranged to be driven to move around an outer periphery of the engagement part (fig. 5, the tongue is dimensioned to wedge any position of the groove 14) to change a position where the power cord is to be fastened by the engagement counterpart so as to precisely secure a free end of the power cord (fig. 5), wherein the engagement counterpart is located at an outer side of the engagement part and is moveable along a circumferential length of the engagement part to fasten the power cord at any position on the engagement part (figs. 4-5).
Smellie does not teach the electrical appliance is an iron comprising an electrical heater arranged inside the main body, wherein the electric heater is connected with the power cord, and the power cord is arranged to be winded around the handle portion for storage.
However, in the same field of endeavor, You teaches an iron with power cord winded up (fig. 3), the iron comprising an electrical heater arranged inside the main body (para. [0020]), wherein, the electric heater is connected with the power cord (para. [0020]), and the power cord is arranged to be winded around the handle portion for storage (fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the power cord storage groove and a counterpart of Smellie with an iron as taught by You for the benefit of securing the power cord of the iron in storage position about the iron appliance when it is not in use (Smellie, col. 1, lines 1-6; You, para. [0006]).
Regarding claim 2, the modified structure Smellie-You teaches the engagement part is a groove that goes around the outer periphery of the main body, and the engagement counterpart is a fastener detachably engaged with the groove at any position. (Smellie, figs. 4-5).
Regarding claim 3, the modified structure Smellie-You teaches the groove is horizontally arranged below the handle portion (Smellie, fig. 1, groove 14 is below handle 13).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smellie (US 2536776) and You (US 2006/0150448), as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Wadhwa (US 2015/0330015).
Regarding claim 4, the modified structure Smellie-You does not teach the fastener comprises an elastic C-shaped part, two transverse parts, and two snap-fit hooks as in the claim.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Wadhwa teaches the fastener comprises an elastic C-shaped part (fig. 3, para. [0039], element 4), two transverse parts (fig. 3, elements 11, 12), and two snap-fit hooks (fig. 3, element 11a), two ends of the elastic C-shaped part are each connected to one of the two snap-fit hooks through one of the two transverse parts (figs. 3, 4A, ends connected 11a by way of the rest of C-shaped part), the elastic C-shaped part can hold a wire part of the power cord (para. [0039]), and a plug-part of the power cord is unable to pass through the elastic C-shaped part after the fastener is engaged with the groove, the two transverse parts respectively abut against an upper sidewall and a lower sidewall of the groove (fig. 3, para. [0041]), and the two snap-fit hooks catch the groove, the fastener can be pressed to be released from the groove (para. [0041], the fastener is resiliently deformable and therefore can be pressed to be released from the groove).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Smellie-You with the teaching that the fastener comprises an elastic C-shaped part, two transverse parts, and two snap-fit hooks as taught by Wadhwa so that the structure can securely and removably retain the cord (via elastic C-shaped part) (Wadhwa, para. [0041]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, dated 04/01/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims under 35 U.S.C 103 have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to UYEN THI THAO NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 AM-4:30 PM EST.
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, Khoa Huynh can be reached at 571-272-4888. 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.
/UYEN T NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights