Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/958,642

ADAPTER FOR POWERED BRUSH ACCESSORIES

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Oct 03, 2022
Examiner
JENNINGS, MICHAEL DEANGILO
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Conair LLC
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
840 granted / 1081 resolved
+7.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+15.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
1117
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
40.4%
+0.4% vs TC avg
§102
28.6%
-11.4% vs TC avg
§112
18.9%
-21.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1081 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . RCE 1. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 27, 2026 has been entered. Rejections 35 U.S.C. § 112 2. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. In particular, independent claim 1 is rejected since line 5 requires “…the attachment hub configured to releasably receive an accessory”. However, claim 7 claims “the accessory is a brush head having a plurality of bristles”. It is not clear whether the claim is an adapter that is configured to attach to a cleaning accessory or cleaning tool with an adapter and an accessory. Claims 2-9 are rejected for their dependency on claim 1. Rejections 35 U.S.C. § 102 3. 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, 7 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent (6,032,313) to Tsang. Regarding independent claim 1, Tsang discloses a body portion (154); a plurality of leg members (167) extending from the body portion (154) and being configured to releasably retain the adapter (166’) on a drive hub (151) of a powered brush (168) (capable of retaining the adapter on a power brush (1) (See Col. 8 lines 10-20 and FIG. 2-2); and an attachment hub (163) on the body portion (154), the attachment hub (163) being configured to releasably receive an accessory (165); the adapter (166’) is configured to transmit rotation and /or oscillation from the drive hub (151) of the powered brush (168) to the accessory (165) (See Col. 8 lines 5- 20). Regarding claim 7, Tsang discloses that the accessory (165) is a brush head having a plurality of bristles (See FIG. 2-2). Regarding independent claim 22, Tsang discloses a body portion (154); at least one coupling member (167) extending from the body portion (154) and being configured to releasably retain the adapter (166’) on a drive hub (151) of a powered brush (168) (See Col. 8 lines 10-20 and FIG. 2-2); and an attachment hub (163) on the body portion (154), the attachment hub (163) being configured to releasably receive an accessory (165) so as to allow for selective coupling and decoupling of the accessory (165) to the body portion (154) without destruction of the accessory (165) (See Col. 8 lines 5- 20). Claims 1, 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication (2005/0278876) to Roth et al. .Regarding independent claim 1, Roth et al. discloses a body portion (43); a plurality of leg members (56) extending from the body portion (43) and being configured to releasably retain the adapter (See FIG. 7) on a drive hub (28) of a powered brush (10) (capable of retaining the adapter on a power brush (10) (See paragraphs [0014]-[0017] and See FIGS. 3-4); and an attachment hub (32) on the body portion (43), the attachment hub (32) being configured to releasably receive an accessory (18); the adapter (See FIG. 7) is configured to transmit rotation and /or oscillation from the drive hub (28) of the powered brush (10) to the accessory (18) (See paragraphs [0014]-[0017]). Regarding claim 8, Roth et al. discloses a plurality of drive legs (46) extending from the body portion (43), in alternating arrangement with the plurality of leg members (56); wherein the plurality of drive legs (46) are configured to transfer rotational energy of the drive hub of the powered brush to the adapter (capable of transferring power of the drive hub (28)). Regarding claim 9, Roth et al. discloses that the drive legs (46) are tapered (See FIG. 4). Rejections 35 U.S.C. § 103 4. 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. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent U.S. Patent (6,032,313) to Tsang. Regarding claim 6, Tsang is silent the hub are hexagonal in shape; however, absent criticality in the specification at paragraph [0023], it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the shape of the adapter (FIG. 2-2) in order to fit a different drive hub (168) since a change in shape requires routine skill for one of ordinary skill in the art and would have been obvious to optimize the invention for different attachments. Response to Arguments 5. Applicant’s arguments with respect to 35 U.S.C. § 112 have been considered but the rejection is maintained. Applicant's arguments filed on January 27, 2026 have been fully considered but are moot since the Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-9 and 22 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 6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL D. JENNINGS whose telephone number is (571)270-1536. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30pm. 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, Monica S. 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. MICHAEL DEANGILO. JENNINGS Examiner Art Unit 3723 /MICHAEL D JENNINGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 03, 2022
Application Filed
May 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Jun 16, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Oct 23, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Jan 27, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 08, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601106
WIPING SHEET AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING WIPING SHEET
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588751
VEHICLE WASHING SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590468
POOL RELATED PLATFORM AND ADDED-ON ACCESSORIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582275
CLEANER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569103
WET ROBOT CLEANER AND CONTAMINATION PREVENTION MODULE USED THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+15.0%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1081 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month