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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 3/9/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-33 remain pending in the application.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by
Vincent Paul Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/0088269).
Regarding claim 16, Walker JR. teaches a connector (Fig. 2, Interconnect Member 16)
for a safety razor (Fig. 2, Shaving Razor 10), the connector being adapted to removably connect
a handle (Fig. 2, Handle 12) to a blade unit (Fig. 2, Razor Cartridge 14; [0023], lines 1 -2),
comprising: a body with a first arm (Fig. 2, Arm 18) and a second arm (Fig. 2, Arm 20) both
extending from the body, respective distal end regions of both arms being adapted to connect the
blade unit to the connector (Fig. 2, Razor Cartridge 14; [0024], lines 1-3); the body having a
recess having an opening (Fig. 3, Opening 45), the recess extending along a length of the body
(Fig. 4, the recess extends along the body, the length direction being defined by the left inside
wall of Opening 45 as shown in Fig. 4) and a user-operable latch (Fig. 3, latch including Latch 40, Release Tab 22, and Flange member 64) including a protrusion (Fig. 4, Flange 64) at a first end of the latch extending into the recess beyond the opening (Fig. 4, the opening is the outermost ring of Opening 45, and Flange 64 extends at least partially into the recess past the opening), the recess being adapted to removably receive the first end of the handle (Fig. 4, Handle 12), and the protrusion (Fig. 4, Flange 64) being received in an aperture (Fig. 4, Examiner interprets the gap created between Trailing End Portion 34 and Front Wall 66 to be the aforementioned aperture) at the first end, the protrusion (Fig. 4, Flange 64) being releasable from the aperture by a user-applied force to a lever (Fig. 4, Release Tab 22; [0030], lines 1-4) at a second end of the latch along the length of the body and opposite the first end (Fig. 4, examiner interprets that the lever extends in the direction of the length of the body in addition to being opposite to the first end) to release the first end of the handle from the recess, the lever configured along the length of the body towards the blade unit and beyond the opening (Fig. 4, examiner interprets that the Release Tab 22 is configured along the length of the body, the length being in the direction defined by the left inside wall of Opening 45 as shown in Fig. 4. Examiner additionally interprets that the length direction stretches generally towards and away from Cartridge 14, and therefore the Release Tab 22 is configured in a direction which is towards the blade unit. Additionally, it can be seen in Fig. 4 that the Release Tab 22 extends in the length direction beyond Opening 45), the lever configured along the length of the body towards the blade unit and beyond the opening (Fig. 4, examiner interprets that the Release Tab 22 is configured along the length of the body, the length being in the direction defined by the left inside wall of Opening 45 as shown in Fig. 4. Examiner additionally interprets that the length direction stretches generally towards and away from Cartridge 14, and therefore the Release Tab 22 is configured in a direction which is towards the blade unit. Additionally, it can be seen in Fig. 4 that the Release Tab 22 extends in the length direction beyond Opening 45), wherein the lever (Fig. 4, Release Tab 22) is proximal to the blade unit (Fig. 4, Razor Cartridge 14 – Merriam Webster defines proximal as “situated close to”. The examiner finds that the Release Tab 22 is situated close to the Razor Cartridge 14) and distal to the opening (Fig. 4, Opening 45 – Merriam Webster defines distal as “situated away from the point of attachment or origin or a central point especially of the body”. Release Tab 22 is distanced from the central point of the opening and is additionally separated from it by Flange Member 64, and is thereby situated away from and therefore distal to Opening 45).
Regarding claim 17, Walker JR. further teaches the connector (Fig. 2, Interconnect
Member 16) of claim 16, wherein the recess of the connector (Fig. 2, Interconnect Member 16)
in combination with the first end of the handle (Fig. 4, Handle 12), define a poka yoke feature
(Fig. 4, Latch Member 30 and Flange Member 64) to prevent an incorrect orientation of the
handle when received in the connector ([0026], lines 3-6).
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.
Claims 1-3, 6, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Vincent Paul Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) in view of 김기선 (Korean Patent
No 200487779).
Regarding claim 1, Walker JR. teaches a safety razor (Fig. 1, Shaving Razor 10),
comprising: a blade unit (Fig. 1, Razor Cartridge 14) having a housing with a razor blade (Fig. 1,
Blade 11); an elongated handle (Fig. 1, Handle 12), and having a first end including an aperture
(Fig. 4, Examiner interprets the gap created between Trailing End Portion 34 and Front Wall 66
to be the aforementioned aperture) extending into the thickness, and an opposed second end; and
a connector (Fig. 2, Interconnect Member 16) having a body with a first arm (Fig. 2, Arm 18)
and a second arm (Fig. 2, Arm 20) both extending from the body, respective distal end regions of
both arms being adapted to connect the blade unit to the handle (Fig. 2, Razor Cartridge 14 and
Handle 12; [0023], lines 1-2); the body having a recess having an opening (Fig. 3, Opening 45),
the recess extending along a length of the body (Fig. 4, the recess extends along the body, the
length direction being defined by the left inside wall of Opening 45 as shown in Fig. 4) and a
user-operable latch (Fig. 3, latch including Latch 40, Release Tab 22, and Flange member 64) including a protrusion (Fig. 4, Flange 64) at a first end of the latch, the protrusion extending into the recess beyond the opening (Fig. 4, the opening is the outermost ring of Opening 45, and Flange 64 extends at least partially into the recess past the opening), the first end of the handle (Fig. 4, Handle 12) being removably received in the recess and the protrusion being received in the aperture to secure the connector to the handle, and the protrusion being releasable from the aperture by a user-applied force to a lever (Fig. 4, Release Tab 22; [0030], lines 1-4) at a second end of the latch along the length of the body and opposite the first end (Fig. 4, examiner interprets that the lever extends in the direction of the length of the body in addition to being opposite to the first end) to release the first end of the handle from the recess, wherein the lever (Fig. 4, Release Tab 22) is proximal to the blade unit (Fig. 4, Razor Cartridge 14 – Merriam Webster defines proximal as “situated close to”. The examiner finds that the Release Tab 22 is situated close to the Razor Cartridge 14) and distal to the opening (Fig. 4, Opening 45 – Merriam Webster defines distal as “situated away from the point of attachment or origin or a central point especially of the body”. Release Tab 42 is distanced from the central point of the opening and is additionally separated from it by Flange Member 64, and is thereby situated away from and therefore distal to Opening 45).
Walker JR. fails to teach that the handle has a uniform thickness.
However, 김기선 teaches a safety razor with a handle (Fig. 3, Handle 120) that has a
uniform thickness.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Walker JR.’s handle to have a uniform
thickness as taught by 김기선 as a matter of combining prior art elements according to known
methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143). In this case, the predictable result is
Walker JR.’s razor being of simplified geometry which allows for ease of manufacturing.
Regarding claim 2, Walker JR. further teaches the safety razor (Fig. 2, Shaving Razor
10) of claim 1, wherein the handle (Fig. 2, Handle 12) has a curved profile in an orientation
perpendicular to the thickness.
Regarding claim 3, Walker JR. further teaches the safety razor (Fig. 2, Shaving Razor
10) and handle (Fig. 2, Handle 12) of claim 1.
Walker JR. fails to teach that the handle is flat in the transverse cross section.
However, 김기선 teaches a safety razor with a handle (Fig. 1, Handle 120) that is flat in
the transverse cross section.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Walker JR.’s handle to have the flatness
of the handle in the transverse cross section as taught by 김기선 as a matter of combining prior
art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143). In this
case, the predictable result is Walker JR.’s razor being of simplified geometry which allows for
ease of manufacturing.
Regarding claim 6, Walker JR. further teaches the safety razor (Fig. 3, Shaving Razor
10) of claim 1, wherein the first end of the handle (Fig. 3, Handle 12), in combination with the
recess of the connector (Fig. 3, Interconnect Member 16) define a poka yoke feature (Fig. 4,
Latch Member 30 and Flange Member 64) to prevent an incorrect orientation of the handle in the
connector ([0026], lines 3-6).
Regarding claim 13, Walker JR. further teaches the safety razor (Fig. 2, Shaving Razor
10) of claim 1, wherein the handle (Fig. 2, Handle 12) comprises only a single component part
([0022], lines 15-20).
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincent
Paul Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) in view of 김기선 (Korean Patent No
200487779) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gretchen Giannelli (U.S.
PGPub No 2016/0368157).
Regarding claim 4, the Walker JR./ 김기선 combination fails to disclose that the
aperture in the first end of the handle is bounded.
However, Giannelli teaches a safety razor (Fig. 1, Razor Accessary 10), wherein the
aperture (Fig. 1, Port 24) in the first end of the handle (Fig. 1, Body 12) is bounded.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Walker JR./ 김기선
to incorporate the teachings of Giannelli and configure the aperture in the first end of the handle
to be bounded. Doing so provides the benefit of creating an opening which can be used to hang
the razor from a rod or protrusion (Giannelli para 36).
Regarding claim 5, the Walker JR./ 김기선 combination fails to disclose that the
aperture in the first end of the handle extends through the first end.
However, Giannelli teaches a safety razor (Fig. 1, Razor Accessary 10), wherein the aperture (Fig. 1, Port 24) in the first end of the handle (Fig. 1, Body 12) extends through the first
end.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Walker JR./ 김기선
to incorporate the teachings of Giannelli and configure the aperture in the first end of the handle
to extend through the first end. Doing so provides the benefit of creating a hole which can be
used to hang the razor from a rod or protrusion (Giannelli para 36).
Claims 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincent Paul
Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) in view of 김기선 (Korean Patent No
200487779) and Gretchen Giannelli (U.S. PGPub No 2016/0368157), and further in view of
Gyllerstrom Kenneth Vincent (Taiwan Patent No 542774 B).
Regarding Claim 7, the Walker JR./ 김기선 / Giannelli combination of claim 6
discloses a safety razor (Walker JR.; Fig. 1, Shaving Razor 10) with a poka yoke feature (Walker
JR.; Fig. 4, Latch Member 30 and Flange Member 64).
The Walker JR./ 김기선 / Giannelli combination fails to teach wherein the poka yoke
feature includes a first outer corner radius and a second outer corner radius, each outer corner
radius being at the first end of the handle, and the first outer corner radius is different than the
second outer corner radius.
However, Vincent teaches a safety razor (Fig. 2, Razor 20) wherein the poka yoke feature
(Fig. 2, Insertion Member 42 and Hollow Interior 38) includes a first outer corner radius (Fig. 2,
Examiner defines the first outer corner radius to be either of the top two edge radii of Insertion
Member 42) and a second outer corner radius (Fig. 2, Examiner defines the second outer corner
radius to be bottom most edge radii of Insertion Member 42), and the first outer corner radius is
different than the second outer corner radius.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Walker JR./ 김기선 / Giannelli
combination to incorporate the teachings of Vincent and configure the poka yoke feature to
include a first outer corner radius and a second outer corner radius, each outer corner radius
being at the first end of the handle, and the first outer corner radius is different than the second
outer corner radius. While Vincent discloses that the first and second outer corner radii are on the
connector, rearrangement of parts so that the first and second outer corner radii are instead on the
handle would be obvious In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Doing so
provides the benefit of only allowing the handle and connector to attach in the
correct orientation while utilizing a design that allows ease of press-fitting the two pieces
together (Vincent page 4, para 2).
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincent
Paul Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) in view of 김기선 (Korean Patent No
200487779) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee Kyung Tae (Korean
Patent No 102019665 B1).
Regarding claim 8, the Walker JR./ 김기선 combination fails to teach the safety razor of
claim 1, wherein the handle comprises a plant-based, non-polymeric material.
However, Tae teaches a toothbrush (Fig. 1, Toothbrush 100), wherein the handle (Fig. 1,
Toothbrush Pole 110) comprises a plant-based, non-polymeric material (Bamboo; page 2, para
5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Walker JR./ 김기선 combination to
incorporate the teachings of Tae and configure the handle to comprise a plant-based, non-
polymeric material such as bamboo. Doing so is beneficial as bamboo is harmless to the human
body and is environmentally friendly (Tae page 4, para 1).
Regarding claim 9, Tae teaches that the safety razor of claim 8, wherein the plant-based,
non- polymeric material (Bamboo; page 2, para 5) defines a fiber direction. Bamboo is known to
inherently define a fiber direction.
Regarding claim 10, the Walker JR./ 김기선 combination fails to teach the safety razor
of claim 1, wherein the handle comprises a plant-based, non-polymeric material.
However, Tae teaches a toothbrush (Fig. 1, Toothbrush 100), wherein the handle (Fig. 1,
Toothbrush Pole 110) comprises a single layer of a plant-based, non-polymeric material
(Bamboo; page 2, para 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handle of the safety razor of the
Walker JR./ 김기선 combination to be constructed of a single layer of a plant-based, non-
polymeric material as taught by Tae as a matter of combining prior art elements according to
known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143). In this case, the predictable result
is the Walker JR./ 김기선 combination’s razor being of simplified geometry which allows for
ease of manufacturing as well as being more environmentally friendly than that of common
commercially available razors which are made with handles comprised of plastic or other non -
biodegradable materials.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincent Paul
Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) in view of 김기선 (Korean Patent No 200487779)
and Lee Kyung Tae (Korean Patent No 102019665 B1) as applied to claim 9 above, and
further in view of Zwimpfer Martin (European Patent No 3,827,700).
Regarding claim 11, the Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae combination fails to teach the safety
razor of claim 9, wherein the handle comprises between two and nine layers of plant-based non-
polymeric material.
However, Martin teaches a toothbrush handle (Fig. 1a, Handle 14a) which comprises
multiple layers (page 13, para 3) of plant-based non-polymeric material (page 5, para 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handle of the safety razor of the
Walker JR./ 김기선 combination to be constructed of between two and nine layers of plant-
based, non-polymeric material as taught by Martin as a matter of combining prior art elements
according to known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143). In this case, the
predictable result is the Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae combination’s razor having a handle
comprising between two and nine layers of plant-based, non-polymeric material as taught by
Martin. This modification would have been a matter of routine optimization to one of ordinary
skill in the art at the time of filing, and 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 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincent Paul
Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) in view of 김기선 (Korean Patent No
200487779), Lee Kyung Tae (Korean Patent No 102019665 B1), and Zwimpfer Martin
(European Patent No 3,827,700) as applied in claim 11 above, and further in view of
Murakami Shigeru (Japanese Patent No 2004345299 A).
Regarding claim 12, the Walker JR./ 김기선/ Martin/ Tae combination fails to teach the
safety razor of claim 11, wherein the fiber direction of any one layer is arranged at an angle to
the fiber direction of a next adjacent layer of the between two and nine layers.
However, Shigeru teaches a composite of glued laminated bamboo (Fig. 5, Bamboo 1)
and wood (Fig. 5, Wood 3) wherein the fiber direction of any one layer is arranged at an angle to
the fiber direction of the next adjacent layer ([0017], lines 3-4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Walker JR./ 김기선/ Martin/ Tae
combination in claim 11 to incorporate the teachings of Shigeru and configure the fiber direction
of any one layer to be arranged at an angle to the fiber direction of a next adjacent layer of the
between two and nine layers. It is common knowledge that changing the orientation of adjacent
layers in a composite material can increase strength and stiffness.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincent Paul
Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) in view of 김기선 (Korean Patent No
200487779) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Thomas A. Christman (U.S.
Patent No 5,953,825).
Regarding claim 14, the Walker JR./ 김기선 combination teaches the previously
discussed aspects of claim 1, including a user-operable latch (Walker JR.; Fig. 3, latch including Latch 40, Release Tab 22, and Flange member 64).
The Walker JR./ 김기선 combination fails to teach the safety razor of claim 1, wherein
the user-operable latch is supported in the body by a torsion beam spring integrally formed
between the body and the latch.
However, Christman teaches a safety razor which uses integrally formed torsion beam
springs (Fig. 1, Torsion Springs 8) as supports.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Walker JR./ 김기선 combination to
incorporate the teachings of Christman and configure the user-operable latch to be supported in
the body by a torsion beam spring integrally formed between the body and the latch. Doing so is
beneficial as torsion springs assist in biasing towards a rest position (Christman col 2, lines 44 -
46).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincent Paul
Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) in view of 김기선 (Korean Patent No
200487779) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Xuan Jiang (U.S. Patent No
8,273,852) and Harry Krasnick (U.S. PGPub No 2014/0331423).
Regarding claim 15, the Walker JR./ 김기선 combination fails to teach the safety razor
of claim 1, wherein the connector comprises one of medium chain polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA),
and mixture of medium chain polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) and a plant-based non-polymeric
material.
However, Krasnick teaches a component of a toothbrush (Fig. 8, Cleaning Apparatus
800), wherein the component (Fig. 9, Cleaning Head Body 902) comprises a combination of a
plant-based non-polymeric material (wood) and plastic ([0060], lines 1-2). Krasnick fails to teach
that the plastic is specifically medium chain polyhydroxyalkanoate.
However, Jiang teaches medium chain polyhydroxyalkanoate as a multi-purpose plastic
material (Col. 9, lines 32-38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the connector of the safety razor of the
Walker JR./ 김기선 combination to be comprised a mixture of plastic and a plant-based, non-
polymeric material as taught by Krasnick as a matter of combining prior art elements according
to known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143). In this case, the predictable
result is the Walker JR./ 김기선 combination’s razor being more environmentally friendly than
that of common commercially available razors which are made with connectors comprised of
plastic or other non-biodegradable materials. It would have also been obvious to someone of
ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified
the Walker JR./ 김기선 combination as it has been modified by Krasnick to incorporate the
teachings of Jiang and configure the plastic material to be medium chain polyhydroxyalkanoate.
Doing so is beneficial as medium chain polyhydroxyalkanoate is biodegradable and therefore
better for the environment (Jiang Col. 9, lines 32-38).
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Vincent Paul Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) as applied in claims 16 and 17
above, and further in view of Gyllerstrom Kenneth Vincent (Taiwan Patent No 542774 B).
Regarding claim 18, Walker JR. further teaches a connector (Fig. 4, Interconnect
Member 16) with a poka yoke feature (Fig. 4, Latch Member 30 and Flange Member 64).
Walker JR. fails to teach a connector wherein the poka yoke feature includes a first inner
corner radius and a second inner outer corner radius, each inner corner radius being at an end of
the recess opposed the opening, and the first inner corner radius is different than the second inner
corner radius.
However, Vincent teaches a safety razor (Fig. 2, Razor 20) wherein the poka yoke feature
(Fig. 2, Insertion Member 42 and Hollow Interior 38) includes a first inner corner radius (Fig. 2,
Examiner defines the first inner corner radius to be either of the top two edge radii of Hollow
Interior 38) and a second inner corner radius (Fig. 2, Examiner defines the second inner corner
radius to be bottom most edge radii of Hollow Interior 38), each inner corner radius being at the
end of the recess opposed the opening (Both inner corner radii can be seen to extend through the
entirety of Hollow Interior 38, touching both ends of the recess), and the first inner corner radius
is different than the second inner corner radius.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Walker JR. to incorporate the teachings
of Vincent and configure the poka yoke feature of the connector to include a first inner corner
radius and a second inner corner radius, each outer corner radius being at the end of the recess
opposed the opening, and the first outer corner radius is different than the second outer corner
radius. While Vincent discloses that the first and second inner corner radii are on the handle,
rearrangement of parts so that the first and second outer corner radii are instead on the connector
would be obvious In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Doing so provides
the benefit of only allowing the handle and connector to attach in the correct orientation while
utilizing a design that allows ease of press-fitting the two pieces together (Vincent page 4, para
2).
Regarding claim 19, Walker JR. further teaches a handle of a safety razor, wherein a
wall bounding the recess (Fig. 9, Slot 250) has a window opening (Fig. 9, Opening 236)
permitting a user to view each inner corner radius (Fig. 9, slotted projections 232 and 234).
While Walker JR discloses that the window opening in a wall bounding the recess and permitting
the user to view the inner corner radii is located on the handle, rearrangement of parts so that
these features are instead on the connector would be obvious In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86
USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Claims 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Vincent Paul Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) as applied in claim 16 above, and
further in view of Thomas A. Christman (U.S. Patent No 5,953,825).
Regarding claim 20, Walker JR. teaches the previously discussed aspects of claim 16,
including a user-operable latch (Fig. 3, latch including Latch 40, Release Tab 22, and Flange member 64).
Walker JR. fails to teach the safety razor of claim 1, wherein the user-operable latch is
supported in the body by a torsion beam spring integrally formed between the body and the latch.
However, Christman teaches a safety razor which uses integrally formed torsion beam
springs (Fig. 1, Torsion Springs 8) as supports.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Walker JR. to incorporate the teachings
of Christman and configure the user-operable latch to be supported in the body by a torsion beam
spring integrally formed between the body and the latch. Doing so is beneficial as torsion springs
assist in biasing towards a rest position (Christman col 2, lines 44 - 46).
Regarding claim 21, Walker JR. teaches the previously discussed aspects of claim 20,
including a user-operable latch (Fig. 3, latch including Latch 40, Release Tab 22, and Flange member 64) including a second end opposite the first end and having a lever (Fig. 4, Release Tab 22).
Walker JR. fails to teach the safety razor of claim 20, wherein the torsion beam spring is
formed with the latch in a region between the first end and the second end.
However, Christman teaches a safety razor which uses integrally formed torsion beam
springs (Fig. 1, Torsion Springs 8) as supports.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Walker JR. to incorporate the teachings
of Christman and configure the user-operable latch to include a torsion spring beam which is
formed with the latch in a region between the first end and the second end. Doing so is beneficial
as torsion springs assist in biasing towards a rest position (Christman para col 2, lines 44 -46).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincent Paul
Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view
of Xuan Jiang (U.S. Patent No 8,273,852) and Harry Krasnick (U.S. PGPub No
2014/0331423).
Regarding claim 22, Walker JR. fails to teach the connector of claim 16, wherein the
connector comprises one of medium chain polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA), and mixture of medium
chain polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) and a plant-based non-polymeric material.
However, Krasnick teaches a component of a toothbrush (Fig. 8, Cleaning Apparatus
800), wherein the component (Fig. 9, Cleaning Head Body 902) comprises a combination of a
plant-based non-polymeric material (wood) and plastic ([0060], lines 1-2).
Krasnick fails to teach that the plastic is specifically medium chain
polyhydroxyalkanoate.
However, Jiang teaches medium chain polyhydroxyalkanoate as a multi-purpose plastic
material (Col. 9, lines 32-38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the use of plant-based non-polymeric
material and plastic material of Krasnick with the connector of the safety razor of Walker JR. by
known methods, leading to the predictable result of the connector of Walker JR. being more
environmentally friendly than that of common commercially available razors which are made
with connectors comprised of plastic or other non-biodegradable materials (see MPEP 2143). It
would have also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to modify Walker JR. as it has been modified by Krasnick to incorporate
the teachings of Jiang and configure the plastic material to be medium chain
polyhydroxyalkanoate. Doing so is beneficial as medium chain polyhydroxyalkanoate is
biodegradable and therefore better for the environment (Jiang Col. 9, lines 32-38).
Claim 23-25, 28, 30, and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over Vincent Paul Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) in view of 김기선 (Korean
Patent No 200487779) and Lee Kyung Tae (Korean Patent No 102019665 B1).
Regarding claim 23, Walker JR. teaches a handle for a safety razor, comprising: an
elongated slat (Fig. 4, Handle 12) having a first end including an aperture (Fig. 4, Examiner
interprets the gap created between Trailing End Portion 34 and Front Wall 66 to be the
aforementioned aperture) extending into the thickness, and an opposed second end.
Walker JR. does not teach that the elongated slat has a uniform thickness, or that the
handle comprises a plant-based, non-polymeric material that defines a fiber direction.
However, 김기선 teaches a safety razor with a handle (Fig. 3, Handle 120) that has a
uniform thickness, and Tae teaches a toothbrush (Fig. 1, Toothbrush 100), wherein the handle
(Fig. 1, Toothbrush Pole 110) comprises a plant-based, non-polymeric material (Bamboo; page
2, para 5) that defines a fiber direction (Bamboo is known to inherently define a fiber direction).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the uniform handle thickness of 김기선
with the safety razor of Walker JR. by known methods, leading to the predictable result of
Walker JR.’s razor being of simplified geometry which allows for ease of manufacturing (see
MPEP 2143).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Walker JR. to incorporate the teachings
of Tae and configure the handle to comprise a plant-based, non-polymeric material such as
bamboo. Doing so is beneficial as bamboo is harmless to the human body and is environmentally
friendly (Tae page 4, para 1).
Regarding claim 24, Walker JR. further teaches the handle of claim 23, wherein the
handle (Fig. 2, Handle 12) has a curved profile in an orientation perpendicular to the thickness.
Regarding claim 25, the combination of Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae teaches the
aforementioned attributes of claim 23.
김기선 further teaches a safety razor with a handle (Fig. 1, Handle 120) that is flat in the
transverse cross section.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Walker JR./ 김기선/
Tae’s handle to have the flatness of the handle in the transverse cross section as taught by
김기선 as a matter of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield
predictable results (see MPEP 2143). In this case, the predictable result is the combination of
Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae’s razor being of simplified geometry which allows for ease of
manufacturing.
Regarding claim 28, Walker JR. further teaches the handle (Fig. 4, Handle 12) of claim
23, wherein the first end of the handle (Fig. 4, Handle 12), in combination with a recess of a
connector (Fig. 2, Interconnect Member 16) define a poka yoke feature (Fig. 4, Latch Member
30 and Flange Member 64) to prevent an incorrect orientation of the handle in the connector
([0026], lines 3-6).
Regarding claim 30, the combination of Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae teaches the previously
discussed aspects of claim 23.
Tae further teaches a toothbrush (Fig. 1, Toothbrush 100), wherein the handle (Fig. 1,
Toothbrush Pole 110) comprises a single layer of plant-based, non-polymeric material (Bamboo;
page 2, para 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handle of the safety razor of the
Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae combination to be constructed of a single layer of plant-based, non-
polymeric material as taught by Tae as a matter of combining prior art elements according to
known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143). In this case, the predictable result
is the Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae combination’s razor being of simplified geometry which allows
for ease of manufacturing as well as being more environmentally friendly than that of common
commercially available razors which are made with handles comprised of plastic or other non -
biodegradable materials.
Regarding claim 33, Walker JR. further teaches the handle of claim 23, wherein the
handle comprises only the slat (Fig. 2, Handle 12), and the slat is a single component part
([0022], lines 15-20).
Claims 26 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Vincent Paul Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) in view of 김기선 (Korean Patent
No 200487779) and Lee Kyung Tae (Korean Patent No 102019665 B1) as applied to claim
23 above, and further in view of Gretchen Giannelli (U.S. PGPub No 2016/0368157).
Regarding claim 26, the Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae combination teaches the safety razor
(Walker JR.; Fig. 3, Shaving Razor 10) of claim 23 including an aperture (Walker JR.; Fig. 4,
Examiner interprets the gap created between Trailing End Portion 34 and Front Wall 66 to be the
aforementioned aperture) in the first end of the handle (Walker JR.; Fig. 3, Handle 12).
The Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae combination fails to teach that the aperture in the first end
of the handle is bounded.
However, Giannelli teaches a safety razor (Fig. 1, Razor Accessary 10), wherein the
aperture (Fig. 1, Port 24) in the first end of the handle (Fig. 1, Body 12) is bounded.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae
combination to incorporate the teachings of Giannelli and configure the aperture in the first end
of the handle to be bounded. Doing so provides the benefit of creating an opening which can be
used to hang the razor from a rod or protrusion (Giannelli para 36).
Regarding claim 27, the Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae combination teaches the safety razor
(Walker JR.; Fig. 3, Shaving Razor 10) of claim 23 including an aperture (Walker JR.; Fig. 4,
Examiner interprets the gap created between Trailing End Portion 34 and Front Wall 66 to be the
aforementioned aperture) in the first end of the handle (Walker JR.; Fig. 3, Handle 12).
The Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae combination fails to teach that the aperture in the first end
of the handle extends through the first end.
However, Giannelli teaches a safety razor (Fig. 1, Razor Accessary 10), wherein the
aperture (Fig. 1, Port 24) in the first end of the handle (Fig. 1, Body 12) extends through the first
end.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae
combination to incorporate the teachings of Giannelli and configure the aperture in the first end
of the handle to extend through the first end. Doing so provides the benefit of creating a hole
which can be used to hang the razor from a rod or protrusion (Giannelli para 36).
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincent Paul
Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) in view of 김기선 (Korean Patent No 200487779)
and Lee Kyung Tae (Korean Patent No 102019665 B1) as applied to claim 28 above, and
further in view of Gyllerstrom Kenneth Vincent (Taiwan Patent No 542774 B).
Regarding Claim 29, the Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae combination teaches a safety razor
(Walker JR.; Fig. 1, Shaving Razor 10) with a poka yoke feature (Walker JR.; Fig. 4, Latch
Member 30 and Flange Member 64).
The Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae combination fails to teach wherein the poka yoke feature
includes a first outer corner radius and a second outer corner radius, each outer corner radius
being at the first end of the handle, and the first outer corner radius is different than the second
outer corner radius.
However, Vincent teaches a safety razor (Fig. 2, Razor 20) wherein the poka yoke feature
(Fig. 2, Insertion Member 42 and Hollow Interior 38) includes a first outer corner radius (Fig. 2,
Examiner defines the first outer corner radius to be either of the top two edge radii of Insertion
Member 42) and a second outer corner radius (Fig. 2, Examiner defines the second outer corner
radius to be bottom most edge radii of Insertion Member 42), and the first outer corner radius is
different than the second outer corner radius.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae to
incorporate the teachings of Vincent and configure the poka yoke feature to include a first outer
corner radius and a second outer corner radius, each outer corner radius being at the first end of
the handle, and the first outer corner radius is different than the second outer corner radius.
While Vincent discloses that the first and second outer corner radii are on the connector,
rearrangement of parts so that the first and second outer corner radii are instead on the handle
would be obvious In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Doing so provides
the benefit of only allowing the handle and connector to attach in the correct orientation while
utilizing a design that allows ease of press-fitting the two pieces together (Vincent page 4, para
2).
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincent Paul
Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) in view of 김기선 (Korean Patent No 200487779)
and Lee Kyung Tae (Korean Patent No 102019665 B1) as applied to claim 23 above, and
further in view of Zwimpfer Martin (European Patent No 3,827,700).
Regarding claim 31, the Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae combination teaches the previously
discussed aspects of claim 23.
The Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae combination fails to teach the safety razor of claim 23,
wherein the handle comprises between two and nine layers of plant-based non-polymeric
material.
However, Martin teaches a toothbrush handle (Fig. 1a, Handle 14a) which comprises
multiple layers (page 13, para 3) of plant-based non-polymeric material (page 5, para 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handle of the safety razor of the
Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae combination to be constructed of between two and nine layers of plant-
based, non-polymeric material as taught by Martin as a matter of combining prior art elements
according to known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143). In this case, the
predictable result is the Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae combination’s razor having a handle
comprising between two and nine layers of plant-based, non-polymeric material as taught by
Martin. This modification would have been a matter of routine optimization to one of ordinary
skill in the art at the time of filing, and 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 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vincent Paul
Walker JR. (U.S. PGPub No 2011/008269) in view of 김기선 (Korean Patent No
200487779), Lee Kyung Tae (Korean Patent No 102019665 B1), and Zwimpfer Martin
(European Patent No 3,827,700) as applied to claim 31 above, and further in view of and
Murakami Shigeru (Japanese Patent No 2004345299 A).
Regarding claim 32, the Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae/ Martin combination teaches the
previously discussed aspects of claim 31.
The Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae/ Martin combination fails to teach the safety razor of claim
31, wherein the fiber direction of any one layer is arranged at an angle to the fiber direction of a
next adjacent layer of the between two and nine layers.
However, Shigeru teaches a composite of glued laminated bamboo (Fig. 5, Bamboo 1)
and wood (Fig. 5, Wood 3) wherein the fiber direction of any one layer is arranged at an angle to
the fiber direction of the next adjacent layer ([0017], lines 3-4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Walker JR./ 김기선/ Tae/ Martin
combination to incorporate the teachings of Shigeru and configure the fiber direction of any one
layer to be arranged at an angle to the fiber direction of the next adjacent layer. It is common
knowledge that changing the orientation of adjacent layers in a composite material can increase
strength and stiffness.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/9/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1 and 16, Applicant argues that Walker Jr. does not teach “the lever configured along the length of the body towards the blade unit and beyond the opening” and “wherein the lever is proximal to the blade unit and distal to the opening”. Applicant states that the previous Office Action equates the Release Tab 22 of Walker Jr. to the claimed “latch”. In the rejections of claims 1 and 16 above, the Release Tab 22 is individually drawn to the claimed “lever”, while the claimed latch is formed of the group consisting of Release Tab 22, Flange Member 64, and Latch 40. Applicant argues that the Release Tab 22 is not on the end towards the blade unit. Whether or not this is a true statement, it is irrelevant, as the lever as claimed (which is made equivalent to Release Tab 22 of Walker Jr.) is not described as being on an end towards the blade unit. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). It can be seen in the rejection of claims 1 and 16 above as well as in Fig. 4 of Walker Jr. that the claimed lever (Release Tab 22) is configured along the length of the body towards the blade unit and beyond the opening. Being a three-dimensional object, the Release Tab 22 extends in a multitude of directions towards a multitude of things, which includes but is not limited to along the length of the body towards the blade unit (Cartridge 14) of Walker Jr.. Further, the Release Tab 22 of Walter Jr. does extend beyond the Opening 45, beyond being defined by Merriam Webster as “out of the reach or sphere”. Since the Release Tab 22 of Walker Jr. extends such that it is not located in the Opening 45, and rather outside of it, it is considered to extend beyond the Opening 45.
Regarding claims 1 and 23, Applicant argues that K’779 does not teach that the handle is an elongated slat, and therefore also cannot teach that the handle has a uniform thickness. According to the applicant, item 120 of K’779 is not a slat and is rather prismatic, and additionally exhibits a non-uniform thickness since it is thinner at a first end near 130 than at a second end near 150. Examiner interprets that when looking only at the handle of K’779, as required by the claim, the handle (Handle 120) has a uniform thickness, when considering the thickness to apply to the defining outside shape of the handle and not including any indents or cutouts in the handle. Further, Merriam-Webster defines a slat as a thin narrow flat strip. Looking to Fig. 2 of K’779, examiner finds that the handle appears to be a thin narrow flat strip and can therefore be considered a slat. Therefore, Examiner maintains the rejection of claims 1 and 23 and all claims depending on claims 1 and 23. Item 300 should not be considered in the thickness of the handle, as it is its own different feature which merely interacts with the handle of K’779.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELLA LORRAINE KEENA whose telephone number is (571)272-1806. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am - 5:00 pm 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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at (571) 272-4502. 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.
/ELLA L KEENA/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 /BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights