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 .
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, 4-6, 9 and 11-17, 20 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Birk et al (US 20210052063 A1) and in view of Goldmann (US 20190098991 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 14 and 15. Birk discloses a device 10A (figure 2A) for feeding bristle bundles into receiving openings in target plates and a brush-producing machine 1 (figure 5) comprising the device; and a method for operating the device including providing the device; the device comprising:
at least one sliding drive 2103A (slides/moves linearly and at least indirectly drives pins through such movement)
at least one pin package (100A and/or 2101A and/or 2102A) with a plurality of sliding pins 100A, each of the sliding pins being configured for inserting one of the bristle bundles into a respective one of the receiving openings in the target plate 400A.
Regarding claim 4, Birk further discloses wherein the at least one pin package has a number of sliding pins 100A which correspond to a number and arrangement of the receiving openings in at least one of a source plate or the target plate 400A (figure 2A) for the bristle bundles of a bundle group (at least some of the pins correspond in number and arrangement with openings).
Regarding claim 5, Birk further discloses least one pin guide 220A arranged between the at least one sliding drive and a source plate.
Regarding claim 6, Birk further discloses at least one coupling plate 2101A, through which a movement of at least two of the sliding pins is coupled to one another (paragraph 0033: tight fit of pins in plate couples pins together).
Birk is silent regarding
Claim 1: at least one sensor by force transmitted by the sliding drive to the at least one sliding pins is determined at least indirectly; wherein the at least one sensor is arranged in a direction of force flow between the sliding drive and the at least one sliding pins.
Claim 9: wherein the sliding pins comprise a plurality of types of sliding pins and the at least one sensor includes a sensor for each of the types of sliding pins.
Claim 11: the device further comprising a control unit which is configured to activate the at least one sliding drive, depending on a force determined by the at least one sensor.
Claim 12: wherein the control unit has an information output interface.
Claim 13: wherein the control unit has a communication interface for data exchange.
Claim 15: the method further comprising: determining a force transmitted by the at least one sliding drive to the sliding pins at least indirectly using the at least one sensor.
Claim 16: further comprising at least one of a) comparing the force with a reference value or b) deactivating the sliding drive when the force reaches or exceeds the reference value.
Claim 17: wherein the at least one of the determining or the comparing of the force is required when the device is in no-load operation.
Claim 21: recording the force determined using the at least one sensor via a data store and supplying the force determined using the at least one sensor to other devices via the data store.
However, Goldmann teaches a device for feeding bristles comprising
Claim 1: at least one sensor 17 by which a force transmitted by the sliding drive to the at least one sliding pins is determined at least indirectly (paragraph 0030); wherein the at least one sensor is arranged in a direction of force flow between the sliding drive and the at least one sliding pins (see figure).
Claim 9: wherein the sliding pins comprise a plurality of types of sliding pins (the claim does not specify that the plurality of sliding pins are part of the device) and the at least one sensor includes a sensor for each of the types of the pins (there are two sensors and each sensor can be for a different type of sliding pin).
Claim 11: the device further comprising a control unit 18 (17 and 19 may also serve as part of the control unit) which is configured to activate the at least one sliding drive, depending on a force determined by the at least one sensor (paragraph 0038: activates shutting down of the sliding drive).
Claim 12: wherein the control unit has an information output interface 19 serves to output information from 17 to 18.
Claim 13: wherein the control unit 17/18/19 has a communication interface for data exchange (19 exchanges data between 17 and 19; 18 can shut down device as set forth in paragraph 0038 which serves as outputting data).
Claim 15: the method further comprising: determining a force transmitted by the at least one sliding drive to the sliding pins at least indirectly using the at least one sensor (paragraph 0030).
Claim 16: further comprising comparing the force with a reference value (paragraph 0038).
Claim 17: wherein the determining of the force is required when the device is in no-load operation (In method claims, only those steps that must be performed are considered in the BRI, so the BRI would not include steps contingent on meeting a certain condition; this claim only requires the determining “when the device is in no-load operation”; since the device being in no-load operation is not required by the claimed method, the determining is also not required within the scope of the claim).
Claim 21, recording the force determined using the at least one sensor via a data store (17 stores/records the data) and supplying the force determined using the at least one sensor to other devices (18 and 19) via the data store (17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify Birk by incorporating the above set forth structure and method, as taught by Goldmann, for the purpose of ensuring that the device is turned off when necessary to prevent further damage to parts of the device or the brush being manufactured.
Regarding claim 20, further comprising at least one of recommending or initiating at least one of a replacement or re-sharpening of a cutting blade, by which the bristle bundles are cut, when the force reaches or exceeds a reference value (In method claims, only those steps that must be performed are considered in the BRI, so the BRI would not include steps contingent on meeting a certain condition).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Birk et al (US 20210052063 A1), in view of Goldmann (US 20190098991 A1) and further in view of Ferrari et al (US 20140167488 A1)
Regarding claim 7, Birk/Goldmann discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 1. Birk/Goldman is silent regarding wherein the at least one sliding drive is a hydraulic, pneumatic or electromechanical linear drive. However, Ferrari teaches actuators for brush manufacturing elements being pneumatic (paragraph 0086). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify Birk/Goldmann by having the drive be actuated by pneumatic means, as taught by Ferrari, for the purpose of using a well known actuator to effectively move parts of the device.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Birk et al (US 20210052063 A1), in view of Goldmann (US 20190098991 A1) and further in view of Boere et al (US 20190281968 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Birk/Goldmann discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 1. Birk/Goldman is silent regarding the device further comprising an amplifier is assigned to the at least one sensor. However, Boere discloses an amplifier being provided with a sensor as part of a force sensing structure in the art of toothbrushes (paragraph 0051). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify Birk/Goldmann by providing an amplifier assigned to the at least one sense, as taught by Boere, for the purpose of effectively transmitting and comparing force data.
Claim(s) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Birk et al (US 20210052063 A1), in view of Goldmann (US 20190098991 A1) and further in view of Zeiher (DE 10312016 A1).
Regarding claims 18-20, Birk/Goldmann discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 1 and 15. Birk/Goldman is silent regarding the method further comprising inferring at least one a degree of contamination or a degree of wear of the device from the force that has been determined and further comprising issuing a request for at least one of cleaning or maintenance of the device when the force reaches or exceeds a reference value
Goldman further teaches wanting force to remain below a threshold (paragraph 0038)
However, Zeiher teaches a method of manufacturing a brush by inserting bristles including using a force sensor, wherein
the method further comprising inferring a degree of wear of the device from the force that has been determined (page 2, paragraph 6 of translation: lower force signifies damaged element, wherein damage is equated to a type of wear) and further comprising issuing a request maintenance of the device when damage is detected (for Birk/Goldmann this would be force exceeding threshold as set forth in paragraph 0038 of Goldmann)(page 3, paragraph 1 of translation: position changed serves as maintenance request; furthermore, stopping of the device as taught by Goldmann could serve as a maintenance request since it is a signal that would be interpreted by others as a request for maintenance).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify Birk/Goldmann by the method further comprising inferring at least one a degree of contamination or a degree of wear of the device from the force that has been determined and further comprising issuing a request for at least one of cleaning or maintenance of the device when the force reaches or exceeds a reference value, as taught by Zeiher, for the purpose of fixing an issue when detected and preventing further damage.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/13/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant’s argument that the prior art does not teach the sensor as claimed, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the present application uses a sensor to monitor a force transmitted from the sliding drive to the sliding pins when inserting a bundle of bristles into a receiving opening of a target plate) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). 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).
Applicant argues that Goldmann does not teach at least one sensor is arranged in the direction of force flow between the slide drive and the push pins. As best understood, Applicant’s position is that this is not taught because the sensor taught by Goldmann is on a back of the bristle carriers facing away from the machining side of the bristle carrier. However, even in this location, the sensor is “in the direction” of force flow. A “direction”, for example a downward direction, extends continuously along an axis. The claim does not require the sensor to be between the slide drive and push pins. The “direction of force flow between the slide drive and the push pins” is from top to bottom and the sensor is arranged in the “direction”.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ERIC J ROSEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7855. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 930am-6pm.
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, Edward Lefkowitz can be reached at (571) 272-2180. 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.
/ERIC J ROSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772