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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the
battery, motor, vacuum, as required by Claims 1, 10;
fan driven system, as required by Claims 4, 13;
turbine driven system, as required by Claims 5, 14;
vacuum pump, as required by Claims 6, 15;
separate actuator, as required by Claims 8, 17;
bin, as required by Claims 9, 18,
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-18 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.
Regarding Claims 1 &10, the limitation "normal level of performance" is not defined in the INSTANT APPLICATION such that a skilled Artisan would recognize this level from any other. Examiner notes that the SPECIFICATION defines "normally operating" as a "reduced state of power torque or speed", without referring to another state as a baseline. No other definition of "normal" is provided. The claims are therefore indistinct with regards to metes and bounds an cannot be understood by the Examiner. In order to examine the claims and advance prosecution, Examiner has interpreted the claims to mean any level of operation.
Regarding Claims 9 &18, the limitation "foreign matter" is indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim whether the foreign matter is a required element of the electric clipper or method of using same. In order to examine the claims and advance prosecution, Examiner has interpreted the claims to mean the foreign matter is not a required element of the claimed matter.
Claims 2-8 and 11-17 are rejected as being dependent on independent claims 1 and 10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-5, 7, 9-14, 16, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leung, et alia (US 2003/0131480), hereinafter Leung, in view of McCambridge, et alia (US 6,684,511), hereinafter McCambridge.
Regarding Claim 1, Leung discloses method comprising:
providing an electric clipper (Examiner notes the electric clipper exists, ergo it has been provided), wherein the electric clipper comprises:
a body having an exterior surface (Fig 1);
at least one battery disposed within the body (Para [0029]);
a motor (12) disposed within the body (Para [0023]);
a clipper head (6) (Para [0019]), operably coupled to the body (Fig 1), that is powered by the motor and that is configured to clip hair (Para [0005]);
a power actuator (18) (Para [0024]) integrated with the exterior surface of the body (Fig 1) that is configured to selectively connect and disconnect the at least one battery and the motor to thereby power on and off the motor in response to corresponding actuations by a user such that when the motor is powered on by the power actuator the motor operates at a normal level of performance (Para [0024]);
at least one boost actuator (20) (Para [0024] integrated with the exterior surface of the body and configured to provide increased operating performance of the clipper head when actuated by a user.
Leung is silent to a vacuum. McCambridge teaches an electric clipper (Col 1, Ln 26) having a vacuum at least partially disposed within the body (Col 9, Ln 63-65), and being selectively connectable and disconnectable from the battery (Col 4, Ln 38-39 teaches a non–rechargeable battery which Examiner interprets to mean it is removable and therefore connectable and disconnectable from the electric clipper and therefore also the vacuum). McCambridge further teaches the advantage of the vacuum in that it collects hair clippings.
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method for the electric clipper, as disclosed by Leung, to include a vacuum at least partially disposed within the body (Col 9, Ln 63-65), and being selectively connectable and disconnectable from the battery, as taught by McCambridge, in order to collect hair clippings.
Regarding Claim 2, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung further discloses the body of the electric clipper has at least two opposing sides (Fig 1) and wherein the at least one boost actuator is located on a first one of the two opposing sides (Fig 1).
Regarding Claim 3, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung is not explicit to more than one boost actuator, however, having provided one boost actuator, a skilled Artisan would easily recognize the ability to provide a second, for the ease of use by both right and left handed users, or in order to actuate the boost with the electric clipper in more than one operating position.
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method for the electric clipper, as taught by combined Leung/McCambridge to include another of the at least one boost actuator is located on a second one of the two opposing sides, such that both opposing sides of the body have a corresponding boost actuator that each independently, when actuated by a user, provide increased operating performance of the clipper head, in order to provide a second boost actuator, for the ease of use by both right and left handed users, or in order to actuate the boost with the electric clipper in more than one operating position.
Regarding Claim 4, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung is silent to the vacuum, however McCambridge teaches the vacuum comprises a fan driven system (190) (Col 10, Ln 14).
Regarding Claim 5, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung is silent to the vacuum, however McCambridge teaches the vacuum comprises a turbine driven system (190) (Col 10, Ln 14) (Examiner has interpreted the limitation turbine to include a fan).
Regarding Claim 7, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung is silent to the vacuum, however McCambridge teaches operation of the vacuum is directly coupled to operation of the electric clipper (Col 10, Ln 20-28).
Regarding Claim 9, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung is silent to the vacuum, however McCambridge teaches the vacuum comprises a bin (182) (Col 10, Ln 30) configured to store foreign matter during operation of the vacuum.
Regarding Claim 10, Leung discloses an electric clipper comprising:
a body having an exterior surface (Fig 1);
at least one battery disposed within the body (Para [0029]);
a motor (12) disposed within the body (Para [0023]);
a clipper head (6) (Para [0019]), operably coupled to the body (Fig 1), that is powered by the motor and that is configured to clip hair (Para [0005]);
a power actuator (18) (Para [0024]) integrated with the exterior surface of the body (Fig 1) that is configured to selectively connect and disconnect the at least one battery and the motor to thereby power on and off the motor in response to corresponding actuations by a user such that when the motor is powered on by the power actuator the motor operates at a normal level of performance (Para [0024]);
at least one boost actuator (20) (Para [0024] integrated with the exterior surface of the body and configured to provide increased operating performance of the clipper head when actuated by a user.
Leung is silent to a vacuum. McCambridge teaches an electric clipper (Col 1, Ln 26) having a vacuum at least partially disposed within the body (Col 9, Ln 63-65), and being selectively connectable and disconnectable from the battery (Col 4, Ln 38-39 teaches a non–rechargeable battery which Examiner interprets to mean it is removable and therefore connectable and disconnectable from the electric clipper and therefore also the vacuum). McCambridge further teaches the advantage of the vacuum in that it collects hair clippings.
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method for the electric clipper, as disclosed by Leung, to include a vacuum at least partially disposed within the body (Col 9, Ln 63-65), and being selectively connectable and disconnectable from the battery, as taught by McCambridge, in order to collect hair clippings.
Regarding Claim 11, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung further discloses the body of the electric clipper has at least two opposing sides (Fig 1) and wherein the at least one boost actuator is located on a first one of the two opposing sides (Fig 1).
Regarding Claim 12, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung is not explicit to more than one boost actuator, however, having provided one boost actuator, a skilled Artisan would easily recognize the ability to provide a second, for the ease of use by both right and left handed users, or in order to actuate the boost with the electric clipper in more than one operating position.
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method for the electric clipper, as taught by combined Leung/McCambridge to include another of the at least one boost actuator is located on a second one of the two opposing sides, such that both opposing sides of the body have a corresponding boost actuator that each independently, when actuated by a user, provide increased operating performance of the clipper head, in order to provide a second boost actuator, for the ease of use by both right and left handed users, or in order to actuate the boost with the electric clipper in more than one operating position.
Regarding Claim 13, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung is silent to the vacuum, however McCambridge teaches the vacuum comprises a fan driven system (190) (Col 10, Ln 14).
Regarding Claim 14, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung is silent to the vacuum, however McCambridge teaches the vacuum comprises a turbine driven system (190) (Col 10, Ln 14) (Examiner has interpreted the limitation turbine to include a fan).
Regarding Claim 16, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung is silent to the vacuum, however McCambridge teaches operation of the vacuum is directly coupled to operation of the electric clipper (Col 10, Ln 20-28).
Regarding Claim 18, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung is silent to the vacuum, however McCambridge teaches the vacuum comprises a bin (182) (Col 10, Ln 30) configured to store foreign matter during operation of the vacuum.
Claims 6, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leung, in view of McCambridge and Johnson (US 5,269,073), hereinafter Johnson.
Regarding Claim 6, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung is silent to the vacuum. Johnson teaches an electric clipper having a vacuum and further having a vacuum pump for directing cut hair into a bin (Col 3, Ln 20).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method for the electric clipper, as taught by combined Leung/McCambridge to include a vacuum comprising a vacuum pump, as taught by Johnson, in order to directing cut hair into a bin.
Regarding Claim 15, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung is silent to the vacuum. Johnson teaches an electric clipper having a vacuum and further having a vacuum pump for directing cut hair into a bin (Col 3, Ln 20).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method for the electric clipper, as taught by combined Leung/McCambridge to include a vacuum comprising a vacuum pump, as taught by Johnson, in order to directing cut hair into a bin.
Claims 8, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leung, in view of McCambridge and Ortega (US 7,114,257), hereinafter Ortega.
Regarding Claim 8, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung is silent to the vacuum. Ortega teaches an electric clipper having a vacuum and further having a separate actuator that controls actuation of the vacuum (32) (Col 3, Ln 4).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method for the electric clipper, as taught by combined Leung/McCambridge to include a separate actuator that controls actuation of the vacuum, as taught by Ortega, in order to provide more flexibility in operation.
Regarding Claim 17, combined Leung/McCambridge teaches all aspects of the claimed invention, as stated above. Leung is silent to the vacuum. Ortega teaches an electric clipper having a vacuum and further having a separate actuator that controls actuation of the vacuum (32) (Col 3, Ln 4).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method for the electric clipper, as taught by combined Leung/McCambridge to include a separate actuator that controls actuation of the vacuum, as taught by Ortega, in order to provide more flexibility in operation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2001/0025421 to Damstra teaches an electric clipper.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Fred C Hammers whose telephone number is (571)272-9870. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 0080-1700.
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, Adam Eiseman can be reached at (571) 270-3818. 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.
/FRED C HAMMERS/
Examiner
Art Unit 3724
/ADAM J EISEMAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights