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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 6-8, 10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 03/06/2026
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-5, 9 in the reply filed on 3/06/2026 is acknowledged.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in CN on 09/11/2020. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CN202021991551.6 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
It appears that the Office is not authorized to retrieve the priority document via the WIPO Digital Access Service (DAS).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show balls (13) as described in the specification. While 13 is identified as the “balls” they are depicted as cylindrical protrusions or cylindrical nubs rather than a spherical ball. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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.
Claim 4 is 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.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the bottom wall " in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Did the Applicant intend for claim 4 to depend from claim 3, rather than claim 1?
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.
Claims 1, 5 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR 200437789, herein referred to as KR.
In regards to claim 1, KR discloses a hair treatment device, comprising: a main body (outer body 10); and a housing (inner body 20); wherein the main body (10) comprises a tool bit device (moving body portion 30), the housing (20) comprises an accommodating cavity (internal area of 20), and the tool bit device (30) is movably accommodated in the accommodating cavity (internal area of 20) in a telescopic manner (see Figures 6a-6b); when the tool bit device (30) is accommodated in the accommodating cavity, the tool bit device is automatically turned off; and when the tool bit device (30) extends out of the accommodating cavity (internal area of 20; fig. 6b), the tool bit device is automatically turned on.
(“and internally, when the motor terminal (33a) and the battery terminal (33d), which are formed spaced apart from each other on the front body (33) of the moving body (35), come into contact with the contact terminal (21) simultaneously, the power of the battery (38) is transmitted through the battery terminal (33d) to the motor (37) through the motor terminal (32a), and as the eccentric vibration shaft (37a) rotates, the nose hairs that have entered the inside of the safety net (31) are cut by the cutting blade (36)” see page 19.
In regards to claim 5, KR discloses wherein a locking device (12) is further fixedly disposed in the accommodating cavity, the main body comprises a self-locking push rod (33c), and the self-locking push rod (33c) is movably locked on the locking device (12; 33c can only move between the two ends of the slot 12).
In regards to claim 9, KR discloses wherein the accommodating cavity comprises an opening (near cover 11), the main body comprises a switch plate (pivoting cover 11), the switch plate is movably disposed in the opening (between Figures 6a and 6b; about torsion spring 11a; fig.3); when the tool bit device is accommodated in the accommodating cavity, the switch plate does not protrude with respect to a starting surface of the opening (fig. 6a).
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 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 200437789, herein referred to as KR in view of Maschitz et al. (U.S. Patent 6,868,919), herein referred to as Maschitz.
In regards to claim 2, KR discloses a razor having movable components and switching arrangement in which activation of the razor is controlled based on the relative position of components, such as through engagement and disengagement of the electrical contacts. However, KR does not teach that the wherein the main body comprises a Hall switch, a magnet is disposed in the accommodating cavity; when the tool bit device is accommodated in the accommodating cavity, the Hall switch is close to the magnet; and when the tool bit device extends out of the accommodating cavity, the Hall switch is distal from the magnet. Maschitz discloses a switching device in which a magnet (4) is positioned to move relative to a Hall sensor (5) such that the sensor switches between ON and OFF states depending on the relative position of the magnet and the sensor (see col. 3, lines 11-24). Thus, Maschitz teaches a non-contact, position based switching arrangement using a magnet and Hall-effect sensor. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the switching arrangement of KR to employ the magnet and Hall-effect sensor arrangement as taught by Maschitz in order to detect the relative position of the movable components and control activation of the razor. Such a substation represents the use of a known alternative to contact-based switching mechanism and would have yielded predictable results of activating the device when the components are in a first relative position and deactivating the device when in a second relative position. Additionally, the substitution would improve reliability by eliminating mechanical electrical contacts and reducing wear.
In regards to claim 3, the modified device of KR discloses wherein an accommodating groove is defined on a bottom wall (e.g. in the same location as the groove of contact terminal 21 as modified by Maschitz; as the device of KR can be manipulated and reoriented by hand, limitation “bottom” does not by itself impart a specific location) of the accommodating cavity and the magnet (e.g. in the location of contact terminal 21 as modified by Maschitz) is fixedly disposed in the accommodating groove.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 200437789, herein referred to as KR in view of Wetzel et. al. (U.S. Patent 5,507,095), herein referred to as Wetzel.
In regards to claim 4, KR discloses wherein the main body (outer body 10) is connected to the bottom wall of the accommodating cavity but does not disclose that it is through an elastic element such that when the tool bit device is accommodated in the accommodating cavity, the elastic element is compressed; and when the tool bit device extends out of the accommodating cavity, the elastic element is stretched. Wetzel discloses a trimer device in which a movable trimmer (4’) is biased by springs (36) positioned between the housing and the trimmer assembly (see Fig. 3, col. 5, lines 25-30). The springs urge the trimmer outward relative to the housing, such that the springs are compressed when the trimmer is in a retracted position within the housing and expanded as the trimmer moves outward to an extended position. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate such a spring biased arrangement in the device of KR in order to bias the trimmer toward an extended position and facilitate deployment of the trimmer from within the handle, as spring biasing mechanisms are commonly used to assist movement between retracted and extended positions in hand-held grooming devices.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA M LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-8339. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a.m.- 5p.m..
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.
/LAURA M LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724