DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. Claims 11-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 11/17/2025.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II in the reply filed on 11/17/2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Interpretation
3. The term “high voltage” in claim 15 will be interpreted to be “in the case of a DC voltage, voltage values of more than 1 kV and, in the case of AC voltages, voltage values of more than 1.5 kV” as stated in p.4 of the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. 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.
5. Claims 17-23 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.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the object" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 also recites the limitation "said potential equalizing facility" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "said potential equalizing facility" in line 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 19 depends from claim 18.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "said potential equalizing facility" in line 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 21-23 depend from claim 20.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. Claims 15-20 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wunderl et al. (DE 102018209735 A1, provided in Applicant’s IDS filed 06/01/2023).
Regarding claim 15, Wunderl teaches a hand-guided device (Fig. 1-5), comprising: an electrically insulating housing (spacer 7, plasma source 5, and dashed/highlighted portion of base body 3, see drawing below, Fig. 1-5);
PNG
media_image1.png
674
522
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a plasma source accommodated in said housing (electrode surface 58, Fig. 4) and electrically supplied using power electronics (Fig. 5), which are operated with high voltage (“The control device itself can have a high-voltage source or be designed as a high-voltage source”, see p.7, 4th paragraph of English translation, where “the plasma voltage is 3.5 kV (peak to peak), p.14, 2nd to last paragraph of English translation); and
an outer surface of the device (exterior surface of housing as mapped above, Fig. 1-5) which, during use of the device, is in contact with a hand of a user (portion of base body 3 highlighted in the drawing above is in held by a hand) and is at least in part electrically conductive (because all materials in the universe have an electrical conductivity value, the material used for the housing of spacer 7, plasma source 5, and portion of base body 3 are thus “electrically conductive”).
Regarding claim 16, Wunderl teaches wherein said plasma source (electrode 58 is part of plasma source 5, Fig. 5) comprises a circuit board (Fig. 5 is a circuit diagram).
Regarding claim 17, Wunderl teaches wherein said plasma source (electrodes 58, Fig. 4), during an operation of the device generates plasma (plasma device 1, Fig. 1) for the treatment of the object on an outer treatment surface (“treating body surfaces”, abstract), and wherein a potential equalizing facility is spaced apart from the treatment surface (housing 57, Fig. 4 is spaced apart via housing of spacer 7, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 18, Wunderl teaches wherein a potential equalizing facility (housing 57, Fig. 4) has an annular body (housing 57 is ring-shaped) that surrounds said power electronics (electrode 58, electrical contacting 67, and safety circuit 65 are surrounded by housing 57, Fig. 3 and p.20, 2nd to last paragraph of English translation) and in part forms the outer surface (housing 57 bounds the exterior surface of plasma source 5. Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 19, Wunderl teaches wherein said housing (spacer 7, plasma source 5, and dashed/highlighted portion of base body 3, see drawing above, Fig. 1-5) has an upper part (portion of base body 3, see drawing above) and a lower part (spacer 7, Fig. 1) that delimit an interior space of said housing (Fig. 3) in which said power electronics are accommodated (plasma source containing power electronics, e.g., electrode 58, Fig. 3-4), and wherein said annular body (housing 57, Fig. 3) is arranged between said upper part (portion of base body 3, Fig. 3) and said lower part (spacer 7, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 20, Wunderl teaches wherein a potential equalizing facility has a layer that is applied to said housing (portion of base body 3 labeled with x, see drawing below, is a separate component to the remainder of base body 3, see Fig. 3, and thus is “applied” onto the dashed portion of base body 3)
PNG
media_image2.png
674
522
media_image2.png
Greyscale
and at least in part forms the outer surface (faces external-facing direction).
Regarding claim 23, Wunderl teaches an actuating element (control element 45, Fig. 3) for selectively activating or deactivating the device (p.9, 4th paragraph of English translation), and wherein said potential equalizing facility (x-portion of base body 3, see drawing above) at least in part forms a surface of said actuating element (groove formed on x-portion surrounding and below control element 45, Fig. 3).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
9. Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wunderl et al. (DE 102018209735 A1, provided in Applicant’s IDS filed 06/01/2023) as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of Fregoso (US 20170238987 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Wunderl teaches said layer (x-portion of base body 3, see drawing above), but is silent to the material composition of said layer or the entire base body.
Fregoso teaches a hand-held plasma treatment apparatus for human tissue (treatment device 100, Fig. 1 and [0018]), where the housing encompassing the entire device (101, Fig. 1) can be made of “any appropriate material, such as aluminum, other metal, plastic, etc.” ([0018]).
Wunderl and Fregoso are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of hand-held plasma generating apparatuses for the treatment of body surfaces.
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 entire base body (including the x-portion highlighted in drawing above) of Wunderl by incorporating the material to be plastic as taught by Fregoso, because the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use (i.e., encompassing all interior components so that the user can hold the device, [0018]) supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07).
With this modification, the plastic being “electrically conductive” is inherent, as all materials have an electrical conductivity value.
Regarding claim 22, Wunderl teaches said layer (x-portion of base body 3, see drawing above), but is silent to the material composition of said layer or the entire base body.
Fregoso teaches a hand-held plasma treatment apparatus for human tissue (treatment device 100, Fig. 1 and [0018]), where the housing encompassing the entire device (101, Fig. 1) can be made of “any appropriate material, such as aluminum, other metal, plastic, etc.” ([0018]).
Wunderl and Fregoso are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of hand-held plasma generating apparatuses for the treatment of body surfaces.
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 entire base body (including the x-portion highlighted in drawing above) of Wunderl by incorporating the material to be metal as taught by Fregoso, because the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use (i.e., encompassing all interior components so that the user can hold the device, [0018]) supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07).
With this modification, the metal being “electrically conductive” is inherent, as all materials have an electrical conductivity value.
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Aham Lee whose telephone number is (703)756-5622. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday, 10:00 AM - 8:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Maris R. Kessel can be reached at (571) 270-7698. 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.
/Aham Lee/Examiner, Art Unit 1758
/MARIS R KESSEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1758