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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 7/29/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the prior art disclosure of DUINEVELD et al. (EP 3,725,263) Applicant argues:
“Further, new reference Duineveld fails to remedy the deficiencies of Gerhardt. Duineveld only discloses an IMU for use as a movement sensor. (See, Duineveld, par. [0069]). At paragraph [0068], Duinveled discloses that its movement sensors determine velocity. Duineveld separately discloses a ‘position sensor’ to determine positional information. (See, e.g., Duineveld, par. [0064]). Therefore, like Gerhardt, Duineveld also discloses the use of two different sensors, only one of which is an IMU, to determine movement and position of an oral care device.”
However, the prior art discloses a movement sensor (44), which determines velocity, that is an IMU (see paragraphs [0096]-[0097]). The DUINEVELD et al. disclosure further teaches “velocity information can be also be used to determine a position” in paragraph [0024]. Thus, there is explicit disclosure of “an inertial measurement unit, IMU, operable to output signals dependent on position and movement of the oral treatment device” as claimed. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not convincing.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, and 6-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by DUINEVELD et al. (EP 3,725,263).
Regarding Claim 1, DUINEVELD et al. disclose an oral treatment device for use in treating an oral cavity of a user, the oral treatment device comprising:
an inertial measurement unit, IMU, operable to output signals dependent on position (see paragraph [0024], “the interproximal space” in paragraph [0116] and “another input being the locations of interdental spacing” in paragraph [0120]) and movement of the oral treatment device (see “the speed of movement of the brush” in paragraph [0117] and “movement…of the toothbrush head is an input” in paragraph [0120]);
a fluid delivery system (30) for delivering working fluid to the oral cavity of a user (see Figure 4); and
a controller (50) configured to:
process signals received from the IMU indicating position (see “the locations of interdental spacings” in paragraph [0120]) and movement of the oral treatment device relative to the oral cavity of the user (see “brush back and forward” in paragraph [0117]); and
on the basis of the processing, output a control signal to the fluid delivery system to control delivery of the working fluid (see paragraph [0120]), wherein the controller is further configured to:
process the signals received from the IMU to determine that the oral treatment device is being moved according to a predetermined movement type (see paragraph [0117]), the predetermined movement type being a scrubbing movement (see “a scrubbing period” in paragraph [0117]); and
in response to the determination, output the control signal to the fluid delivery system to prevent delivery of the working fluid (see “when not to jet” in paragraph [0120]).
Regarding Claim 2, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the oral treatment device according to claim 1, wherein the control signal is operable to cause prevention of delivery of working fluid by the fluid delivery system (see paragraph [0108]).
Regarding Claim 4, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the oral treatment device according to claim 1, wherein movement of the oral treatment device according to the predetermined movement type impedes the use of the oral treatment device in treating the oral cavity of the user (see paragraphs [0114]-[0118]).
Regarding Claim 6, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the oral treatment device according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to:
process the signals received from the IMU to determine an orientation (see paragraph [0119) of the oral treatment device; and
output the control signal to the fluid delivery system based on the determined orientation (see paragraphs [0119]).
Regarding Claim 7, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the oral treatment device according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to:
process the signals received from the IMU to determine a change in orientation of the oral treatment device during use of the oral treatment device (see paragraph [0114]); and
output the control signal to the fluid delivery system based on the determined change in orientation of the oral treatment device (see paragraph [0114]).
Regarding Claim 8, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the oral treatment device according to claim 1,
wherein the oral treatment device (10) comprises a head (60), the head (60) being operable to be moved along a row of teeth between a first end of the row and a second end of the row (see Figure 4),
wherein the fluid delivery system (30) is at least partly comprised in the head (see Figure 4), and
wherein the controller is configured to:
process the signals received from the IMU to determine a trajectory of the head of the oral treatment device between the first end of the row and the second end of the row (see paragraphs [0117]-[0119]); and
output the control signal to the fluid delivery system based on the determined trajectory (see paragraphs [0117]-[0119]).
Regarding Claim 9, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the oral treatment device according to claim 8, wherein the controller is configured to:
process the signals received from the IMU to determine a change in orientation of the head of the oral treatment device during movement of the head of the oral treatment device between the first end of the row and the second end of the row (see paragraph [0119]); and
output the control signal to the fluid delivery system based on the determined change in orientation of the head (see paragraph [0119]).
Regarding Claim 10, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the oral treatment device according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to:
process the signals received from the IMU to determine that movement of the oral treatment device relative to the oral cavity has ceased (see paragraphs [0029]-[0032]); and
in response to the determination, output the control signal to the fluid delivery system to cause the fluid delivery system to deliver the working fluid (see paragraphs [0029]-[0032]).
Regarding Claim 11, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the oral treatment device according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to:
process the signals received from the IMU to detect an interproximal gap between adjacent teeth in the oral cavity of the user (see paragraph [0120]); and
output the control signal to the fluid delivery system in response to detecting the interproximal gap (see paragraph [0117]).
Regarding Claim 12, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the oral treatment device according to claim 11, wherein the controller is configured to output the control signal to the fluid delivery system to cause the fluid delivery system to deliver working fluid to the detected interproximal gap (see paragraph [0117]).
Regarding Claim 13, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the oral treatment device according to claim 1, wherein the oral treatment device (10) comprises a toothbrush (see Figures 3-4).
Regarding Claim 19, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the oral treatment device of claim 1, wherein the scrubbing movement is back-and-forth movement (see paragraph [0117]) of the oral treatment device.
Regarding claim 20, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the oral treatment device of claim 1, wherein the scrubbing movement is based on whether the signals received from the IMU indicate that oral treatment device is being moved back-and-forth at a speed beyond a predetermined speed threshold (see paragraph [0118]).
Regarding Claim 21, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the oral treatment device of claim 1, wherein the determination of the scrubbing movement is based on whether the signals received from the IMU indicate that the oral treatment device is being moved back-and-forth repetitively (see paragraph [0117]).
Regarding Claim 14, DUINEVELD et al. disclose a method of operating an oral treatment device for use in treating an oral cavity of a user, the oral treatment device comprising:
an inertial measurement unit, IMU, operable to output signals dependent on position (see paragraph [0024], “the interproximal space” in paragraph [0116] and “another input being the locations of interdental spacing” in paragraph [0120]) and movement of the oral treatment device (see “the speed of movement of the brush” in paragraph [0117] and “movement…of the toothbrush head is an input” in paragraph [0120]);
a fluid delivery system (30) for delivering working fluid to the oral cavity of a user (see Figure 4); and
a controller (50),
the method comprising, at the controller:
processing signals received from the IMU indicating position (see “the locations of interdental spacings” in paragraph [0120]) and movement of the oral treatment device relative to the oral cavity of the user (see “brush back and forward” in paragraph [0117]); and
on the basis of the processing, outputting a control signal to the fluid delivery system to control delivery of the working fluid (see paragraph [0120]), the method further comprising:
processing the signals received from the IMU to determine that the oral treatment device is being moved according to a predetermined movement type (see paragraph [0117]), the predetermined movement type being a scrubbing movement (see “a scrubbing period” in paragraph [0117]); and
in response to the determination, outputting the control signal to the fluid delivery system to prevent delivery of the working fluid (see “when not to jet” in paragraph [0120]).
Regarding claim 22, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the method of claim 14, wherein the scrubbing movement is based on whether the signals received from the IMU indicate that oral treatment device is being moved back-and-forth at a speed beyond a predetermined speed threshold (see paragraph [0118]).
Regarding Claim 15, DUINEVELD et al. disclose a computer program comprising a set of instructions which, when executed by a computerized device (50), cause the computerized device (50) to perform a method of operating an oral treatment device for use in treating an oral cavity of a user, the oral treatment device comprising an inertial measurement unit, IMU, operable to output signals dependent on position (see paragraph [0024], “the interproximal space” in paragraph [0116] and “another input being the locations of interdental spacing” in paragraph [0120]) and movement of the oral treatment device (see “the speed of movement of the brush” in paragraph [0117] and “movement…of the toothbrush head is an input” in paragraph [0120]), and a fluid delivery system (30) for delivering working fluid to the oral cavity of a user (see Figure 4), the method comprising:
processing signals received from the IMU indicating position (see “the locations of interdental spacings” in paragraph [0120]) and movement of the oral treatment device relative to the oral cavity of the user (see “brush back and forward” in paragraph [0117]); and
on the basis of the processing, outputting a control signal to the fluid delivery system to control delivery of the working fluid (see paragraph [0120]), the method further comprising:
processing the signals received from the IMU to determine that the oral treatment device is being moved according to a predetermined movement type (see paragraph [0117]), the predetermined movement type being a scrubbing movement (see “a scrubbing period” in paragraph [0117]); and
in response to the determination, outputting the control signal to the fluid delivery system to prevent delivery of the working fluid (see “when not to jet” in paragraph [0120]).
Regarding Claim 16, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the computer program of claim 15, wherein the scrubbing movement is back-and-forth movement (see paragraph [0117]) of the oral treatment device.
Regarding claim 17, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the computer program of claim 15, wherein the scrubbing movement is based on whether the signals received from the IMU indicate that oral treatment device is being moved back-and-forth at a speed beyond a predetermined speed threshold (see paragraph [0118]).
Regarding Claim 18, DUINEVELD et al. disclose the computer program of claim 15, wherein the determination of the scrubbing movement is based on whether the signals received from the IMU indicate that the oral treatment device is being moved back-and-forth repetitively (see paragraph [0117]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL COLLINS whose telephone number is (571)272-8970. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Jacob Scott can be reached at (571) 270-3415. 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.
M.K.C.
9/4/2026
/MICHAEL COLLINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights