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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-3, 5, and 6 have been amended. Claims 4 and 7-10 have been canceled. Claims 1-3, 5, and 6 have been examined on the merits.
Response to Arguments
The amendments to the drawing and specification are persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 4-5, filed 05/07/2026, with respect to the amendments to the drawing objections are persuasive. The drawing objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 5, filed 05/07/2026, with respect to the previous 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejections are persuasive. The previous 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 5-9, filed 05/07/2026, with respect to the previous 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections are not persuasive.
With respect to: ““The applicant argues that Dishon does not disclose the below feature in claim 1. "an elastomer is a flexible silicone ring~ and embedded on the groove, the elastomer is arranged between the brush head insert and an inner wall of the brush head body and the elastomer is in an interference fit with the inner wall of the brush head body
an abutting portion is further provided on the elastic arm, the abutting portion is a projection facing into the fixed slot, the inner wall of the brush head body has an inner wall projection, the inner wall projection is a projection facing the groove, and the abutting portion and the inner wall projection are capable of elastically abutting against the motor drive shaft and the elastomer respectively "..”, the examiner disagrees. As detailed below, Dishon as modified by Wu and Li teach the limitations of the claim.
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 first sealing ring 136 in WU is not disposed between the vibrating rod 130 and the brush head member 300 (see FIG. 7),”) 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).
Additionally, the teaching of Wu was solely relied upon, as detailed below, for the use of a ring and its interference fit tolerance.
With respect to: “In conclusion, WU provides no motivation to replace the spring clip 22 of Dishon with the first sealing ring 136.”, the examiner disagrees. Dishon discloses in paragraph 0026: “The spring clip 22 is generally a stamped metal product, although other resilient materials and formation methods may be used.”.
With respect to: “The IWP in Dishon is not specifically configured to abut against the spring clip 22, but is used for pressing against the coupling member 20. Furthermore, The IWP is recessed relative to the left side portion rather than being protruding, and thus cannot be regarded as corresponding to the inner wall projection defined in Claim 1.”, the examiner disagrees. Fig. 2-A shows IWP abutting the elastomer 22. IWP can be seen projecting from the outer wall in the annotated Fig. 2-A below.
PNG
media_image1.png
661
732
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 1-3, 5, and 6 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 1 recites: “An electric toothbrush, comprising a brush head and a toothbrush handle, a motor drive shaft….snap-fit and fix a motor drive shaft”. As claimed, it is unclear whether both recited motor drive shafts are the same or different components. For examination purposes, both motor drive shafts have been construed as the same.
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 1-3, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dishon (US 20210100346 A1), WU (CN113180867A), and Li (US 12295803 B2).
Referring to claim 1: Dishon teaches an electric toothbrush (“electric toothbrush” [0019]), comprising a brush head (10 Fig. 1) and a toothbrush handle (112 Fig. 9), a motor drive shaft (80 Fig. 9) is provided on (shown in Fig. 9) the toothbrush handle, the brush head (10 Fig. 1), comprises a brush head body (12 Figs. 1 and 9) and a brush head insert (20 Fig. 1), wherein a mounting slot (mounting slot of 12 shown in Fig. 9) is provided in the brush head body (12 Figs. 1 and 9),
the brush head insert (20 Fig. 1) is mounted in the mounting slot (mounting slot of 12 shown in Fig. 9), an elastic arm (47 Fig. 5) and a fixed arm (FA Fig. 1-A inserted below) are provided on the brush head insert (20 Fig. 1),
a fixed slot (44 Fig. 7) is formed in the brush head body (12 Figs. 1 and 9) and is provided between the elastic arm (47 Fig. 5) and the fixed arm (FA Fig. 1-A inserted below), the fixed slot (44 Fig. 7) is configured to snap-fit (snap-fit between 70 and 120 shown in Fig. 9) and fix a motor drive shaft (80 Fig. 9),
a groove (GR Fig. 1-A inserted below) is provided on both the elastic arm (47 Fig. 5) and the fixed arm (FA Fig. 1-A inserted below), and an elastomer (22 Fig. 5; “The spring clip 22 is generally a stamped metal product, although other resilient materials and formation methods may be used.” [0026]; Merriam-Webster: “elastomer: any of various elastic substances resembling rubber”; elastic:“1a: capable of recovering size and shape after deformation”)
and embedded on the groove (GR Fig. 1-A inserted below), the elastomer is arranged between the brush head insert (20 Fig. 1) and an inner wall (inner wall of 12 shown in Fig. 9) of the brush head body (12 Figs. 1 and 9),
an abutting portion (70 Fig. 9) is further provided on the elastic arm (47 Fig. 5), the abutting portion (70 Fig. 9) is a projection facing (shown in Fig. 7) into the fixed slot (44 Fig. 7), the inner wall (inner wall of 12 shown in Fig. 9) of the brush head body (12 Figs. 1 and 9) has an inner wall projection (IWP Fig. 2-A inserted below), the inner wall projection is a projection facing the groove (GR Fig. 1-A inserted above), and the abutting portion (70 Fig. 9) and the inner wall projection (IWP Fig. 2-A inserted below) are capable of elastically (due to their flexible material, both are capable of elastically abutting; “The spring clip 22 is generally a stamped metal product, although other resilient materials and formation methods may be used.” [0026]; Merriam-Webster: “elastomer: any of various elastic substances resembling rubber”; elastic:“1a: capable of recovering size and shape after deformation”; “The sleeve 12 may be formed from a molded plastic”) abutting against the motor drive shaft (80 Fig. 9) and the elastomer (22 Fig. 5) respectively, but is silent on the elastomer is specifically a flexible silicone ring and the elastomer is in an interference fit with the inner wall of the brush head body.
Wu in an analogous brush head (10 Fig. 1) teaches a similar configuration elastomer (136 Figs. 2 and 3) is a ring (“ring” [0084]) and is in an interference fit (“The amount of interference between the ring 136 and the two wall surfaces is greater than or equal to 0.1 mm and less than or equal to 0.5 mm” [0084]) with the similar configuration inner wall (111 Figs. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electric toothbrush of Dishon with the interference fit as taught by Wu for the purpose of having sufficient friction between the two elements to prevent unintended decoupling, sealing against water, and to dampen vibrations ([0085] of Wu).
Li teaches a similar configuration ring that is specifically flexible silicone (“The first sealing member 70 may be a solid structure, such as a rubber ring or a silicone ring, and its structure is relatively simple.” Col. 11, lines 65-67).
It also would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electric toothbrush of Dishon as modified with the flexible silicone material as taught by Li for the purpose of having a suitable material for sealing and/or provided suitable friction between the mating objects.
PNG
media_image2.png
416
534
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
556
616
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Referring to claim 2: Dishon as modified teaches the electric toothbrush according to claim 1, wherein both sides of the elastic arm (47 Fig. 5) are hollow (66 shown on both sides as HM in Fig. 1-A inserted above), so that the elastic arm (47 Fig. 5) deforms (“slots 66 that enable the bridge 47 to flex” [0024]) when squeezed to ensure that the motor drive shaft (80 Fig. 9) is stably snap-fitted (snap-fit between 70 and 120 shown in Fig. 9) into the fixed slot (44 Fig. 7).
Referring to claim 3: Dishon as modified teaches the electric toothbrush according to claim 1, but is silent on wherein an amount of interference between the elastomer and the inner wall of the brush head body is 0.3-0.5 mm; or the groove is circumferentially recessed on an outer wall of the brush head insert.
Wu in an analogous brush head (10 Fig. 1) teaches wherein an amount of interference between the elastomer (136 Figs. 2 and 3) and the similar configuration inner wall is 0.3-0.5 mm (“The amount of interference between the ring 136 and the two wall surfaces is greater than or equal to 0.1 mm and less than or equal to 0.5 mm” [0084]); or the groove (groove of 136 Figs. 2 and 3) is circumferentially recessed on an outer wall of the similar configuration brush head insert (130 Figs. 2 and 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electric toothbrush of Dishon as modified with the interference amount and flexible ring as taught by Wu for the purpose of having a proper interference fit between the coupled members and the ring shaped elastomer for having an alternate elastomer capable of fitting in the groove.
Referring to claim 5: Dishon as modified teaches the electric toothbrush according to claim 2, wherein the brush head insert (20 Fig. 1) comprises an insert top end (TE Fig. 1-A inserted above) and an insert bottom end (BE Fig. 1-A inserted above), at least one end of the elastic arm (47 Fig. 5) and the fixed arm (FA Fig. 1-A inserted above) is connected to or integrally formed with the insert top end (TE Fig. 1-A inserted above) or the insert bottom end, and both sides of a left side (LS Fig. 1-A inserted above) of the elastic arm (47 Fig. 5) are respectively provided with elongated holes (HM Fig. 1-A inserted above) arranged in a longitudinal direction (LD Fig. 1-A inserted above) so that both sides of the elastic arm (47 Fig. 5) form a hollow design (shown in Fig. 1-A inserted above).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dishon (US 20210100346 A1), WU (CN113180867A), and Li (US 12295803 B2), as applied in claim 5, and in further view of Craft (US 5697117 A) and Sauer (US 9561092 B2).
Referring to claim 6: Dishon as modified teaches the electric toothbrush according to claim 5, wherein the insert bottom end (BE Fig. 1-A inserted above) further comprises an insert base (IB Fig. 1-A inserted above), and both sides of the insert base (IB Fig. 1-A inserted above) are respectively provided with a first fixed strip (1FS Fig. 1-A inserted above) and a second fixed strip (2FS Fig. 1-A inserted above) arranged in a longitudinal direction (LD Fig. 1-A inserted above).
But is silent on wherein the insert top end comprises a cross-shaped positioning portion,
and an inside of the mounting slot has a cross-shaped groove corresponding to the cross-shaped positioning portion for quickly locating a mounting position of the brush head insert in the mounting slot;
a first boss and a second boss are further provided on an outer wall of the cross-shaped positioning portion, and the first boss and the second boss have elasticity;
Craft teaches a similar configuration insert top end (top end 32 of 28 Figs. 1-3) comprises a cross-shaped positioning portion (shown in Figs. 2 and 6),
and an inside of the similar configuration mounting slot (mounting slot 54 of 25 shown in Figs. 6, 8 and 9; “recess 54 is desirably formed in the shoulder 55 of the brush head defining the annular thrust surface 46 to receive the lugs 50” Col. 3, lines 49-51) has a cross-shaped groove corresponding to the cross-shaped positioning portion (shown in Fig. 4) for quickly locating a mounting position (shown in Figs. 8 and 9) of the similar configuration brush head insert (28 Figs. 1-3 and 7-9) in the mounting slot.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the insert top end of Dishon as modified with the cross-shaped positioning portion as taught by Craft for the purpose of preventing unintentional rotational movement between the mated parts.
Sauer teaches a similar configuration insert top end (130 Figs. 4A and 4B) comprising a boss (139 Fig. 4A) having elasticity (“A stopper element 139 made from an elastomeric material” Col. 6, lines 47-48).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the insert top end of Dishon as modified with the Sauer for the purpose of preventing unintended axial uncoupling.
It also would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the insert top end of Dishon as modified with a second boss for the purpose of having an additional frictional member to prevent axial uncoupling in the case where the first boss fails, and since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B)
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 CHRISTOPHER SOTO whose telephone number is (571)272-8172. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8a.m. - 5 p.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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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.
CHRISTOPHER SOTO
Examiner
Art Unit 3723
/CHRISTOPHER SOTO/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/MONICA S CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights