Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/504,612

RAZOR CARTRIDGE AND RAZOR ASSEMBLY

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Nov 08, 2023
Examiner
KEENA, ELLA LORRAINE
Art Unit
3724
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Dorco Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
20%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
0%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 20% of cases
20%
Career Allow Rate
1 granted / 5 resolved
-50.0% vs TC avg
Minimal -20% lift
Without
With
+-20.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
64 currently pending
Career history
69
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
62.7%
+22.7% vs TC avg
§102
22.7%
-17.3% vs TC avg
§112
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 5 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Response to Amendment The amendment filed October 28th, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-13 remain pending in the application. Claim 3 has been cancelled. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/31/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-Final Office Action on 7/21/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 1 and 12 have been amended to include the limitation “wherein the pair of coupling protrusions are statically fixed with respect to each other”. This limitation is not disclosed in the specification of the claimed invention, nor could it be definitively determined from viewing the drawings of the invention provided. 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 1-7 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka Kiyoaki (JP 3730802 B2 – hereinafter Kiyoaki) in view of 김학호 et al. (KR 20140002070 U – hereinafter 김학호). Regarding claim 1, Kiyoaki teaches a razor cartridge, comprising: a blade housing configured to receive at least one or more shaving blades in a longitudinal direction (Fig. 1 , housing of Blade Cartridge 3 and Razor Blades 67), a pair of coupling holes formed in a rear surface of the blade housing (Fig. 5, Recessed 70), the pair of coupling holes spaced apart from each other in the longitudinal direction (Fig. 5); and a connector coupled to the blade housing (Fig. 7, Head Unit 10) and comprising a pair of coupling protrusions spaced apart from each other in the longitudinal direction (Fig. 7, Engaging Protrusions 33a and 33b), the pair of coupling protrusions respectively connected to the coupling holes and rotatable about a first rotational axis parallel to the longitudinal direction (Fig. 5, rotation along first axis shown in Fig. 10 and 11), wherein each of the coupling protrusions forms a gap between each of the coupling holes to allow the blade housing to pivot about a second rotational axis perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (Fig. 5 shows gaps above 33a and 33b, Fig. 8 and Fig. 9 show rotation about a second axis which is perpendicular to the longitudinal axis), wherein each of the coupling protrusions is formed to extend outwardly (Fig. 5, protrusions 33a and 33b extend outwardly from axis L). Kiyoaki does not teach wherein the pair of coupling protrusions are statically fixed with respect to each other. However, 김학호 teaches a pair of coupling protrusions which are statically fixed with respect to each other (Fig. 8, Projections 33a are statically fixed to one another as they are formed of one integral piece). 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 fixing method of Kiyoaki such that the arms are statically fixed with respect to each other via making the two integral as it has been held that “the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice."); but see Schenck v. Nortron Corp. Regarding claim 2, Kiyoaki further teaches the razor cartridge of claim 1, wherein the gap is configured to be formed at a front side of the coupling protrusion in response to the blade housing being undepressed (Fig. 8, the side of the blade that is undepressed has a gap above 33a), and wherein the gap is configured to be formed at a rear side of the coupling protrusion in response to the blade housing being depressed (Fig. 8, the side of the blade that is depressed has a gap below 33b). Regarding claim 3, Kiyoaki further teaches the razor cartridge of claim 1, wherein the gap comprises a pair of gaps comprising a first gap and a second gap (Fig. 8, first gap is above 33a in the leftmost recess and the second gap is below 33b in the rightmost recess), wherein the first gap is configured to be formed at a front side of a first one of the coupling protrusions, corresponding to the first gap, and wherein the second gap is configured to be formed at a rear side of a second one of the coupling protrusions, corresponding to the second gap, in response to the blade housing having pivoted about the second rotational axis (Fig. 8 shows the housing pivoted about the second axis). Regarding claim 4, Kiyoaki further teaches the razor cartridge of claim 1, wherein the gap comprises a pair of gaps that are configured to be formed at a rear side of the pair of coupling protrusions, respectively, in response to the blade housing being depressed (Fig. 8 and 9, gap is at the rear side of the 33a and 33b when it’s respective side of the housing is depressed). Regarding claim 5, Kiyoaki further teaches the razor cartridge of claim 1, wherein the coupling hole comprises a first surface (Fig. 10 and 11, Engaging Surface 65a), wherein the coupling protrusion comprises a second surface disposed forward of the first surface and corresponding to the first surface (Fig. 10 and 11, Contact Surface 40a), and wherein the second surface is configured to move along the first surface in contact with the first surface in response to the blade housing in an undepressed state pivoting about the first rotational axis (Fig. 10 and 11, movement and contact between the two surfaces is shown; [0052]). Regarding claim 6, Kiyoaki further teaches the razor cartridge of claim 5, wherein the second surface is configured to move along the first surface with the second surface spaced apart from the first surface in response to the blade housing in a depressed state pivoting about the first rotational axis (Fig. 9, it can be seen that the first surface is spaced apart from the second for protrusions 33a when its side of the housing is depressed. If rotation of the first axis were to occur in this state, inherently the two surfaces would be spaced apart during the rotation). Regarding claim 7, Kiyoaki further teaches the razor cartridge of claim 5, wherein the first surface has a concave curved surface (Fig. 10 and 11, Engaging Surface 65a is concave), wherein the second surface has a convex curved surface corresponding to the concave curved surface of the first surface (Fig. 10 and 11, Contact Surface 40a is convex and corresponds to 65a), and wherein the concave curved surface of the first surface and the convex curved surface of the second surface have a profile of an are centered on the first rotational axis. Regarding claim 11, Kiyoaki further teaches the razor cartridge of claim 1, wherein the connector comprises: a center supporting unit (Fig. 8, Pusher 23) configured to support a central region (Fig. 8, Engaging Protrusion 66) of the rear surface of the blade housing in response to the blade housing being in a depressed state (Fig. 8, depressed state is shown, and 23 is shown to support the central region in the depressed state; [0048]). Regarding claim 12, Kiyoaki further teaches a razor assembly, comprising: a blade housing configured to receive at least one or more shaving blades (Fig. 1, housing of Blade Cartridge 3 and Razor Blades 67) in a longitudinal direction, a pair of coupling holes (Fig. 5, Recesses 70) formed in a rear surface of the blade housing, the pair of coupling holes spaced apart from each other in the longitudinal direction; a connector (Fig. 7, Head Unit 10) coupled to the blade housing and comprising a pair of coupling protrusions (Fig. 7, Engaging Protrusions 33a and 33b), the pair of coupling protrusions respectively connected to the coupling holes and rotatable about a first rotational axis parallel to the longitudinal direction (Fig. 5, rotation along first axis shown in Fig. 10 and 11); and a restoring force-providing (Fig. 8. Pusher 23 and Compression Coil Spring 44) unit configured to provide restoring force for restoring the blade housing in response to pivoting to a first resting position ([0048]), wherein each of the coupling protrusions forms a gap between each of the coupling holes to allow the blade housing to pivot about a second rotational axis perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (Fig. 5 shows gaps above 33a and 33b, Fig. 8 and Fig. 9 show rotation about a second axis which is perpendicular to the longitudinal axis), wherein each of the coupling protrusions is formed to extend outwardly (Fig. 5, protrusions 33a and 33b extend outwardly from axis L), wherein a central area along the longitudinal direction of the connector is opened in a direction from a rear toward a front of the coupling protrusions to allow at least a portion of the restoring force unit to be coupled by passing through at least a portion of the connector (Fig. 7, there is a central area of Head Unit 10 which is opened in a vertical direction (extending in a direction defined from a from a rear toward a front of 33a and 33b) which allow at least a portion of the restoring force unit comprised of Pusher 23 and Compression Coil Spring 44 to be coupled by passing through the connector – Pusher 23 and Compression Coil 44 both pass through the Head Unit 10). Kiyoaki does not teach wherein the pair of coupling protrusions are statically fixed with respect to each other. However, 김학호 teaches a pair of coupling protrusions which are statically fixed with respect to each other (Fig. 8, Projections 33a are statically fixed to one another as they are formed of one integral piece). 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 fixing method of Kiyoaki such that the arms are statically fixed with respect to each other via making the two integral as it has been held that “the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice."); but see Schenck v. Nortron Corp. Regarding claim 13, Kiyoaki further teaches the razor assembly of claim 12, wherein the restoring force-providing unit comprises: a plunger (Fig. 8, Pusher 23) configured to transmit the restoring force in cam action with the blade housing; and an elastic member (Fig. 8, Compression Coil Spring 44) configured to provide an elastic force to the plunger. Claims 8, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka Kiyoaki (JP 3730802 B2 – hereinafter Kiyoaki) in view of 김학호 et al. (KR 20140002070 U – hereinafter 김학호) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cha Jum Sook (KR 20170029314 A – hereinafter Sook). Regarding claim 8, the existing combination of Kiyoaki 김학호and fails to teach the razor cartridge of claim 1, further comprising: a plurality of supporting bars formed between the blade housing and the connector and configured to support opposite sides of the blade housing. However, Sook teaches a razor cartridge comprising a plurality of support bars (Fig. 2, Elastic Generating Ends 42A-3) formed between the blade housing (Fig. 2, housing of Blade Cartridge 30) and a connector (Fig. 2, Engaging Means 40) and configured to support opposite sides of the blade housing. 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 razor cartridge of Kiyoaki and 김학호 to include a plurality of supporting bars formed between the blade housing and the connector and configured to support opposite sides of the blade housing as taught by Sook. Doing so is beneficial as it supports the blade cartridge at a predetermined pressure (Sook, Page 4 para 7). Regarding claim 9, the existing combination of Kiyoaki, 김학호, and Sook does not explicitly teach the razor cartridge of claim 8, wherein the support bars are configured to be elastically deformed to restore the blade housing to a second rest position in response to the blade housing pivoting about the second rotational axis. However, Sook further teaches wherein the support bars are configured to be elastically deformed to restore the blade housing to a rest position in response to the blade housing pivoting about a rotational axis (Page 5, para 2). 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 support bars of the combination of Kiyoaki and Sook such that they can be elastically deformed to restore the blade housing to a second rest position in response to the blade housing pivoting about the second rotational axis as taught by Sook. Doing so is beneficial as it allows the blade cartridge to be brought into close contact with the skin (Sook, Page 4 para 7). Regarding claim 10, the existing combination of Kiyoaki and Sook does not teach the razor cartridge of claim 8, further comprising: a plurality of circular guards formed on opposite sides of the rear surface of the blade housing and abutting the plurality of support bars, wherein the plurality of circular guards are configured to allow the first rotational axis to pass through a radial center of the plurality of circular guards in response to the blade housing pivoting about the first rotational axis. g Ends 36) formed on opposite sides of the rear surface of the blade housing. 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 support bars of the combination of Kiyoaki and Sook such that they abut against a plurality of guards. Doing so is beneficial as it allows the blade cartridge to be rotatable within an adjustable and predetermined angle (Sook, Page 6 para 3). 김학호 teaches a razor cartridge with guards (Fig. 3, Pivoting Area 12a) that are circular and configured to allow the first rotational axis to pass through a radial center of the plurality of circular guards in response to the blade housing pivoting about the first rotational axis (circular-arc shaped groove). 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 guards of the combination of Kiyoaki and Sook to be circular and configured to allow the first rotational axis to pass through a radial center of the plurality of circular guards in response to the blade housing pivoting about the first rotational axis as taught by 김학호. Doing so is beneficial as it contributes to ensuring a good shaving angle is made (김학호, Page 6 para 2). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 10/28/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claims 1 and 12, Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. 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 ELLA LORRAINE KEENA whose telephone number is (571)272-1806. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am - 5:00 pm ET. 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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at (571) 272-4502. 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. /ELLA L KEENA/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 /BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 08, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 16, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Oct 23, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 28, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 30, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Mar 25, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12539635
FOOD PRODUCT SLICING APPARATUS HAVING A PRODUCT GATE ASSEMBLY AND METHOD OF OPERATING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 1 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
20%
Grant Probability
0%
With Interview (-20.0%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 5 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month