DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Claims 6,11,14, and 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/24/25.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 8, 10, 13, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being disclosed by Maimone et al. (11,148,310).
Maimone et al. discloses the invention/method including:
Claim 1; a surface treatment head having a first end with an applicator 312 and a second end comprising an extension 322; an end interconnector 328; and a sleeve 334 positioned between the surface treatment head and the end interconnector, wherein the extension extends through the sleeve and is received in the end interconnector (see Fig. 5-6) such that the surface treatment head is releasably attached to the end interconnector.
Claims 2 and 15; wherein a portion of an outer surface of the extension engages a portion of an inner surface of the end interconnector to form one of a mechanical connection (see elements 322A and 322F, 322F1, 328A, 330) or a magnetic connection that releasably attaches the surface treatment head to the end interconnector.
Claim 8; wherein the sleeve comprises a first material (elastomeric like rubber) and the end interconnector comprises a second material (plastic) that is different from the first material.
Claim 10; wherein the surface treatment head comprises a shaving razor cartridge 312 and the applicator comprises at least one blade 14.
Claim 13; providing one or more surface treatment heads each having a first end with an applicator 312 and a second end comprising an extension 322; providing a sleeve 334; providing an end interconnector 328; releasably attaching one surface treatment head of the one or more surface treatment heads to the end interconnector (see elements 322A and 322F, 322F1, 328A, 330) such that (i) the sleeve is positioned between the one surface treatment head and the end interconnector, and (ii) the surface treatment head is releasably attached to the end interconnector (see Fig. 5).
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.
Claim(s) 4 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maimone et al. (11,148,310) in view of Jungnickel (2022/0143854).
Maimone et al. discloses the invention/method substantially as claimed except for a ball-snap connection, spring-loaded ball, and recess. However, Jungnickel teaches the use of a ball-snap connection (see Fig. 1), spring-loaded ball (54 and 56), and recess (inherently disclosed with the component 14) for the purpose of facilitating the attachment/detachment of two components. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the device of Maimone et al. by providing the above limitations as taught by Jungnickel in order to obtain a device that facilitates the attachment/detachment of two components.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maimone et al. (11,148,310) in view of Lu et al. (10,414,058).
Maimone et al. discloses the invention substantially as claimed including an outer surface of the end interconnector is smooth (see Fig. 1) but lacks of a plurality of gripping protrusions. However, Lu et al. teaches the use of a plurality of gripping protrusions 88 for the purpose of increasing the grip. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the device of Maimone et al. by providing the above limitations as taught by Lu et al. in order to obtain a device that increases the grip.
Claim(s) 12 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maimone et al. (11,148,310) in view of Kopelas et al. (2024/0083053).
Maimone et al. discloses the invention/method substantially as claimed including an actuator button. However, Kopelas et al. teaches the use of an actuator button 16 for the purpose of facilitating the attachment/detachment of the cartridge. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the device of Maimone et al. by providing the above limitations as taught by Kopelas et al. in order to obtain a device that facilitates the attachment/detachment of the cartridge.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3, 5, and 7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR FLORES SANCHEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4507. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday8:00-4:00 pm.
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.
/OMAR FLORES SANCHEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724