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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-8, 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jimenez (USPN 7917986) in view of Gutierrez-Caro (USPN 7070354).
Jimenez teaches a toothbrush, comprising: a replaceable head (1) including a housing, the housing having an inner surface defining a receiving volume; a handle (3) including a protruding portion (13), the protruding portion extending axially at an end of the handle (figure 1); and a locking mechanism including the receiving volume of the replaceable head and the protruding portion of the handle, the locking mechanism providing an engagement of the replaceable head with the handle. There is a removable capsule (2) including a motor assembly that is disposed within the handle.
Jimenez teaches all the essential elements of the claimed invention however fails to teach that the locking mechanism is a click-lock engagement. Jimenez teaches that the locking mechanism is threading.
Gutierrez-Caro teaches a toothbrush with a head (300) and a handle (20) having a protruding portion (40). There is a locking mechanism providing a click lock engagement (41) of the replaceable head with the handle.
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 locking mechanism of Jimenez with the locking mechanism of Gutierrez-Caro since both locking mechanisms are equivalent structures known in the art. Therefore, because these two locking mechanisms were art-recognized equivalents at the time of the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to substitute a click lock for a threading. Further, a click lock mechanism provides a faster means to remove the head from the handle.
With regards to claim 2, Gutierrez-Caro teaches that the protruding portion of the handle including a projection (41) supported on the protruding portion of the handle and extending radially from a narrowest outer dimension of the protruding portion of the handle. The inner surface of the housing defines at least one indentation (34) along the receiving volume, the projection includes a corresponding at least one rib (41), and the corresponding at least one rib is flexible into detachable click-lock engagement with the inner surface of the housing within the receiving volume of the replaceable head.
With regards to claim 3, Jimenez in view of Gutierrez-Caro teach that the locking mechanism prevents rotation of the replaceable head about the handle when the handle is in click-lock engagement with the housing in the receiving volume of the replaceable head.
With regards to claim 5, Jimenez in view of Gutierrez-Caro teach a skin (17; Jimenez) on the handle portion. The protruding portion extending axially beyond the skin (figure 1 of Jimenez). The protruding portion of the handle is in detachable click lock engagement with the receiving volume of the housing using the locking mechanism. An outer surface of the replaceable head is in edge-to-edge abutting contact with an outer surface of the skin portion (figure 1 of Jimenez).
With regards to claim 6, Jimenez in view of Gutierrez-Caro teach that the edge-to-edge abutting contact between the outer surface of the replaceable head and the outer surface of the skin portion of the handle is along a widest cross-sectional area of the handle (figure 1 of Jimenez shows largest cross section near the protruding portion).
With regards to claim 7, Jimenez in view of Gutierrez-Caro teach the edge-to-edge abutting contact is continuous about the housing of the replaceable head (figure 1 of Jimenez).
With regards to claim 8, Jimenez in view of Gutierrez-Caro teach the edge-to-edge abutting contact between the outer surface of the replaceable head and the outer surface of the skin portion of the handle is continuous along an enclosed two-dimensional shape.
With regards to claim 10, Jimenez in view of Gutierrez-Caro teach that the protruding portion of the handle includes a projection (41; Gutierrez-Caro) supported on the protruding portion of the handle and extending radially from a narrowest outer dimension of the protruding portion of the handle (figure 1; Gutierrez-Caro), the projection providing the click-lock engagement of the receiving volume of the replaceable head with the inner surface of the bousing.
With regards to claim 11, Jimenez in view of Gutierrez-Caro teaches that the handle includes a skin portion (17; Jimenez), the protruding portion extending axially beyond the skin portion, and wherein the protruding portion of the handle provides the click-lock engagement as the handle is moved axially into the receiving volume in an orientation in which the skin portion of the handle and the inner surface of the housing of the replaceable head enclose the projection and the protruding portion of the handle within the receiving volume.
With regards to claim 12, Jimenez in view of Gutierrez-Caro teaches that the handle includes a skin portion (17; Jimenez), the protruding portion extending axially beyond the skin portion.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jimenez (‘986) in view of Gutierrez-Caro (‘354) further in view of Hammon (PGPub 20080311282).
Jimenez in view of Gutierrez-Caro teach all the essential elements of the claimed invention however fail to teach that the handle has a mounting surface to mount the handle to a vertical surface. Hammon teaches a toothbrush with a mounting surface (116). 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 handles of Jimenez in view of Gutierrez-Caro so that there is a mounting surface as taught by Hammon to allow the toothbrush brush to be stored on a vertical surface to reduce clutter on a bathroom countertop.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The applicant argues that Gutierrez-Caro and Blaustein fail to teach a removable capsule including a motor assembly. The applicant agrees with this argument and further search was performed to find prior art to teach the new claim limitation. Jimenez was found the meet the majority of the claim limitations, except for a click-lock locking mechanism. Gutierrez-Caro was then used as a secondary reference to teach a click-lock locking mechanism as an alternative equivalent structure to Jimenez’s threading locking mechanism.
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 SHAY LYNN KARLS whose telephone number is (571)272-1268. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th (6am-5pm).
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, Eric Rosen can be reached on 571-270-7855. 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.
/SHAY KARLS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723