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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s arguments in regards to the restriction requirement have been fully considered and are persuasive. Examiner withdraws the previous restriction requirement, filed 25 April, 2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wupendram (2019/0351463, previously presented) in view of Nunes (EP3936000A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Wupendram teaches an electronic toothbrush system (Fig. 1, [0035]), comprising:
a toothbrush (Ref. 100, Fig. 1, [0035]) including a handle portion (Ref. 104, Fig. 1, [0035]) and a head portion (Ref. 120, Fig. 1, [0036]), the head portion including a bristle cluster (Ref. 122, Fig. 1, [0036]);
a sensor array ([0031] describes using sensors) in communication with a housing of the toothbrush, the sensor array to detect the usage of the toothbrush ([0031]);
a computing device in electrical communication with the sensor array ([0030-0031&0035] describes a computing device with a storage device to be in electrical communication with sensors);
one or more I/O devices (Ref. 126, Fig. 1) in electrical communication with the microprocessor, the I/O devices to provide an alert, a sound, or an indication ([0041-0042]);
a protective case (Ref. 128, Fig. 1, [0048]) dimensioned to at least partially receive the toothbrush and to encase the head portion (Fig. 5, [0048]); and
a locking mechanism (Ref. 130, Fig. 2) to prevent unwanted or unpermitted access to the toothbrush ([0048]).
Wupendram fails to explicitly teach a microprocessor in electrical communication with the sensor array. Nunes teaches an electric toothbrush system with a toothbrush, sensor array, and microprocessor and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor. Nunes teaches an electronic toothbrush system, (Fig. 1), comprising:
a tooth brush (Ref. 100, Fig. 1) including a handle portion (Ref. 1, Fig. 1) and a head portion (Ref. 2, Fig. 1);
a sensor array (Ref. 6, Fig. 1, [0059]); and
a microprocessor (Ref. 8, [0059], Fig. 1) in electrical communication with the sensor array ([0059] describes the microprocessor in electric communication with the sensor array). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the computing device, as taught by Wupendram, with a microprocessor, as taught by Nunes, to achieve the predictable results of communicating with sensors to carry out operations of the toothbrush.
Regarding Claim 2, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches wherein the sensor array is comprised of a motion sensor to detect motion of the toothbrush ([0031] describes using motion sensors).
Regarding Claim 3, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches wherein the sensor array includes a kinetic motion detector ([0031] describes using sensors to detect direction of motion, motion, and acceleration which are a part of kinetic motion).
Regarding Claim 4, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches wherein the sensor array includes a biometric sensor capable of scanning a biometric element of a human ([0031] describes a biometric sensor).
Regarding Claim 5, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches wherein the locking mechanism (130) selectively secures the protective case in a closed position ([0048]).
Regarding Claim 6, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches one or more UV lights ([0048] describes having UV lights in the protective case) to provide an antiseptic environment within an interior of the protective case, wherein the one or more UV lights are oriented to emit UV light towards the bristle cluster of the toothbrush ([0048]).
Regarding Claim 8, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 6, as described above, and further teaches wherein the one or more UV lights are mounted on an interior surface of the protective case ([0048] describes having UV lights in the protective case).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wupendram as modified as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Russell (US 2011/0256509, previously presented).
Regarding Claim 7, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 6, as described above, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the one or more UV lights are mounted on the head of the toothbrush. Russell teaches a toothbrush with a handle and head and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor of toothbrushes. Russell teaches wherein the one or more UV lights (Ref. 26, Fig. 2, [0024] describes the UV light emitters)) are mounted on the head of the toothbrush (Fig. 2, [0018]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the head of the toothbrush, as taught by Wupendram as modified, with one or more UV lights, as taught by Russell, to provide UV light to brighteners on the teeth to allow for brighter teeth ([0032]) and to see how effective the user is cleaning teeth ([0027]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wupendram as modified as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Galladora (2024/0251935, previously presented) and Ameseder (5,029,252, previously presented).
Regarding Claim 9, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as described above, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the toothbrush is mountable to a base to secure the toothbrush while the toothbrush is inoperative (Examiner notes the base is not positively recited as it is part of the claim limitations but rather the toothbrush needs to be capable of mounting to the base). Galladora teaches a base for a toothbrush and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor of a toothbrush system. Galladora teaches wherein toothbrush is mountable to a base (Ref. 10, Fig. 4) to secure the toothbrush while the toothbrush is inoperative ([Abstract]), wherein the base includes a second sensor array (Ref. 50, Fig. 4, [0017]) including a second biometrics sensor (Ref. 50, fig. 4, [0017]), wherein the base includes a second set of at least one I/O devices (Ref. 65, [0018]) to provide a sound, an alert, or an indicator ([0018&0027]), and wherein the base includes a second microprocessor (Ref. 260, Fig. 3, [0027]) in operable communication with the second sensor array, the second set of at least one I/O devices, and the second biometrics sensor ([0027]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the toothbrush system, as taught by Wupendram as modified, to be capable of mounting to the base with a second sensor array, I/O device, and microprocessor, as taught by Galladora, to securely lock around a toothbrush to prevent contamination and prevent unauthorized use or malice ([Abstract & [0001]).
Wupendram as modified fails to explicitly teach the base having an at least one motion sensor as part of the second sensor array. However, Galladora teaches a UV light may be in the base (10, [0041]). Ameseder teaches a base for a toothbrush and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor of a toothbrush system. Ameseder further teaches wherein toothbrush is configured to be mounted to a base (Ref. 1, Fig. 1) to secure the toothbrush while the toothbrush is inoperative (Fig. 1), wherein the base includes a second sensor array (Ref. 16, Fig. 9, [Col. 5, Line 24-29]) including an at least one motion sensor (Ref. 16, fig. 9) to switch on a light source (Ref. 2) to sanitize the toothbrush ([Col. 5, Lines 24-42]). Given the teaching of the UV light of Galladora, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the base, as taught by Wupendram as modified, with a motion sensor, as taught by Ameseder, to add further function of the light source be turned on and off when motion is detected vs not detected thereby saving power ([Col. 5, Lines 24-42]).
Claims 10, 15-16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wupendram (2019/0351463, previously presented) in view of Nunes (EP3936000A1) in view of Galladora (2024/0251935, previously presented).
Regarding Claim 10, Wupendram teaches An electronic toothbrush system (Fig. 1, [0035]), comprising:
a toothbrush (Ref. 100, Fig. 1, [0035]) including a handle portion (Ref. 104, Fig. 1, [0035]) and a head portion (Ref. 120, Fig. 1, [0036]), the head portion including a bristle cluster (Ref. 122, Fig. 1, [0036]);
a sensor array ([0031] describes using sensors) in communication with a housing of the toothbrush, the sensor array to detect the usage of the toothbrush ([0031]), the sensor array to detect the usage of the toothbrush and to detect the presence of a human and the identity of the human using a biometric sensor ([0031] describes a biometric sensor);
a computing device in electrical communication with the sensor array ([0030-0031]describes a computing device with a storage device to be in electrical communication with sensors);
one or more I/O devices (Ref. 126, Fig. 1) in electrical communication with the microprocessor, the I/O devices to provide an alert, a sound, or an indication ([0041-0042]);
a protective case (Ref. 128, Fig. 1, [0048]) dimensioned to at least partially receive the toothbrush and to encase the head portion (Fig. 5, [0048]); and
one or more UV lights ([0048] describes having UV lights in the protective case) to provide an antiseptic environment within the protective case ([0048]).
Wupendram fails to explicitly teach a base to provide a secure mount for the toothbrush. Galladora teaches a base for a toothbrush and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor of a toothbrush system. Galladora teaches a base (Ref. 10, Fig. 4) to provide a secure mount for the toothbrush (Fig. 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the toothbrush system, as taught by Wupendram as modified, to be capable of mounting to the base, as taught by Galladora, to securely lock around a toothbrush to prevent contamination and prevent unauthorized use or malice ([Abstract & [0001]).
Wupendram as modified fails to explicitly teach a microprocessor in electrical communication with the sensor array. Nunes teaches an electric toothbrush system with a toothbrush, sensor array, and microprocessor and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor. Nunes teaches an electronic toothbrush system, (Fig. 1), comprising:
a tooth brush (Ref. 100, Fig. 1) including a handle portion (Ref. 1, Fig. 1) and a head portion (Ref. 2, Fig. 1);
a sensor array (Ref. 6, Fig. 1, [0059]); and
a microprocessor (Ref. 8, [0059], Fig. 1) in electrical communication with the sensor array ([0059] describes the microprocessor in electric communication with the sensor array). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the computing device, as taught by Wupendram as modified, with a microprocessor, as taught by Nunes, to achieve the predictable results of communicating with sensors to carry out operations of the toothbrush.
Regarding Claim 15, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 10, as described above, and Wupendram further teaches a locking mechanism (Ref. 130, Fig. 2) to selectively secure the protective case in a closed position ([0048]).
Regarding Claim 16, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 10, as described above, and Wupendram further teaches wherein the one or more UV lights are oriented to emit UV light towards the bristle cluster of the toothbrush ([0048] describes having UV lights in the protective case towards the head).
Regarding Claim 19, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 10, as described above, and Wupendram further teaches wherein the protective case is a travel case (Fig. 5, [0048]) including a locking mechanism (Ref. 130, Fig. 2) to secure the toothbrush within the travel case ([0048]).
Claims 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wupendram as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Boughorbel (2017/0056146, previously presented).
Regarding Claim 11, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 10, as described above, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the toothbrush is in operable communication with the base and the protective case via a wireless communication protocol. Boughorbel teaches a toothbrush with a base and communication system and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor of a toothbrush system. Boughorbel teaches wherein the toothbrush is in operable communication with the base and the protective case via a wireless communication protocol ([0014] describes the toothbrush and base can all wirelessly communicate). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the toothbrush and base, as taught by Wupendram as modified, with communication devices such as antennas, as taught by Boughorbel, to non-obtrusively acquire information from the tooth brush for analyses and to improve oral health ([0001-0002]).
Regarding Claim 12, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 11, as described above, and Wupendram further teaches wherein the toothbrush includes a power supply ([0035] describes an energy storage device) to power the microprocessor ([0030]). Wupendram as modified fails to explicitly teach a motor enclosed within the housing of the toothbrush, the motor to provide multi-directional movement of the bristle cluster. Boughorbel teaches a toothbrush with a base and communication system and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor of a toothbrush system. Boughorbel teaches wherein the toothbrush includes a power supply (Ref. 119, Fig. 1) to power the microprocessor ([0020-0021]) and a motor (Ref. 135, fig. 1) enclosed within the housing of the toothbrush ([0022]), the motor to provide multi-directional movement of the bristle cluster ([0022] describes moving the output shaft in multiple directions). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the toothbrush, as taught by Wupendram, with a motor to provide multi-directional movement of the bristle cluster, as taught by Boughorbel, to allow for suitable hygienic care of brushing an user’s teeth ([0023]).
Regarding Claim 13, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 12, as described above, and Boughorbel further teaches wherein the microprocessor (122) is in operable communication ([0019] describes the controller in communication via an antenna) with a memory (Ref. 154, Fig. 1, [0027]) to store operational instructions associated with an oral hygiene regimen ([0027] describes transmitting instructions, note examiner interprets any step or process in teeth brushing or preparing a toothbrush as part of an oral hygiene regimen). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the microprocessor, as taught by Wupendram as modified, to communicate with a memory to store operational instructions associated with an oral hygiene regimen, as taught by Boughorbel, to non-obtrusively acquire information from the tooth brush for analyses and to improve oral health ([0001-0002]).
Regarding Claim 14, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 13, as described above, and Wupendram further teaches wherein the one or more I/O devices (126) are in operable communication with the microprocessor to emit a sound or an indicator associated with the oral hygiene regimen ([0042] describes using lights to indicate when toothpaste needs to be changed as part of the oral hygiene regimen).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wupendram as modified as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Russell (US 2011/0256509, previously presented).
Regarding Claim 17, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 16, as described above, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the one or more UV lights are mounted on the head of the toothbrush. Russell teaches a toothbrush with a handle and head and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor of toothbrushes. Russell teaches wherein the one or more UV lights (Ref. 26, Fig. 2, [0024] describes the UV light emitters)) are mounted on the head of the toothbrush (Fig. 2, [0018]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the head of the toothbrush, as taught by Wupendram as modified, with one or more UV lights, as taught by Russell, to provide UV light to brighteners on the teeth to allow for brighter teeth ([0032]) and to see how effective the user is cleaning teeth ([0027]).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wupendram as modified as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Ameseder (5,029,252, previously presented).
Regarding Claim 18, Wupendram as modified teaches the limitations of claim 10, as described above, and Galladora further teaches wherein toothbrush is mountable to a base (Ref. 10, Fig. 4) to secure the toothbrush while the toothbrush is inoperative ([Abstract]), wherein the base includes a second sensor array (Ref. 50, Fig. 4, [0017]) including a second biometrics sensor (Ref. 50, fig. 4, [0017]), wherein the base includes a second set of at least one I/O devices (Ref. 65, [0018]) to provide a sound, an alert, or an indicator ([0018&0027]), and wherein the base includes a second microprocessor (Ref. 260, Fig. 3, [0027]) in operable communication with the second sensor array, the second set of at least one I/O devices, and the second biometrics sensor ([0027]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the toothbrush system, as taught by Wupendram as modified, to be capable of mounting to the base with a second sensor array, I/O device, and microprocessor, as taught by Galladora, to securely lock around a toothbrush to prevent contamination and prevent unauthorized use or malice ([Abstract & [0001]).
Wupendram as modified fails to explicitly teach the base having an at least one motion sensor as part of the second sensor array. However, Galladora teaches a UV light may be in the base (10, [0041]). Ameseder teaches a base for a toothbrush and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor of a toothbrush system. Ameseder further teaches wherein toothbrush is mountable to a base (Ref. 1, Fig. 1) to secure the toothbrush while the toothbrush is inoperative (Fig. 1), wherein the base includes a second sensor array (Ref. 16, Fig. 9, [Col. 5, Line 24-29]) including an at least one motion sensor (Ref. 16, fig. 9) to switch on a light source (Ref. 2) to sanitize the toothbrush ([Col. 5, Lines 24-42]). Given the teaching of the UV light of Galladora, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the base, as taught by Wupendram as modified, with a motion sensor, as taught by Ameseder, to add further function of the light source be turned on and off when motion is detected vs not detected thereby saving power ([Col. 5, Lines 24-42]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wupendram (2019/0351463, previously presented) in view of Nunes (EP3936000A1) and Boughorbel (2017/0056146, previously presented).
Regarding Claim 20, Wupendram teaches An electronic toothbrush system (Fig. 1, [0035]), comprising:
a toothbrush (Ref. 100, Fig. 1, [0035]) including a handle portion (Ref. 104, Fig. 1, [0035]) and a head portion (Ref. 120, Fig. 1, [0036]), the head portion including a bristle cluster (Ref. 122, Fig. 1, [0036]);
a sensor array ([0031] describes using sensors) in communication with a housing of the toothbrush, the sensor array to detect the usage of the toothbrush ([0031])and to detect the presence of a human and the identity of the human using a biometric sensor ([0031] describes a biometric sensor);
a microprocessor in electrical communication with the sensor array ([0030-0031]describes a computing device with a storage device to be in electrical communication with sensors);
one or more I/O devices (Ref. 126, Fig. 1) in electrical communication with the microprocessor, the I/O devices to provide an alert, a sound, or an indication ([0041-0042]);
a protective case (Ref. 128, Fig. 1, [0048]) dimensioned to at least partially receive the toothbrush and to encase the head portion (Fig. 5, [0048]); and
one or more UV lights ([0048] describes having UV lights in the protective case)to provide an antiseptic environment within the protective case ([0048]).
Wupendram fails to explicitly teach a microprocessor in electrical communication with the sensor array. Nunes teaches an electric toothbrush system with a toothbrush, sensor array, and microprocessor and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor. Nunes teaches an electronic toothbrush system, (Fig. 1), comprising:
a tooth brush (Ref. 100, Fig. 1) including a handle portion (Ref. 1, Fig. 1) and a head portion (Ref. 2, Fig. 1);
a sensor array (Ref. 6, Fig. 1, [0059]); and
a microprocessor (Ref. 8, [0059], Fig. 1) in electrical communication with the sensor array ([0059] describes the microprocessor in electric communication with the sensor array). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the computing device, as taught by Wupendram, with a microprocessor, as taught by Nunes, to achieve the predictable results of communicating with sensors to carry out operations of the toothbrush.
Wupendram as modified fails to explicitly teach the microprocessor communicates with a memory to store operational instructions associated with an oral hygiene regimen. Boughorbel teaches a toothbrush with a base and communication system and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor of a toothbrush system. Boughorbel teaches a computer system (Ref. 190, 110, 105, & 102, Fig. 1) in operable communication with an application program (Ref. 102, Fig. 1, [0017]) operated by a user computing device (Ref. 190, Fig. 1, [0018]), the application program in communication, via a network (Ref. 110, fig. 1) or near- frequency communication protocol, to the toothbrush to execute computer-readable instructions to establish operational protocols to aid in the formation of a hygiene regimen carried out by the utilization of the toothbrush ([0007]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the microprocessor, as taught by Wupendram as modified , to communicate with a memory to store operational instructions associated with an oral hygiene regimen, as taught by Boughorbel, to non-obtrusively acquire information from the tooth brush for analyses and to improve oral health ([0001-0002]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to the claim are acknowledged and examiner has withdrawn the claim objections and 35 USC 112(b) rejections.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 01 December, 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 10 and 20 under 35 USC 102, in regards to the prior art failing to teach a microprocessor have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Wupendram in view of
Applicant's arguments filed 01 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Claims 1, 10, and 20, applicant’s arguments that the I/O device does not provide any input capabilities have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Examiner has applied Wupendram to the 35 USC 103 rejection above. Wupendram teaches an I/O device to provide an alert, a sound, or an indication [0041-0042]. Wupendram teaches an I/O device as needed in the claim limitations. Further applicant’s specifications discusses that a display is used to provide an alert ([0113]), therefore Wupendram’s teaching of the display would meet the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim in light of the specification. If applicant intends for the I/O device to have input capabilities such structure and limitation is not required.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Perwas (US 2,317,111), Obeirne (US 2022/0061969), Boughorbel (US 2017/0056146), Nazeri (US 2015/0374467), and Nelson (US 2014/0166900) teach toothbrush systems with toothbrushes and protective cases and can be considered analogous art because it is within the same field of endeavor of toothbrush systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANA L POON whose telephone number is (571)272-6164. The examiner can normally be reached on General: 6:30AM-3:30PM.
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, David Posigian can be reached on (313) 446-6546. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppairmy.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANA LEE POON/Examiner, Art Unit 3723