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
2. Claims 1-24 are pending and currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
In the instant case, the abstract recites “The present disclosure provides” (line 1) which is language that can be implied, and should be avoided. Additionally, line 5, line 6, and line 9 begin sentences with “Battery cover”, “Battery cover”, and “Cover body” and the Examiner suggests including an article such as –The battery cover--, --The cover body--.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 9, is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 9, line 4 recites “battery cover” and the Examiner suggests –the battery cover—to clarify the antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 9-11, 17-22, and 24 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 9, line 4 recites “a forward engagement groove”, lines 5-6 recite “backward in the housing,” and line 7 recites “a backward engagement groove” and it is unclear what direction is considered “forward” and “backward.” Forward or backward relative to what? The Examiner suggests more clearly defining what direction is considered “forward” and “backward” relative to the housing and/or battery cover. Similarly, the remaining recitations of “forward” and “backward” in claims 9-11 are confusing because they are not provided with enough context to understand what the “forward” and “backward” directions are relative to.
Claim 17, line 2 recites “the body comprises a device body incorporated” and it is unclear what is meant by this. What is the relationship between the “body” and the “device body.” In what manner is the device body incorporated?
Claim 24, line 3 recites “the body comprises a device body incorporated” and it is unclear what is meant by this. What is the relationship between the “body” and the “device body.” In what manner is the device body incorporated?
The remaining claims are rejected based on their dependence on a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-9, 12-13, 16-18, and 24, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Guo et al. (CN 210778762 U) (see the English translation).
Regarding claim 1, Guo discloses an oral cavity cleaning device (Fig. 1) being a battery replaceable device driven by a battery that is replaceable (batteries are insertable into battery compartment 11, Fig. 1), the oral cavity cleaning device (Fig. 1) comprising:
a body (body 1, Fig. 1) comprising a housing space (battery compartment 11, Fig. 1) in which the battery is housed (“close and open the battery compartment 11, convenient for battery replacement” see the last two lines of [0026]);
a battery cover (tail cover 2, Fig. 1) that closes an opening (disassembly port 12, Fig. 1) of the housing space (11); and
a seal member (“a sealing groove is provided on the outer circumference of the lock sleeve, and the sealing groove is used to set a sealing ring. The sealing ring between the locking sleeve and the guide sleeve can ensure the safety of the electrical circuit inside the fuselage” see para. [0016], para. [0030], and see the sealing groove 37 on guide sleeve 23, Fig. 3) that seals a gap between the battery cover (2) and the body (1, see para. [0016] and see Fig. 3), wherein
the battery cover (2) comprises a cover body (the semicircular plate associated with the body of cover 2, see Figs. 2-3) that is rotatably attached (via hinge 21, Fig. 2) to the body (1, see Figs. 1-2),
the oral cavity cleaning device (Fig. 1) is configured in such a manner that the cover body (body of 2) is rotated (rotated via hinge 21, Fig. 2) to switch between an attachment state in which the seal member seals the gap between the battery cover (2) and the body (1) while closing the opening (12) of the housing space (11; the body 2 is rotatable via hinge 21 to an attachment state in which the cover 2 closes the opening 12) and a non-attachment state (the state depicted in Figs. 1-2, with the battery cover 2 rotated open via hinge 21) in which the sealing of the gap between the battery cover (2) and the body (1) using the seal member is released and the battery cover (2) is detachable from the body (when the battery cover 2 is rotated to the open state in Figs. 1-2, the battery cover is no longer sealing the gap because the sleeve 3, Fig. 3, is no longer inserted into the opening 12. In this state, the battery cover pivots away from body 1 and thus is at least partially detached from the body, relative to the attachment state),
the battery cover (2) comprises a terminal (power connection piece 25 depicts positive and negative terminals as seen in Figure 1; see also para. [0029]) that is attached to the cover body (see Fig. 1) and is in contact with the battery in the attachment state (when the battery cover 2 is closed) to be electrically connected to the battery (“power connecting sheet 25 … Two switch buttons 33 are respectively provided on both sides of the electrical connection piece 25… The power connection piece 25 has a shape that fits the disassembly opening 12” see para. [0029] and Fig. 1. The “power connecting sheet 25” provides electrical connection with the batteries when the lid is closed) and
the cover body (body of 2) comprises an operation rib (pick/paddle 31, Fig. 1) for performing a switching operation between the attachment state (cover 2 closed) and the non-attachment state (cover 2 opened, as in Figs. 1-2) of the battery cover (2) by being hooked by a finger (see Figures 1-2 and para. [0022]: “The outer end of the paddle 31 is exposed outside the notch 26 so that it protrudes from the outer edge of the body 1, so that the user can toggle the lock sleeve 3 to open or close the tail cover 2.” Rotating the rib 31 locks or unlocks the latch 34 onto lock 14, Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 2, Guo discloses wherein the operation rib (31) protrudes along a longitudinal direction of the battery (at least a portion of the rib 31, Figs. 1-2, protrudes along the longitudinal direction of the battery when the cover 2 is closed, and the rib 31 protrudes parallel to the longitudinal direction of the battery when the cover 2 is open as in Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 3, Guo discloses wherein the operation rib (31) is provided at a position eccentric from a rotation center of the cover body (see Fig. 1, the rib is at the edge of the cover body 2, which is a position eccentric from a rotation center, aligned with hinge 21).
Regarding claim 4, Guo discloses wherein the cover body (body of 2) comprises an attachment groove (the groove associated with guide sleeve 23, Fig. 3, that accepts seal 37) in which the seal member (37, Fig. 3) is to be attached, and the seal member is attached into the attachment groove (see Figs. 2-3, the sealing member 37 is connected to the groove of guide sleeve 23 of the body 2; see also para. [0027], [0030]).
Regarding claim 5, Guo discloses wherein the operation rib (31) is positioned outside an outer periphery of the seal member (see Figure 2, the rib 31 extends beyond the outer periphery of the seal member 37 of Fig. 3, which would be located below the hook 34).
Regarding claim 6, Guo discloses wherein the cover body (body of 2) comprises an engagement part (hook plate 34 which forms lock groove 35, Figs. 2-3; see para. [0028]) that is releasably engaged with an engaged part (locking plate 14, Figs. 2-3; see para. [0028]) formed in the body (1) and that prevents the cover body (body of 2 is locked via engagement part 34) from coming off from the body (1) in the attachment state (“the movement trajectory of the hook plate 34 intersects with the position of the lock plate 14, and then the lock groove 35 and the lock plate 14 intersect. When intersecting, the locking plate 14 snaps into the lock groove 35, and the tail cover 2 is fixed on the disassembly opening 12 by the lock sleeve 3” see the last sentence of para. [0028]).
Regarding claim 7, Guo discloses wherein the engagement part (34, 35 Figs. 2-3) is an engagement claw (it includes a “hook” plate 34, see Figs. 2-3), and the engaged part (14) is an engagement groove (14 is part of an internal groove 12, see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 8, Guo discloses wherein the operation rib (31) is positioned outside the engagement claw (34/35, Figs. 2-3) with respect to a rotation center of the battery cover (the rotation center of the battery cover 2 is along the hinge axis 21, Fig. 2. The operation rib 31 is outside the engagement claw 34/35 with respect to the hinge 21 axis) that is rotated to switch between the attachment state and the non- attachment state (the battery cover 2 is rotated about hinge 21 to switch between an attachment state and the non-attachment state of Figs. 1-2, as discussed above).
Regarding claim 9, Guo discloses wherein the engagement groove (14 is part of an internal groove 12, see Fig. 2) comprises: a forward engagement groove (see annotated Fig. A below) having an opening that is open toward battery cover (the entire groove 12 defines an opening that is open towards the battery cover 2, as the battery cover 2 may be rotated to be inserted into the opening, see Fig. 2), the forward engagement groove allowing (permitting) the engagement claw (34/35) to move backward (engagement claw 34/35 rotates to engage or disengage with locking part 14, and at least a portion of this rotation is considered to move “backward” as this backward motion has not been defined relative to any other axes or structures) in the housing space (12); and a backward engagement groove (see annotated Fig. A below) connected to the forward engagement groove on a back side in the housing space (connected at locking part 14, Fig. 2, this is considered the back side of the housing space 12), the backward engagement groove allowing (when the backward engagement groove allows the battery cover 2 to be unlocked) the engagement claw (34/35) to move in a rotation direction of the battery cover (2) in the housing space (the engagement claw 34/35 moves together with the battery cover 2, and the engagement claw 34/35 begins at a closed position within the housing space 12 when the lid 2 is closed).
PNG
media_image1.png
379
790
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure A (from Fig. 2 of Guo): Guo has a forward engagement groove (darkened line above), located “forward” relative to the backward engagement groove (dashed line above).
Regarding claim 12, Guo discloses wherein the cover body (body of 2) comprises an attachment groove (the groove associated with guide sleeve 23, Fig. 3, that accepts seal 37) in which the seal member (37, Fig. 3) is attached (see Figs. 2-3, the sealing member 37 is connected to the groove of guide sleeve 23 of the body 2; see also para. [0027], [0030]), and the attachment groove (groove associated with guide sleeve 23, Figs. 2-3) is positioned behind the engagement part (34/35) in the housing space in the attachment state (see Figures 2-3, the attachment groove where it connects to seal member 37 is obscured by the engagement part 34/35 in Figure 2, and thus “behind” the engagement part, even when in the closed attachment state).
Regarding claim 13, Guo discloses wherein the body (1) comprises a peripheral part (the upper edge of the housing 1 in Figure 2 defines a semicircular peripheral edge) around the opening (12) of the housing space (11), the peripheral part being provided with a sealing rib over an entire circumference of the peripheral part (the upper edge of the housing 1 in Figure 2 defines is a peripheral, protruding, sealing rib as it is shown to be able to closely receive the battery cover 2), the sealing rib being in contact with the battery cover in the attachment state (when the battery cover 2 is closed, the peripheral, protruding, sealing rib of 1 is in close contact with the corresponding semicircular battery cover 2, see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 16, Guo discloses wherein the battery cover (2) is attached below to the body (at the bottom surface of body 1, see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 17, Guo discloses wherein the body (1) comprises a device body incorporated (the body 1 is part of an overall device body, including the unlabeled reservoir and nozzle in Fig. 1), the cover body (body of 2) comprises at least a part that protrudes from the device body (body 2 and tab 31 protrude from the device body as seen in Figs. 1-2) as viewed along a rotation axis (along the axis of the hinge 21, Figs. 1-2) of the cover body while the battery cover (2) is rotated to switch from the attachment state to the non-attachment state (as seen in Figs. 1-2), and when the battery cover (2) entirely exists inside the device body (when the cover 2 is closed) as viewed along the rotation axis (along the axis of the hinge 21, Figs. 1-2) of the cover body while the cover body is rotated between the attachment state and the non- attachment state (this is a conditional claim limitation, as it only refers to “when the battery cover entirely exists inside the device body.” If the limitation is contingent on a condition that may not occur, the limitation is not required. Here, the limitation is not required), the gap between the battery cover (2) and the body (1) is sealed by the seal member (seal member 37 at least partially seals the gap between battery cover 2 and body 1 when the battery cover 2 is closed).
Regarding claim 18, Guo discloses wherein the battery cover (2) is disposed with an outer periphery (see Fig. 1, the cover 2 has an outer periphery) along an outer periphery of a bottom surface of the device body in the attachment state (see Fig. 1, when the battery cover 2 is closed in the attachment state, it will share an outer periphery on a bottom surface of the device body).
Regarding claim 24, Guo discloses wherein the body (1) comprises a device body incorporated (the body 1 is part of an overall device body, including the unlabeled reservoir and nozzle in Fig. 1), and the device body is provided with a nozzle (see the unlabeled nozzle in Fig. 1) that is attached to the device body on a side opposite to a side on which the battery cover (2, Fig. 1) is attached and that discharges liquid supplied into the device body (the nozzle discharges liquid in the oral irrigator, and is located on the opposite side of battery cover 2, see Fig. 1).
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.
Claim(s) 14 and 23, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Guo et al. (CN 210778762 U).
Regarding claim 14, Guo does not specifically state the cover body (body of 2) is composed of one component.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the cover body be one component, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893). MPEP 2144.04(V)(B).
Regarding claim 23, Guo is silent regarding wherein the operation rib (31) has a protrusion height within a range which is equal to or greater than 3.5 mm and is equal to or less than 4.5 mm.
However, 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 protrusion height to be between 3.5 mm and 4.5 mm since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component and would be expected to perform substantially the same. A change in size or proportion is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A)).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. (CN 210778762 U) in view of Sato (2011/0149144).
Regarding claim 15, Guo is silent regarding wherein the cover body (body of 2) is provided with a rib that prevents contact with the terminal of the battery when the battery is inserted reversely in the housing space (12).
Sato teaches a related battery cover for an electronic device (battery lid 4, Figs. 1-3), comprising a rib (reverse-connection prevention guard 13, Fig. 3) that prevents contact with the terminal of the battery when the battery is inserted reversely in the housing space (“ a battery reverse-connection prevention guard 13 that prevents the batteries from being inserted with reverse polarity into the battery storage case 6 is fixed by, e.g., thermal fusion to a lid-side battery contact piece 14” see para. [0026]). This provides an advantage of preventing incorrect insertion of a battery.
Therefore, 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 cover body of Guo to be provided with a rib that prevents contact with the terminal of the battery when the battery is inserted reversely as taught by Sato because this prevents incorrect insertion of a battery.
Claim(s) 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. (CN 210778762 U) in view of Snyder (2004/0209222).
Regarding claim 19, Guo is silent regarding further comprising a tank that is detachably attached to the device body and stores liquid, wherein when at least a part of the battery cover protrudes from the device body as viewed along the rotation axis of the cover body, the tank is prevented from being attached to the device body.
Snyder teaches a related oral irrigator (Fig. 2) comprising an irrigator device body (body 50, Fig. 3) and further comprising a tank (reservoir 54, Fig. 3) that is detachably attached to the device body (see Fig. 3) and stores liquid (“a detachable refillable reservoir 54 for storing liquid” see the second sentence of para. [0053]). The tank receives the bottom of the irrigator device body (see Figs. 3-4) to communicate with fluid-access valve (362, Fig. 3). This provides portable oral irrigator that can be more easily transported and easily refillable, while still holding a relatively large volume of liquid for irrigation (see generally para. [0003], [0006]).
Therefore, 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 device body of Guo to be detachably connected to a tank that stores liquid as taught by Snyder so the oral irrigator can be made portable to be more easily transported and easily refillable, while still holding a relatively large volume of liquid for irrigation.
In the modified Guo/Snyder device, when at least a part of the battery cover (2, Guo) protrudes from the device body (as in Figure 1 of Guo) as viewed along the rotation axis (axis of hinge 21, Figs. 1-2 of Guo) of the cover body, the tank (54, Fig. 3 of Snyder) is prevented from being attached to the device body (if the battery cover 2 is in the open position as seen in Figure 1 of Guo, it will not be able to connect to the reservoir 54 of Snyder properly, as the fluid-access valve 363, Fig. 3 requires the bottom of the irrigator to be seated properly).
Regarding claim 20, the modified Guo/Snyder device discloses wherein the battery cover (2, Guo) is housed in the tank (54, Fig. 3 of Snyder) in a state where the tank is attached to the device body (when the battery cover 2 is closed, the oral irrigator device body of Guo is housed in the tank 54 of Snyder, and the cover will be received/housed by the walls 330, 332, 364, Fig. 3 of Snyder).
Regarding claim 21, the modified Guo/Snyder device discloses wherein a tube (pump inlet conduit 88, Fig. 7 of Snyder) through which the liquid in the tank (54, Snyder) is configured to be supplied into the device body is attached to the device body (pump inlet conduit 88 of the device body is connected with the seal 374 at the reservoir 54 to have the liquid in the tank communicated to the device body; see para. [0080] of Snyder), the tank (54) is supported by the device body in a slidable manner between a housed state in which the device body is housed in the tank and a pulled-out state in which the device body is pulled out from the tank (“the body 52 of the oral irrigator 50 is slidably connected with the reservoir 54” see the first sentence of [0080], and see Fig. 3 of Snyder), the tube (88) is housed in a tube housing space (see Fig. 21 of Snyder, the upper portion of channel 366 houses the tube 88) formed between the tank and the device body in the housed state (“the tip 388 of the pump inlet conduit 88 enters the opening 372 of the seal 374 and engages the ball 376 which compresses the spring 378 and allows fluid to enter the interior of the pump inlet conduit 88 through the slot 390 int eh pump inlet conduit 88” see para. [0080] of Snyder. See also para. [0077]), and the operation rib (31, Guo) is positioned close to a center of the tube housing space (“close” is a very broad term, and the entire battery cover 2 is considered “close” to a center of the tube housing space as it is part of the same handheld oral irrigator), and the tube (88, Snyder) is positioned outside (away from) the operation rib (31, Guo) in the tube housing space in the housed state (the tube 88 is located away from operation rib 31 in the modified device).
Regarding claim 22, the modified Guo/Snyder device is silent regarding wherein the operation rib has a protrusion height smaller than a diameter of the tube.
However, 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 protrusion height to be smaller than a diameter of the tube since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component and the operation rib does not need to have a large height (i.e., thickness direction). A change in size or proportion is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A)).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Daisaku (2018/0103750) discloses a related oral irrigator with a battery lid that has a sealing member and can be rotated relative to the body. Yahagi (2011/0214971) discloses a battery cover for an electronic device that rotates relative to the body, and has at least one protruding rib. Boltyenkov et al. (2010/0286964) discloses a related battery cover with an operation rib that protrudes from the battery cover for a finger to slide the cover. Mizuguchi (2006/0211297) discloses a related battery cover that pivots about a shaft to open/close. Kim et al. (2020/0185968) discloses a related battery cover that rotates relative to the body. Steyn et al. (9,014,409) discloses a related battery cover that rotates relative to the body. Bellafiore (4,471,490 and 4,532,649 and 4,617,429) discloses a related battery cover that rotates relative to the body. Zhao et al. (9,324,979) discloses a related battery cover that has a rib to prevent batteries from being reversely inserted. Berman (4,638,409) discloses a related battery cover that rotates relative to the body. Hermann et al. (6,007,941) discloses a watertight battery compartment cover with an actuated O-ring seal. McCarty et al. (4,612,491) discloses a related battery cover that rotates relative to the body, and has an operation rib protruding at an eccentric position.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E MILLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1473. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:30 (Eastern).
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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at 571-272-5139. 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 E MILLER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights