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 Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 7 ends with “and” however there are no limitations following that. It appears that the “and” should be canceled and a period added at the end of the sentence. Appropriate correction is required.
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, 4-5, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Martinez (ES 2395270).
Martinez teaches a cleaning brush comprising: a base material (1); a fixing part (8) coupled to a lower end part of the base material and having a fixing protrusion (8) that protrudes from an outside of the base material; and a rotation body part (2) having at least one fixing groove (4) into which the fixing part coupled to the base material is to be inserted, wherein the base material is replaceable (claim 1).
With regards to claim 4, the fixing groove comprises: a fixing protrusion inserting groove into which the fixing protrusion is configured to be inserted (best shown as what reference element 6 is pointing to in figure 2; the circular groove extending around the entire body part); and a base material inserting groove (best shown as what reference element 5 is pointing to in figure 2) into which the lower end part of the base material is configured to be inserted.
With regards to claim 5, the base material has a block shape (figure 1 and 3 show the block shape) or comprises a plurality of plates overlapping one another.
With regards to claim 8, the base material comprises a polyurethane class (claim 1) or a nylon class.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 9-11, 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Weber (EP 2482692).
Weber teaches a cleaning brush comprising: a base material (18); a fixing part (22) coupled to a lower end part of the base material and having a fixing protrusion (side edges of 22 ) that protrudes from an outside of the base material; and a rotation body part (12) having at least one fixing groove (figure 1 shows where the base and fixing part slide into the groove) into which the fixing part coupled to the base material is to be inserted, wherein the base material is replaceable (the base and fixing parts are removable to be replaced).
With regards to claim 3, wherein the rotation body part has a cylinder shape (figure 1); and the fixing groove has a shape open at an outer surface and an edge of at least one surface of upper and lower surfaces of the rotation body part (the grooves are open on the ends of the cylinder and along the outer surface where the base material is to extend from); and the fixing part coupled to the base material is configured to be inserted in a height direction of the rotation body part from any one surface of the upper and lower surfaces of the rotation body part (figure 1).
With regards to claim 4, the fixing groove comprises: a fixing protrusion inserting groove into which the fixing protrusion is configured to be inserted (figure 2, the portion of the groove that extends horizontally); and a base material inserting groove (figure 2, portion of the groove that extends vertically) into which the lower end part of the base material is configured to be inserted.
With regards to claim 9, a strip brush including a base material (18) having a symmetrically bent shape; a holding frame (19) surrounding a bent lower end part (figure 5 and 6) of the base material; and a core (24) pressurizing a bent inner side of the base material, wherein the fixing part is coupled to a lower end part of the strip brush.
With regards to claim 10, the fixing part has an accommodation part (22) that surrounds an outer side of the holding frame, and an upper end part bent above the holding frame; and the fixing protrusion protrudes toward both sides from an outer surface of the accommodation part (figure 5 and 6 show the protrusions extending horizontally from 22).
With regards to claim 11, the strip brush comprises a filament-shaped strip brush (6) or a sponge-like strip brush.
With regards to claim 13, base materials having shapes different from each other and including materials different from each other are inserted into a plurality of fixing grooves, respectively (wire 18 or plastic 20 and figure 5 and 6 show the different shapes)).
With regards to claim 14, base materials having shapes different from each other and including materials different from each other are inserted into the fixing grooves, respectively, along insertion directions of the fixing grooves (figure 5 and 6 show the different shapes; different materials of wire 18, plastic 20; different materials along fixing groove figure 4).
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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martinez (‘270) in view of Kuivikko (FI 114966).
Martinez teaches all the essential elements of the claimed invention including a disk shape body with grooves that are open from an upper surface. The reference however fails to teach the fixing groove has a shape open at a side surface part of the rotation body part; such that the fixing part coupled to the base material is configured to be inserted inward in a radial direction through the fixing groove from a side surface of the rotation body part. Kuivikko teaches a disk shaped cleaning body with grooves (U) that have an opening on the top surface of the body and a side surface of the body to receive bristle segments (2a’) (figure 3). 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 grooves of Martinez so that they are open from a side surface as taught by Kuivikko as an alternative means for securing the fixing part to the body part. Both means for attaching the fixing part as taught by Martinez and Kuivikko are considered to be equivalent structures known in the art since they both secure the fixing part to the body equally well.
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martinez (‘270).
Martinez teaches all the essential elements of the claimed invention however fails to explicitly teach that the lower end part of the base material has at least one penetration hole; and the fixing part has a fixing protrusion configured to be inserted into the penetration hole and protrudes toward both sides from the penetration hole (claim 6) and that the fixing part has a bar shaped first frame and a base shaped second frame extending in a direction orthogonal to the first frame and protruding from the other side of the base material (claim 7). Martinez teaches that protrusion element (8) is a cross metal element which is different that the material of the base. The protrusion element (8) extends from both sides of the base material. The protrusion elements on one side of the base could be considered the first frame and the protrusion elements on the other side could be considered the second frame. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the protrusion cross metal element (8) extends through an opening in the base material since it would ensure that protrusions is securely attached to the base material.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber (‘692) in view of Drumm (USPN 5445438).
Weber teaches all the essential elements of the claimed invention however fails to teach the fixing part comprises right and left parts detachably coupled to each other. Drumm teaches a brush with fixing parts that can be a single element or can comprise right and left parts (figure 17). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Weber so that the fixing parts comprise right and left parts that are detachably coupled to each other as taught by Drumm since they are considered to be equivalent structures known in the art and could be used interchangeably.
Claim(s) 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber (‘692) in view of Wang (CN 207358840).
Weber teaches all the essential elements of the claimed invention however fails to teach using a powder having a high hardness on a surface of the base material. Wang teaches a grinding brush with bristles that comprise a power material made of carbon (silicon carbide). 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 base material so that is comprises a power material as taught by Wang to increase the cleaning effect of the brush.
Conclusion
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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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
Prosecution Insights