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.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP1935582 to Schultz et al. in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 20090133940 to Woods.
In re claim 1, Schultz teaches a scissor assembly with quantified finger rests comprising: a pair of scissors (1); and
multiple finger rests (11, 12) having different weights (Pg. 4, lines 49-50, Pg. 5, lines 1-7) and interchangeably mounted to the pair of scissors (Pg. 2, lines 17-24, Pg. 5, lines 11-16, 22-28) each one of the multiple finger rests having
a finger rest body (as shown in at least Figure 1).
It has been interpreted that the finger rest are “approximately equal mass,” which in this weight also falls within the claimed limitation of different. Per Merriam Webster Dictionary the term “approximately” is defined as “nearly exact; close in value or amount but not precise.” Per the plain and ordinary meaning if one mass is 1.1 kg and the other mass is 1 kg, while the masses are approximately equal, the masses are also different.
Schultz teaches a scissor assembly with multiple finger rest (11,12) that are interchangeable. The balancing of the mass aids in balancing the device during use. Schultz does not teach a weight indicating unit disposed on the finger rest body for distinguishing said finger rest and other said finger rests.
Woods teaches an implement having a handle with a counterweight. The implement is provided with a visual indicator system to aid in assisting the user to determine which counterweight should be used. Woods teaches the implement has a weight indicating unit disposed on the counterweight body for distinguishing the counterweight from one another (Para 0008). The weight indicating unit can be a mark provided on each counterweight and/or a color-coded system corresponding to each designated counterweight (Para 0008).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the interchangeable finger rests of Schultz with a weight indicating unit disposed on the body as taught by Woods in order to provide a visual indicator such as a mark and/or color coded weight to the user to select the correct weight. Selecting the correct weight prevents imbalance of the device which could lead to user injury. Providing a visual also permits the user to select the correct weight without having to remember which weight is which (Para 0008).
Note, Schultz teaches a device (which in this instance are scissors) having a handle with a weight. Similarly, Woods teaches an implement having a handle with a counterweight. One having ordinary skill in the art would have looks various handles (in various devices) with weights.
In re claim 2, modified Schultz teaches wherein each one of the multiple finger rests has a color indicating unit disposed on the finger rest body (Para 0008, Woods); and
said color indicating units of the multiple finger rests are in different colors (Para 0008, Woods).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schultz et al. in view of Woods, as applied to the above claims, and in further view of US Patent Application Publication No. 20230364774 to Rzadkowolski.
In re claim 3, modified Schultz teaches wherein the color indicating unit and the weight indicating unit of said finger rest are same color (Para 0008, Woods). In other words, Woods teaches the color indicating unit and weight unit as a single unit which is color coded, but does not teach and the color indicating unit is annular and surrounds the weight indicating unit.
Rzadkowolski teaches in the art of tool indicia, a color coded sleeve which may be slid over the handle to allow a user to quickly identify the tool or tool family.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide modified Schultz with a sleeve color indicating unit as taught by Rzadkowolski to improve organization and management of the finger rests. Modifying Schultz in view of the teachings of Rzadkowolski leads to the color indicating unit being separable from the weight indicating unit. Separating the color indicating unit and weight indicating unit does not alter the function of the device and is merely user preference.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Schultz et al. in view of Woods, as applied to the above claims, and in further view of US Patent No. 3,831,277 to Nagata.
In re claim 4, modified Schultz teaches wherein
the pair of scissors has a first connecting portion (Pg. 2, lines 17-24);
each one of the multiple finger rests has a second connecting portion located on one of two opposite ends of said finger rest and configured to be screwed with the first connecting portion (Pg. 2, lines 17-24, Pg. 5, lines 11-16, 22-28).
Regarding claim 4, modified Schultz does not teach the scissor assembly has a washer disposed between and abutting against the pair of scissors and a respective one of the multiple finger rests when the second connecting portion of the corresponding finger rest is screwed with the first connecting portion.
Nagata teaches in the art of scissors connecting two corresponding structures via a screw (4) and washer (26) arrangement. The washer (26) is disposed between and abutting against the pair of scissors and the screw shaft.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide modified Schultz with a washer as taught by Nagata which are advantageous for protecting the surface from damage and distributing loads. The modification of modified Schultz by the teachings of Nagata would have led to the washer being disposed between the scissors and the finger rests.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schultz et al. in view of Woods, as applied to the above claims, and in further view of US Patent Application Publication No. 201900176351 to Wei.
In re claims 5 and 6, modified Schultz teaches wherein each one of the multiple finger rests has two opposite ends (as shown in at least Figure 1, Schultz), but does not teach a diameter of each one of the multiple finger rests tapers from the two opposite ends of said finger rest toward a middle of said finger rest.
Wei teaches in the art of scissors, a plurality of finger rest (16) which each have a diameter which tapers from the two opposite ends of said finger rest toward a middle of said finger rest (as shown in at least Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to shape the finger rest of modified Schultz to have a diameter which tapers from two opposite ends (of the finger rest) toward a middle as taught by Wei based on the desired holding preference of the user. Changing the shape of the finger rests of Schultz to have tapering ends as taught by Wei is an obvious shape design variant to maintain resting a user’s fingers during cutting.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schultz et al. in view of Woods, and in further view of Rzadkowolski, as applied to the above claims, and in further view of Wei.
In re claim 7, modified Schultz teaches wherein each one of the multiple finger rests has two opposite ends (as shown in at least Figure 1, Schultz), but does not teach a diameter of each one of the multiple finger rests tapers from the two opposite ends of said finger rest toward a middle of said finger rest.
Wei teaches in the art of scissors, a plurality of finger rest (16) which each have a diameter which tapers from the two opposite ends of said finger rest toward a middle of said finger rest (as shown in at least Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to shape the finger rest of modified Schultz to have a diameter which tapers from two opposite ends (of the finger rest) toward a middle as taught by Wei based on the desired holding preference of the user. Changing the shape of the finger rests of Schultz to have tapering ends as taught by Wei is an obvious shape design variant to maintain resting a user’s fingers during cutting.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schultz et al. in view of Woods and in further view of Nagata, as applied to the above claims, and in further view of Wei.
In re claim 8, modified Schultz teaches multiple finger rests (as shown in at least Figure 1, Schultz), but does not teach a diameter of each one of the multiple finger rests tapers from the two opposite ends of said finger rest toward a middle of said finger rest.
Wei teaches in the art of scissors, a plurality of finger rest (16) which each have a diameter which tapers from the two opposite ends of said finger rest toward a middle of said finger rest (as shown in at least Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to shape the finger rest of modified Schultz to have a diameter which tapers from two opposite ends (of the finger rest) toward a middle as taught by Wei based on the desired holding preference of the user. Changing the shape of the finger rests of Schultz to have tapering ends as taught by Wei is an obvious shape design variant to maintain resting a user’s fingers during cutting.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schultz et al. in view of Woods, as applied to the above claims, and in further in view of Wei, and in further view of CN1655909 to Fedor et al.
In re claims 9 and 10, modified Schultz teaches wherein each one of the multiple finger rests (11,12, Schultz) has two opposite ends;
one of the two opposite ends of said finger rest located away from the pair of scissors when said finger rest is mounted to the pair of scissors.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, modified Schultz does not teach one end of the finger rest forms a convex surface and the weight indicating system is disposed on the convex surface.
Wei teaches a finger rest having one end located away from the pair of scissors having a convex surface.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to shape the end of the finger rest of Schultz located away from the scissors to have a convex surface as taught by Wei to maintain supporting a user’s fingers when using the device. Changing the shape of the finger rest of Schultz is an obvious design variant and user preference based on the desired cuts being performed.
Further regarding claims 9 and 10, modified Schultz teaches the weight indicating unit uses a mark to indicate to the user the mass of the finger rests (Para 0008, Woods), but does not teach the weight indicating unit is disposed on the convex surface.
Fedor teaches in the art of cutting, a handle (of a cutter) having an indicating unit on an end of the surface (255).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the weight indicating system of modified Schultz on the end of the handle surface (or in this instance on the end of the surface of the finger rest) as taught by Fedor to identify the finger rest when in a stored position (Pg. 5, lines 20-28) and amongst a group of other finger rest.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schultz et al. in view of Woods, in further view of Rzadkowolski, and in further view of Wei, as applied to the above claims, and in further view of Fedor.
In re claim 11, modified Schultz teaches wherein each one of the multiple finger rests (11,12, Schultz) has two opposite ends;
one of the two opposite end of said finger rest located away from the pair of scissors when said finger rest is mounted to the pair of scissors.
Regarding claim 11, modified Schultz does not teach one end of the finger rest forms a convex surface and the weight indicating system is disposed on the convex surface.
Wei teaches a finger rest having one end located away from the pair of scissors having a convex surface.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to shape the end of the finger rest of Schultz located away from the scissors to have a convex surface as taught by Wei to maintain supporting a user’s fingers when using the device. Changing the shape of the finger rest of Schultz is an obvious design variant and user preference based on the desired cuts being performed.
Further regarding claim 11, modified Schultz teaches the weight indicating unit uses a mark to indicate to the user the mass of the finger rests (Para 0008, Woods), but does not teach the weight indicating unit is disposed on the convex surface.
Fedor teaches in the art of cutting, a handle (of a cutter) having an indicating unit on an end of the surface (255).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the weight indicating system of modified Schultz on the end of the handle surface (or in this instance on the end of the surface of the finger rest) as taught by Fedor to identify the finger rest when in a stored position (Pg. 5, lines 20-28) and amongst a group of other finger rest.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schultz et al. in view of Woods in further view of Nagata, and in further view of Wei, as applied to the above claims, and in further view of Fedor.
In re claim 12, modified Schultz teaches wherein each one of the multiple finger rests (11,12, Schultz) has two opposite ends;
one of the two opposite end of said finger rest located away from the pair of scissors when said finger rest is mounted to the pair of scissors.
Regarding claim 12, modified Schultz does not teach one end of the finger rest forms a convex surface and the weight indicating system is disposed on the convex surface.
Wei teaches a finger rest having one end located away from the pair of scissors having a convex surface.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to shape the end of the finger rest of Schultz located away from the scissors to have a convex surface as taught by Wei to maintain supporting a user’s fingers when using the device. Changing the shape of the finger rest of Schultz is an obvious design variant and user preference based on the desired cuts being performed.
Further regarding claim 12, modified Schultz teaches the weight indicating unit uses a mark to indicate to the user the mass of the finger rests (Para 0008, Woods), but does not teach the weight indicating unit is disposed on the convex surface.
Fedor teaches in the art of cutting, a handle (of a cutter) having an indicating unit on an end of the surface (255).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the weight indicating system of modified Schultz on the end of the handle surface (or in this instance on the end of the surface of the finger rest) as taught by Fedor to identify the finger rest when in a stored position (Pg. 5, lines 20-28) and amongst a group of other finger rest.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US PGPUB 20160008994 teaches a cutting device having an interchangeable weight system with a weight identifying unit in which the weights aid to maintain balance of the device. KR20110092838 teaches scissors with tapering finger rests. JP3126016 teaches a cutting device having a plurality of different weights in the handle to maintain balance of the device while cutting.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER S MATTHEWS whose telephone number is (571)270-5843. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8am-4pm.
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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at 571-272-4502. 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.
/JENNIFER S MATTHEWS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724