Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 14, 2026
Application No. 18/741,434

APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR BENDING BRUSH FIBERS TO PROVIDE AN ANGLED BRUSH

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 12, 2024
Priority
Jun 12, 2023 — provisional 63/507,721
Examiner
RODGERS, THOMAS RAYMOND
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
ULTRAFAB, INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
9m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allowance Rate
226 granted / 386 resolved
-1.5% vs TC avg
Strong +59% interview lift
Without
With
+59.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
426
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
47.3%
+7.3% vs TC avg
§102
29.7%
-10.3% vs TC avg
§112
21.2%
-18.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 386 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 9/12/2024 and 1/9/2025 are being considered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claims 1, 2, 5-11, 13, 14, 16, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fritze (WO2004086906A1) Regarding claim 1, Fritze discloses an apparatus for bending brush fibers extending from a backing strip comprising: a rotating shaft (rollers of Item 7) having a curved circumferential outer surface along which the backing strip of a brush (Item 3) travels to dispose the fibers (Item 1) extending from said backing strip outwards; and an energy delivery head (Items 8, 4 and 5), positioned along said backing strip when traveling along said shaft, bends said fibers in which energy delivered by said head deforms said fibers, when being bent by said head, to retain at least a portion of said fibers bent at an angle with respect to a longitudinal dimension of the backing strip, wherein said portion for each of said fibers starts at a location between the backing strip and an end or tip of the fiber, and extends to the end or tip of the fiber (page 3 starting with “in the bristle carrier”). Regarding claim 2, Fritze discloses the apparatus according to Claim 1 wherein said head has a portion configured to bend and delivery energy to heat each of said fibers as the fiber contacts at least said portion of said head when traveling by said head, responsive to rotation of said shaft, to retain the fiber deformed bent at said angle (Pages 3-4). Regarding claim 5, Fritze discloses the apparatus according to Claim 1 wherein said energy delivered by said head is heat energy (Page 3 discusses the bristles passing through a heated liquid). Regarding claim 6, Fritze discloses the apparatus according to Claim 1 wherein said shaft has an axis of rotation, said head has a surface with a front edge parallel to said axis of rotation, and at least said front edge of said head bends and heats each of said fibers as the fiber passes by said head to retain the fiber deformed bent at said angle (best shown in Figure 1 and 2). Regarding claim 7, Fritze discloses the apparatus according to Claim 6 wherein said front edge of said head is spaced by a gap from said outer surface of said shaft along which said brush travels, and said angle is at least in accordance with a size of said gap (gap filled by item 17). Regarding claim 8, Fritze discloses the apparatus according to Claim 1 wherein said fibers of said brush extend at least substantially upright from said backing strip prior to be bent at said angle to form said brush into an angled brush (Figure 2). Regarding claim 9, Fritze discloses the apparatus according to Claim 1 wherein said brush is delivered to said shaft in a first direction and after traveling along said shaft exits said shaft in a second direction (Figure 1). Regarding claim 10, Fritze discloses the apparatus according to Claim 1 wherein said head is movable between a down position adjacent said shaft to enable bending of fibers and an up position away from said shaft (Figure 1). Regarding claim 11, Fritze discloses the apparatus according to Claim 1 wherein said angle is at or between 10 and 80 degrees (Figure 2 shows about 45), with respect to a longitudinal dimension along which the backing strip extends when horizontally disposed, in accordance with one or more of a size of a gap between the outer surface of the rotating shaft and said head, and a radial position of said head about an axis of rotation of said shaft (gap formed by item 17 to make the bristles a predetermined shape). Regarding claim 13, Fritze discloses a method for bending brush fibers extending from a backing strip comprising steps of: rotating a shaft (Item 7) having a curved circumferential outer surface along which the backing strip (Item 3) of a brush travels to dispose the fibers (Item 1) extending from said backing strip outwards; bending said fibers as said backing strip travels along said outer surface of said shaft (by Item 8); and delivering energy by a head to said fibers while said bending step is being carried out by said head to retain at least a portion of said fibers bent at an angle with respect to a longitudinal dimension of said backing strip (Item 21 and 5). Regarding claim 14, Fritze discloses a brush comprising: a plurality of synthetic fibers (Item 1 is discussed being plastic); a backing strip (Item 3) having a surface from which each of said plurality of fibers extends a length to an end or tip of the fiber; and each of said fibers being deformed bent, by energy delivered via a head as said head bends said fibers with travel of said backing strip passing by said head (Items 21, 8 and 5), at an angle along a region of the fiber located at a location between said backing strip and the end or tip of the fiber, to bend at an angle from said region to the end or tip of the fiber, in which said angle is with respect to a longitudinal dimension of said backing strip (Figure 2). Regarding claim 16, Fritze discloses the brush according to Claim 14 wherein said angle is at or between 10 and 80 degrees with respect to said longitudinal dimension of the backing strip (Figure 2 shows roughly 45 degrees). Regarding claim 18, Fritze discloses the brush according to Claim 14 wherein said backing strip is flexible along at least said longitudinal dimension (Figure 2). Regarding claim 19, Fritze discloses the brush according to Claim 14 wherein a same one of said angle is provided along each of said fibers (all bristles are subject to the same heat and deformation). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 3, 4, 12, 15 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fritze (WO2004086906A1) in view of Edwards (US 2002/0033234). Regarding claim 3, Fritze discloses the apparatus according to Claim 1 . Fritze fails to explicitly disclose wherein said backing strip wraps at least partially along said curved circumferential outer surface of said shaft while travelling along said shaft . Edwards teaches a brush making apparatus wherein said backing strip (Item 74) is moved around on a belt (Item 54) as a means for transportation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to simply substitute the brush type of Fritze to be a strip brush instead of a brush head (for items such as a tooth brush). Both brush types are known in the art and are effectively used for different scenarios. As discussed in Paragraph 13 of Edwards, regardless of the brush assembly types, both lead to the predictable result of using heat to modify the shape of the bristle to the predetermined form. Regarding claim 4 and 15, Fritze discloses the apparatus according to Claim 1 . Fritze fails to explicitly disclose wherein said energy delivered by said head is ultrasonic energy. Edwards teaches a brush making apparatus wherein said energy delivered by said head is ultrasonic energy (Paragraph 36). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to simply substitute the heating means of Fritze for the ultrasonic means as taught by Edwards. Both are capable of properly heating a bristle to the plastic deformation range. As such the predictable result of the bristle being heated by either heat source. Regarding claim 12, Fritze discloses the apparatus according to Claim 1 . Fritze fails to explicitly disclose wherein said backing strip is flexible along at least said longitudinal dimension to enable said backing strip to travel along said outer surface of said shaft. Edwards teaches a brush making apparatus wherein said backing strip (Item 74) is moved around on a belt (Item 54) as a means for transportation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to simply substitute the brush type of Fritze to be a strip brush instead of a brush head (for items such as a tooth brush). Both brush types are known in the art and are effectively used for different scenarios. As discussed in Paragraph 13 of Edwards, regardless of the brush assembly types, both lead to the predictable result of using heat to modify the shape of the bristle to the predetermined form. Regarding claim 21 and 22, Fritze discloses the apparatus according to Claim 1 wherein said brush is delivered to said shaft in a first direction to enable said backing strip to following curvature of said curved circumferential outer surface of said rotating shaft so that said fibers extending from said backing strip pass by said energy delivery head positioned to bend and delivery energy to deform said fibers, and then said brush exits said shaft in a second direction with said at least a portion of said fibers extending from said backing strip of said brush bent at said angle (Figure 1). Fritze fails to explicitly disclose the backing strip is capable of curving. Edwards teaches a brush making apparatus wherein said backing strip (Item 74) is moved around on a belt (Item 54) as a means for transportation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to simply substitute the brush type of Fritze to be a strip brush instead of a brush head (for items such as a tooth brush). Both brush types are known in the art and are effectively used for different scenarios. As discussed in Paragraph 13 of Edwards, regardless of the brush assembly types, both lead to the predictable result of using heat to modify the shape of the bristle to the predetermined form. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fritze (WO2004086906A1). Regarding claim 17, Fritze discloses the brush according to Claim 14 wherein said angle is 20 degrees with respect to said longitudinal dimension of the backing strip. 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 predetermined angle to be any angle including 20 degrees. Such a modification is viewed as a change in shape, which has been held to be of routine by one skilled in the art (see MPEP 2144.04). Further in the instant application there is no criticality to the claimed angle. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fritze (WO2004086906A1) in view of Rueb (US 5,033,797). Regarding claim 20, Fritze discloses the brush according to Claim 14. Fritze fails to explicitly disclose wherein said backing strip has a width, and said plurality of fibers extend from said surface grouped in rows of different ones of said fibers that at least substantially extend along said width of said backing strip, and every two different ones of said rows are spaced from each other along said longitudinal dimension of said backing strip (Fritz shows representative 2 dimensional drawing of the brush). Reub teaches a brush wherein said backing strip has a width, and said plurality of fibers extend from said surface grouped in rows of different ones of said fibers that at least substantially extend along said width of said backing strip, and every two different ones of said rows are spaced from each other along said longitudinal dimension of said backing strip (Figure 6, 7, 10 and 11). 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 brush of Fritze to have the plurality of rows as taught by Reub. Modifying the number of bristles would increase the ability for the brush to be able to apply an abrasive force. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOM R RODGERS whose telephone number is (313)446-4849. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8AM-5PM EST. 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 at (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 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. /TOM RODGERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 12, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12702257
HAND CLEANING TOOL INCLUDING INDIVIDUAL FINGER SCRAPERS
2y 11m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12691557
Torque Stick and Wrench
5y 8m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12672501
APPARATUS AND METHOD OF TREATING SUBSTRATE
3y 7m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12660796
ANIMAL CLEANING DEVICE
4y 2m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12653301
Oral Care Implement
4y 10m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
58%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+59.0%)
2y 11m (~9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 386 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month