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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Reference characters 20 (through-holes), 21 (opening portions) and 30 (polishing region) provided in the disclosure are not included in the drawings. It is suggested these reference characters be deleted from the disclosure as the drawings instead provide reference characters 20A, 20B, 21A, 21B, 21C, 21D, 30A, 30B, 30C and 30D, which refer to specific through-holes, opening portions and polishing regions. Applicant may replace all instances of 20 with 20A,20B, all instances of 21 with 21A, 21B, 21C, 21D and all instances of 30 with 30A, 30B, 30C and 30D.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites “a plurality of through-holes that are formed on the base material, and have opening portions as file teeth at both ends, of the opening portions at both the ends,” where the comma after “both ends” and the clause “at both the ends” require deletion. 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 1-8 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 1 recites the through-holes having opening portions as file teeth at both ends, where it is unclear what is meant by this language. An opening by definition is a gap or aperture, which is devoid of structure per se; thus, it is unclear how it defines “file teeth at both ends”.
Claim 4 requires the base material have a total of four polishing regions and claim 2, from which claim 4 depends, recites “the base material has a polishing region”. It is unclear if the polishing region of claim 2 is the same or different from the polishing regions of claim 4.
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 100846444 B1) and McDermott (US 3045321).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a nail file (Refer to Figures 6-7b) comprising: a plate-shaped base material (1); and a plurality of through-holes (7) that are formed on the base material (1), and have opening portions (6, edges at ends of through-holes) as file teeth at both ends, of the opening portions at both the ends, a shape of each of the opening portions that are open to another surface (one of the surfaces of 1) of the base material (1) is a circle and an area of each of the opening portions that are open to a one surface is made larger than an area of each of the opening portions that are open to the other surface (Refer to Figure 7b); however, Kim does not disclose a shape of each of the opening portions that are open to the one surface of the base material is a polygon. McDermott discloses a similar file (Refer to Figures 1-6) having a plate-shaped metallic base material with a plurality of holes (23;23,24;28). McDermott teaches it is beneficial to provide one or both surfaces of the base material with a pattern defined by edges/elements (25) at opening portions around each hole, where the pattern can be in various shapes, such as pyramids, cones, hexagons, etc. (Refer to col.1 lines 43-52). As best shown in Figure 1, a hexagonal patten is formed resulting in abrading elements 25, with corners 25a (Refer to col. 3 lines 58-73), where such patterns result in smooth abrading of target surfaces, “great durability”, “inherent mechanical strength”, etc. (Refer to col. 5 lines 60-66). 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 file of Kim such that the one surface be provided with opening portions of hexagonal shape, thereby forming a honeycomb pattern on the one surface as taught by McDermott in order to provide various individual abrading edges and corners, formed by the hexagonal pattern, ensuring improved abrading with smooth results with great durability and mechanical strength.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Kim and McDermott disclose the nail file of claim 1 above, where the base material has a polishing region (surfaces of 1) in which the opening portions are formed, on a front surface, the polygon as the shape of each of the opening portions is one type selected from a triangle, a quadrangle, and a hexagon (As explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, the shape of the opening portions on the one surface is a hexagon.), and the opening portions are arranged to planarly fill the polishing region (Refer to Figure 6 of Kim).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Kim and McDermott disclose the nail file of claim 2 above, wherein the polygon as the shape of each of the opening portions (21) is a regular hexagon (As explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, the shape of the opening portions on the one surface is a regular hexagon. Refer to Figure 1 of McDermott), and the opening portions the shape of each of which is a regular hexagon are arranged in a honeycomb shape in the polishing region (Refer to Figure 1 of McDermott).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kim and McDermott as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Gordon et al. (US 20140100589).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Kim and McDermott disclose the nail file of claim 3 above, where the opening portions on the one surface are in the shape of regular hexagons and the opening portions on the other surface are circular (Refer to Figures 6-7a of Kim depicting circular opening portions, where the one surface of Kim was modified per the teachings of McDermott to have hexagonal opening portions); however, the combination does not disclose the one surface and the other surface, each provide two polishing regions, resulting in four polishing regions, where the one surface has first and third opening portions defining two polishing regions, where the third opening portions are of smaller size than the first opening portions, and the other surface has second and fourth opening portions defining the other two polishing regions where the fourth opening portions have a smaller size than the second opening portions. It is well-known and conventional in the art for abrading devices to have discrete sections with different abrasive properties, where the size of the opening portions dictates the degree of abrasiveness/roughness (coarseness or fineness). Gordon et al. discloses an exfoliating/abrading device having a plurality of holes defining opening portions, where the size and spacing of the opening portions varies in discrete regions of the device to provide smoother and coarser regions (Refer to Abstract, paragraphs 0007 and 0030, and Figures 1, 6, 7 and 10). 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 nail file of the combination of Kim and McDermott such that each surface (the one surface and the other surface) have two polishing regions defined by opening portions of different size, as Gordon et al. demonstrate it is well-known and conventional to form various discrete regions with different abrasive properties dictated by the different diameters of the opening portions in each region, as this allows the device to provide different coarseness and fineness levels of abrasion which the user may pick from or use sequentially as desired during use.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kim and McDermott as applied to claims 1-3 above, and further in view of Nakamura (JP5743709).
Regarding claims 5-7, the combination of Kim and McDermott disclose the nail file of claim 1-3 above. Kim teaches the base material is formed of metal but is silent regarding the specific type of metal; however, it is well-known and conventional in the art to construct such files of stainless steel, such as 18-8 stainless steel as demonstrated by Nakamura (Refer to page 3 “18Cr-8NL stainless steel plate”). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the metal nail file of the combination of Kim and McDermott of 18-8 stainless steel as Nakamura demonstrates it is well-known and conventional to make such files of 18-8 stainless steel and it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kim, McDermott and Gordon et al. as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Nakamura (JP5743709).
Regarding claims 8, the combination of Kim, McDermott and Gordon et al. disclose the nail file of claim 4 above. Kim teaches the base material is formed of metal but is silent regarding the specific type of metal; however, it is well-known and conventional in the art to construct such files of stainless steel, such as 18-8 stainless steel as demonstrated by Nakamura (Refer to page 3 “18Cr-8NL stainless steel plate”). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the metal nail file of the combination of Kim, McDermott and Gordon et al. of 18-8 stainless steel as Nakamura demonstrates it is well-known and conventional to make such files of 18-8 stainless steel and it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TATIANA L NOBREGA whose telephone number is (571)270-7228. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Thomas Barrett can be reached at 571-272-4746. 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.
/TATIANA L NOBREGA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799