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 . This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 6/29/2026 in which claims 1, 3-6, 8 are pending and claims 1, 4 and 5 are currently amended.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 15, the limitations “the elastic member always imposes an elastic force” should be amended to – the elastic member continuously applies an elastic force--.
Claim 1, line 18, “is always tightly attached to an inner wall” should be – is continuously biased against an inner wall--
Claim 6, “is lower than” should be -- is less than--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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-, 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huang (U.S. Patent 6,745,474)
In regards to claim 1, Huang discloses an ant-loose mounting structure of an electric hair cutter fixed blade mounting frame, comprising a body (20), and a cutter head assembly(40) wherein the cutter head assembly (40) is arranged at a front end of the body (blade 30 extends out the front end),
wherein the cutter head assembly (40) further comprises a fixed blade mounting frame (44) and a fixed blade (30), wherein the fixed blade (30) is fixedly connected to the fixed blade mounting frame (44), wherein the front end of the body (20) is provided with a guide rail (formed by recesses 211)
wherein the fixed blade mounting frame (44) is slidably connected to the guide rail (near 211; see Fig. 6a) wherein the fixed blade mounting frame (44) is provided with a bent portion (rails 443; fig. 4) extending inwards wherein the fixed blade mounting frame interacts with the guide rail in a sliding manner through the bent portion (rails 443 slide over the rails near recesses 211),
wherein an elastic member (spring member 43) is arranged between the guide rail and the fixed blade (30) mounting frame wherein the elastic member (43) abuts directly between the bent portion of the fixed blade mounting frame(at notch 444) and the guide rail (in the recesses 211) ,
wherein the elastic member (43) always imposes an elastic force on the fixed blade mounting frame(44) and wherein the direction of the elastic force is perpendicular to the sliding direction of the fixed blade mounting frame (44) along the guide rail so that the fixed blade mounting frame is always tightly attached to an inner side wall of the guide rail.
In regards to claim 3, Huang discloses wherein the elastic member (43) is an arched elastic sheet.
In regards to claim 4, Huang discloses wherein the arched elastic sheet (43) is provided with an arched portion (431) and flat abutting portions (432) extending from both ends of the arched portion wherein the arched portion abuts against the fixed blade mounting frame (444) and wherein the two flat abutting portions abuts against the inner side wall of the guide rail (211).
In regards to claim 5, Huang discloses wherein the inner side wall of the guide rail (211) is provided with a groove for interacting with the arched elastic sheet (43) and wherein the arched elastic sheet is installed in the groove by the two flat abutting portions (biased into the groove by the flat portions).
In regards to claim 6, Huang discloses wherein the length of the groove (along the length of 20) is greater than the length of 43; and wherein the depth of the groove is lower than the height of the arched elastic sheet (43 has a greater width when considering 432) than widths of the grooves of holder 20 formed near 221)
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (U.S. Patent 6,745,474) in view of Hansen et al. (U.S. Publication 2010/0233793), herein referred to as Hansen.
In regards to claim 8, Huang discloses wherein the elastic member is made of a spring steel material. Huang discloses the elastic member 43 is a spring but does not disclose that it is made of spring steel. Hansen sets forth a utility knife with a leaf spring 320 that is made of sheet steel material. As sheet steel is a known material for leaf springs within blade mounted utility knives, it would have been obvious to having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the elastic member 43 of Huang to be made form spring steel as a well known material for leaf springs.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-8 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA M LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-8339. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a.m.- 5p.m..
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.
/LAURA M LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights