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 statement (IDS) submitted on 5/18/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Claims
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 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. Specifically, Ripich (US 2019/0223896 A1) (previously of record) is not relied upon to disclose or teach the amended limitations of “the scraping edge element tapering into an angled edge completely surrounding the bottom side of the scraper head portion such that the scraped oral biofilm is retained within the bottom side and inhibited from dribbling down the body”.
Claim Objections
Applicant’s arguments, see “Remarks”, filed 8/24/2026, with respect to the objection to claim 1 for including a typographical error have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of Applicant’s amendment to correct the previously cited typographical error. The objection of claim 1 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Applicant provided arguments, see “Remarks”, filed 8/24/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claim 18 regarding the limitations of “wherein the body of the scraper incorporated an extended handle portion having a manually operate suction control valve”. These limitations were unclear as it could not be definitively determined if the recitation of “a suction valve” was intended to be a separate element from the “suction control valve” previously defined in claim 1, or whether this limitation sought to further modify the “suction control valve” previously defined in claim 1. The arguments have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of Applicant’s amendment to change the recitation of “a manually operate suction control valve” to “the suction control regulator valve” which more clearly is defined to further modify the “suction control valve” defined in claim 1. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) of claims 18-19 has been withdrawn.
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.
Claim 6 is 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 6 recites, “wherein the scraper head portion has a top side and a bottom side” and it is unclear if this limitation seeks to define a “topside and bottom side” of the scraper head portion that is distinct and separate from the “topside and bottom side” previously defined in claim 1, or whether this limitation merely seeks to further modify the previously recited “topside and bottom side” of the scraper head portion defined in claim 1. For the purposes of examination, these limitations are interpreted to refer to and further modify the “topside and bottom side” of the scraper head portion previously defined in claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ripich (US 2019/0223896 A1) (previously of record) in view of Teed (US 2005/0197665 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ripich discloses:
A tongue scraper (device 2; see Fig. 1; see also Para. [0035]-[0036]) with suction application assist (see Para. [0036]-[0038]) for removing scraped oral biofilm from a patient’s tongue (see Para. [0035]-[0038] and [0047]), the tongue scraper comprising:
a body (see Fig. 1; body extending between handle 4 and head 6) having a distal end and a proximal end (see Examiner’s Diagram of Fig. 1 below designating a “proximal end” and “distal end” of the body), said body including:
a flow path suction channel (flow path 16; see Fig. 3; see also Para. [0046] and [0050]) transversing between said distal end and said proximal end (see Fig. 3), said distal end configured with a scraper head portion (head 6; see Figs. 2-3) with a suction lumen accessing said body flow path channel for removing scraped oral biofilm (see Para. [0046], [0048] and [0051] mentioning wherein a portion of flow path 16 extends into the distal head portion and is defined therein as trough 60 and inlet 40 as shown in Figs. 3 and 5);
said scraper head portion further having a scraping edge element (working edge 50, see Fig. 3), said scraping edge element configured to direct said scraped oral biofilm into said scraper head suction lumen when said scraper is manually operated (see Para. [0047]) and said scraped oral biofilm is removable through said flow path suction channel when suction is applied to the proximal end of said tongue scraper body (see Para. [0047] mentioning wherein debris and saliva are scraped from the tongue by the working edge and accumulate thereon; thereafter, the vacuum is applied to suction and remove saliva and debris therefrom through the vacuum passage as recited in Para. [0037] and [0048]);
wherein said scraper head position has a topside (shown in Fig. 1) and a bottom side (shown in Fig. 5), said bottom side having said scraper scraping edge element (see Fig. 5), the scraping edge element tapered into an angled edge (see Fig. 5; see also Para. [0047] mentioning wherein the working edge is curved/angled); and
wherein a suction control regulator valve is incorporated as part of the body of the tongue scraper (vacuum control opening 20, see Fig. 1 and Para. [0038]-[0040]).
PNG
media_image1.png
608
574
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, while Ripich provides a disclosure of wherein the scraping edge is “stepped-down” from the head to allow the working edge to engage the tongue free of interference from the head (see Para. [0047]; see also Fig. 4), Ripich does not expressly disclose wherein the scraping edge element completely surrounds the bottom side of the scraper head portion such that the scraped oral biofilm is retained within the bottom side and inhibited from dribbling down the body.
In the same field of endeavor, namely tongue scraper devices, Teed teaches a tongue scraping
device (see Fig. 1) comprising: A body (body 10; see Fig. 1) having a distal end comprising a scraper head
portion (reservoir cup 12; see Fig. 1); wherein said scrap head further comprises a scraping edge
element (edge 34; see Figs. 1 and 3) configured to direct scraped oral biofilm into said scraper head (see Para. [0032]-[0033]); wherein the scraping edge element completely surrounding the bottom side of the scraper head portion such that the scraped oral biofilm is retained within the bottom side and inhibited from dribbling down the body (see Figs. 1 and 3; see also Para. [0032]-[0033] mentioning wherein the edge 34 is a wall that completely surrounds the concave bottom wall 27 of the cup 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention, as a matter of simple substitution of one known tongue scraper edge element for
another (see KSR International Co. V. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)) to have
obtained the predictable result of modifying the working edge 50 of Ripich to extend around the
circumference of the head 6, as shown to be an alternative scraping edge configuration by the disclosure
of Teed. Since the only criticality imparted to the working edge 50 of Ripich pertains to wherein the
working edge is "stepped-down" from the head 6 to allow the working edge 50 to engage the tongue
free of interference from head 6 and handle 4 (see Ripich Para. [0047]), one of ordinary skill in the art
would have expected the device of Ripich to function equally well with either the semi-circular working
edge configuration shown in Ripich Fig. 5, or the circumferential working edge configuration shown in
Teed Figs. 1 and 3. Since both configurations have the respective scraper edge element "stepped-down"
away from the internal capture wall/portion of the head portion and are configured to scrape and
remove oral biofilm from a patient's tongue, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable
expectation of success in interchanging the two known alternative scraper edge configurations.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 1, Ripich further discloses wherein the scraper edge element is positioned in front of the scraper head suction lumen (see Figs. 3 and 5 showing wherein working edge 50 is positioned distally of the vacuum trough 60 and inlet 40).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 1, Ripich further discloses wherein the suction is configured to be applied to the patient’s oral cavity (see Para. [0035]-[0036] mentioning wherein the device is configured to be used to clean a patient’s tongue) utilizing hospital supplied suction through suction tubing (see Para. [0005] mentioning wherein the device may be used in a hospital room and is thus seen to be reasonably capable of utilizing a hospital-suppled tube as the vacuum tube 14 as shown in Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 1, Ripich further discloses wherein the scraper is connectable at its proximal end to any type of external suction source (see Para. [0036] mentioning wherein any vacuum source known in the art may be used as the designated vacuum source).
Regarding claim 6 (see 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection above), the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 1, Ripich further discloses wherein the scraper head portion has a top side (shown Fig. 1) and a bottom side (shown in Fig. 5), said bottom side having the suction lumen (see Fig. 5 showing wherein the trough 60 and inlet 40 are disposed on the “bottom side” of the head).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 1, Ripich further discloses wherein the scraper head portion is configured to remove oral secretions from the patient’s tongue (see Para. [0035]-[0038] and [0047]-[0048]).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 7, Ripich further discloses wherein the patient is intubated (see Para. [0047]-[0048]; as the device of Ripich is disclosed to remove saliva and other debris from a patient’s tongue, the device may be reasonably utilized to remove debris from the tongue of an intubated patient).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 1, Ripich further discloses wherein the scraper is plastic molded in one piece (see Para. [0035] mentioning wherein the device may be molded from rigid plastics to form the single piece tongue scraper device; see also Para. [0046] mentioning wherein the head and handle portions are integrally formed with one another).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 1, Ripich further discloses wherein the scraper is disposable after use (see Para. [0036], [0053] and [0057] mentioning wherein the scraped may either be cleaned and reused or disposed of after a number of uses).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 1, Ripich further discloses wherein the scraper is utilized in a hospital, home health, dental, nursing home, or home setting (see Para. [0005] and [0036]).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 1, Ripich further discloses wherein the scraping edge element has a curved scraper configuration edge (see Para. [0047]; see also Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 1, Ripich further discloses wherein the scraper is a single procedure use product disposable of after each use (see Para. [0036], [0053] and [0057] mentioning wherein the scraped may either be cleaned and reused or disposed of after a number of uses).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 1, Ripich further discloses wherein the scraper is molded in one piece of a rigid plastic (see Para. [0035] mentioning wherein the device may be molded from rigid plastics to form the single piece tongue scraped device; see also Para. [0046] mentioning wherein the head and handle portions are integrally formed with one another).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 1, Ripich further discloses wherein the proximal end of the body includes a fitting (tapered end 10; see Fig. 1; see also Para. [0036]) for connection to suction tubing (see Para. [0036]).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 1, Ripich further discloses wherein the suction control regulator valve is positioned adjacent to a proximal connector end of the scraper (see Fig. 3 showing the vacuum control opening 20 located adjacent the tapered end 10).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 16, Ripich further discloses wherein the suction control regulator valve is manually operated by thumb pressure (see Para. [0038]-[0040] mentioning wherein a user covers the vacuum control opening 20 with their finger to manually adjust the vacuum pressure supplied through the device).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 1, Ripich further discloses wherein the body of the scraper incorporates an extended handle portion (handle 4; see Fig. 1) having the control regulator valve (see Fig. 1 showing wherein the vacuum control opening is located on the handle portion of the device).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses the invention of claim 18, Ripich further discloses wherein the suction control regulator valve is manually operated by thumb pressure (see Para. [0038]-[0040] mentioning wherein a user covers the vacuum control opening 20 with their finger to manually adjust the vacuum pressure supplied through the device).
Claim(s) 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ripich (US 2019/0223896 A1) (previously of record) in view of in view of Teed (US 2005/0197665 A1), further in view of Boord (US 2021/0137660 A1) (previously of record).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses all of the limitations of the invention of claim 1.
However, Ripich does not expressly disclose wherein brush elements are incorporated as part of the scraper head portion.
In the same field of endeavor, namely vacuum-assisted tongue cleaning devices, Boord teaches:
A tongue scraper (see Fig. 16B) with suction application assist (see Para. [0006], [0008] and [0086]) comprising;
a tongue scraper body (see Fig. 16B), said body including:
a scraper head portion (head 6; see Fig. 16B) with a suction lumen (vacuum passage 16; see Fig. 6; see also Para. [0058]; the vacuum passage is understood to be present in the embodiment of Fig. 16B unless otherwise stated) accessing said body flow path channel for removing scraped oral biofilm (see Para. [0006], [0008], [0058] and [0086]);
said scraper head portion further having a scraping edge element (working edge 50; see Fig. 11C; see also Para. [0086]);
said head portion further comprising a plurality of brush elements (brush 312; see Fig. 16B) disposed on the top surface thereof (see Fig. 16; see also Para. [0086]), to facilitate initial debris collection and accumulation, if utilized before suctioning and, if utilized after suction, to facilitate final cleaning of a surface within the mouth, such as the tongue, teeth, or gum (see Para. [0086]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the top surface of the head portion of Ripich to comprise a plurality of bristle elements thereon as taught and suggested by Boord to, in this case, provide an addition cleaning feature to facilitate initial debris collection and accumulation, if utilized before suctioning and, if utilized after suction, to facilitate final cleaning of a surface within the mouth, such as the tongue, teeth, or gum (see Boord Para. [0086]).
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Ripich and Teed discloses all of the limitations of the invention of claim 1.
However, Ripich does not expressly disclose wherein a sponge element is incorporated as part of the scraper head portion.
In the same field of endeavor, namely vacuum-assisted tongue cleaning devices, Boord teaches:
A tongue scraper (see Fig. 16B) with suction application assist (see Para. [0006], [0008] and [0086]) comprising;
a tongue scraper body (see Fig. 16B), said body including:
a scraper head portion (head 6; see Fig. 16B) with a suction lumen (vacuum passage 16; see Fig. 6; see also Para. [0058]; the vacuum passage is understood to be present in the embodiment of Fig. 16B unless otherwise stated) accessing said body flow path channel for removing scraped oral biofilm (see Para. [0006], [0008], [0058] and [0086]);
said scraper head portion further having a scraping edge element (working edge 50; see Fig. 11C; see also Para. [0086]);
said head portion further comprising a recess (90; see Figs. 20-25), disposed in front of the suction lumen and scraping edge element defined within the head portion, within which a sponge material may be secured (see Para. [0090]) to allow a user to place said sponge in contact with the patient’s tongue (see Para. [0090]) to be utilized either before or after scraping of the tongue to further aid in removal of saliva or debris therefrom (see Boord Para. [0090]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the head portion of the device of Ripich to include a recess disposed in front of trough 60 and working edge 50, configured to receive and hold a sponge material therein as taught and suggested by Boord to, in this case, be utilized either before or after scraping of the tongue to further aid in removal of saliva or debris therefrom (see Boord Para. [0090]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. See the attached PTO-892 (Notice of References Cited). Specifically, US 10188414 B2 to Ripich, US 11103334 B2 to Wakefield, US 9226764 B2 to O’Neil and US 2009/0111069 A1 to Wagner all disclose tongue cleaning devices comprising a vacuum assist and scraper functions
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 MITCHELL B HOAG whose telephone number is (571)272-0983. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 - 5:00 M-F.
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, Darwin Erezo can be reached at 5712724695. 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.
/M.B.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3771
/DARWIN P EREZO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights