Detailed Action
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
2. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
3. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Regarding claim 1, applicant has not invoked 35 U.S.C. 112(f) means plus function analysis with respect to the claimed static assembly in that applicant claims specific structure related to the static assembly being the claimed accommodating chamber and applicant has not claimed any associated functional language with respect to the static assembly. Further, applicant has not invoked 35 U.S.C. 112(f) means plus function analysis with respect to the claimed rotary assembly in that applicant has not claimed any associated functional language with respect to the rotary assembly. Further, applicant has not invoked 35 U.S.C. 112(f) means plus function analysis with respect to the claimed motion detection component in that applicant claims specific structure related to the motion detection component being the claimed motion detection assembly and the motion feedback assembly. Further, applicant has invoked 35 U.S.C. 112(f) means plus function analysis with respect to the claimed motion detection assembly and as seen in applicant’s originally filed specification the motion detection assembly is detailed as in practical applications, the motion detection assembly 400 may include a circuit board and a position sensor integrated on the circuit board, and the position sensor may be a laser sensor or a Hall sensor, which is not specifically limited in the present application. The motion detection assembly 400 may be connected to a control assembly outside the accommodating chamber 120 by a wire harness 440, such as a wire, a FPC connecting wire, or the like as seen in paragraph [0046] of applicant’s originally filed specification, and is further detailed as in practical applications, the motion detection assembly 400 may include a circuit board and a position sensor integrated on the circuit board, and the position sensor may be a laser sensor or a Hall sensor, which is not specifically limited in the present application. The positioning hole 410 is formed in the circuit board, and the circuit board may be configured into a continuous ring structure or an open ring structure, such that an inner circumferential wall of the circuit board defines the avoiding space 420 as seen in paragraph [0070] of applicant’s originally filed specification, and is further detailed as correspondingly, two Hall sensors are integrated on the circuit board of the motion detection assembly 400, and the two Hall sensors are spaced apart along a circumference of the first axis 110 and configured to sense the two opposite magnetic poles of the position feedback part 520 as detailed in paragraph [0079] of applicant’s originally filed specification. Further, applicant invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) means plus function analysis with respect to the claimed motion feedback assembly and as seen in applicant’s originally filed specification the motion feedback assembly is detailed as in an implementable embodiment, the motion feedback assembly 500 includes a mounting base 510 and a position feedback part 520. A connecting hole 511 is formed in the mounting base 510, and the mounting base 510 fixedly sleeves the power output shaft 310 through the connecting hole 511 to rotate with the power output shaft 310. A mounting groove 512 is further formed in the mounting base 510, the mounting groove 512 is formed on a periphery of the connecting hole 511, and the position feedback part 520 is mounted in the mounting groove 512, such that the position feedback part 520 can rotate with the power output shaft 310 through the mounting base 510. A groove opening of the mounting groove 512 is provided towards the motion detection assembly 400, and the motion detection assembly 400 is configured to detect a motion position of the position feedback part 520 as seen in paragraph [0075] of applicant’s originally filed specification, is further detailed as the position feedback part 520 is a magnetic part as seen in paragraph [0078] of applicant’s originally filed specification and is further detailed as in practical applications, the position feedback part 520 has at least two opposite magnetic poles as seen in paragraph [0079] of applicant’s originally filed specification.
Regarding claim 2, applicant has not invoked 35 U.S.C. 112(f) means plus function analysis with respect to the claimed shell element and stator element in that applicant has not claimed any associated functional language with respect to these claimed components.
Regarding claim 4, applicant has invoked 35 U.S.C. 112(f) means plus function analysis with respect to the claimed surface covering element and as seen in applicant’s originally filed disclosure the surface covering element is detailed as the surface covering element 222 as an example, in an implementable embodiment, the surface covering element 222 extends along the first axis 110, and one end of the surface covering element 222 extends to the outside of the stator bracket 221 to form a joining portion 2221, such that the surface covering element 222 is connected with the motion detection assembly 400 through the joining portion 2221, as seen in paragraph [0058] of applicant’s originally filed specification.
Regarding claim 11, applicant has not invoked 35 U.S.C. 112(f) means plus function analysis with respect to the claimed rotor element in that applicant has not claimed any functional language associated with the rotor element.
Regarding claim 17, applicant has invoked 35 U.S.C. 112(f) means plus function analysis with respect to the claimed energy storage component and as seen in applicant’s originally filed disclosure the energy storage component is detailed as an existing battery as detailed in paragraph [0097] of applicant’s originally filed specification.
Regarding claims 18 and 20, applicant has invoked 35 U.S.C. 112(f) means plus function analysis with respect to the claimed fluid pumping unit and as seen in applicant’s originally filed disclosure the fluid pumping unit is detailed as a water pump as detailed in applicant’s drawing figure 15 as originally filed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. 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 1-20 are 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 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. The phrase “at least” in the preamble of claim 1 renders the claim indefinite in that it is unclear as to whether other components than the claimed driving body and motion detection component are to be considered part of the claimed invention. Further, applicant invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) means plus function analysis with respect to the claimed motion detection assembly as detailed earlier in paragraph 3 of this office action and the terms/phrases “which is not specifically limited” and “or the like” in paragraph [0046] of applicant’s originally filed specification and “which is not specifically limited” in paragraph [0070] of applicant’s originally filed specification make it unclear as to whether other types of motion detection assemblies than those disclosed are being contemplated by the claim.
Claim 4 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. Applicant has invoked 35 U.S.C. 112(f) means plus function analysis with respect to the claimed surface covering element as detailed earlier in paragraph 3 of this office action and the phrase “as an example” in paragraph [0058] of applicant’s originally filed specification renders the claim indefinite in that it is unclear as to whether other types of surface covering elements than those disclosed are being contemplated by the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitations "the stator element" line 2 and “the shell body” in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the driving apparatus" in lines 2 and 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "water flow" in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
5. 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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN Patent No. 215498605 to Tang et al.
Referring to claim 1, Tang et al. discloses a drive unit for oral cleaning, at least comprising a driving body – at 11,20,30,40,51 and a motion detection component – at 33,53, wherein the driving body extending along a first axis – see longitudinal axis in figures 1-3, comprises a static assembly – at 20, and a rotary assembly – at 30, the rotary assembly – at 30, is rotatably mounted on the static assembly – at 20 – see figures 1-3 and the second and third paragraphs on page 4 of the English translation, the static assembly – at 20, at least partially surrounds the rotary assembly – at 30 – see at 31-33 in figures 1-3, an accommodating chamber – see inner chamber formed by items 11,21-23,51 in figures 2-3, is formed in the static assembly – at 20 – see figures 2-3, and at least one end of the rotary assembly – at 30, extends along the first axis and extends to the outside of the static assembly – at 20 – see at 31 in figures 2-3, the motion detection component – at 33,53, at least partially located in the accommodating chamber – see figures 2-3, comprises a motion detection assembly – at 53, and a motion feedback assembly – at 33, the motion feedback assembly – at 33, is connected with the rotary assembly – at 30-32, and rotates with the rotary assembly – see figures 1-3 and the second and third paragraphs on page 4 of the English translation, the motion detection assembly – at 52-54, is directly connected with the static assembly – at 51 – see figures 1-3, and the motion detection assembly – at 53, detects a motion position of the rotary assembly – at 30, through the motion feedback assembly – at 33 – see figures 1-3 and last paragraph beginning on page 4 and ending at the beginning of page 5 of the English translation. Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) analysis with respect to the claimed motion detection assembly, items 52-54 of Tang et al. include a circuit board and hall sensor consistent with applicant’s originally filed disclosure. Further, regarding the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) analysis with respect to the claimed motion feedback assembly, item 33 of Tang et al. is a magnet(s) consistent with applicant’s originally filed disclosure.
Referring to claim 2, Tang et al. further discloses the static assembly – at 20, comprises a shell element – at 11,12,13, and a stator element – at 21-23, accommodated within the shell element – at 11 – see figures 2-3, the stator element – at 21-23, is fixedly connected with the shell element – at 11 – see at 21-23 in figures 2-3, and the motion detection component – at 33,53, is located at an end of the stator element – at 21-23, along the first axis – longitudinal axis – see figures 2-3.
Referring to claim 3, Tang et al. further discloses the shell element – at 11-13, comprises a shell body – at 11, and a rear cover – at 13, the shell body – at 11, is configured in a cylindrical structure – see figures 1-3, and an opening – at the end of 11 proximate 13 as seen in figures 2-3, is formed in one end of the shell body – at 11 – see figures 2-3, the rear cover – at 13, is connected with the shell body – at 11 – see figures 1-3, and at least partially covers the opening – see figures 2-3, and the motion detection component – at 33,53, is located at an end of the stator element – at 20, close to the rear cover – at 13 – see figures 2-3.
Referring to claim 4, Tang et al. further discloses the stator element – at 21-23, comprises a stator bracket – at 23,and a surface covering element – at 21,22, the surface covering element – at 21,23, at least partially covers the stator bracket – at 23 – see figures 2-3, and the motion detection assembly – at 33,53, is connected with the surface covering element – at 22 – see figures 2-3. Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) analysis with respect to the surface covering element, items 21,22 form a joining portion to connect to other components as seen in figures 2-3, consistent with applicant’s originally filed disclosure.
Referring to claim 5, Tang et al. further discloses the surface covering element – at 21,22, extends along the first axis – longitudinal axis – see figures 2-3, and one end of the surface covering element – at 21,22, extends to the outside of the stator bracket – at 23 – see ends of 21,22 in figures 2-3, to form a joining portion – see ends of 21,22, joining to 31 and/or 50 in figures 2-3, such that the surface covering element – at 21,22, is connected with the motion detection assembly – at 53, through the joining portion – see at 22,51 in figures 2-3.
Referring to claim 11, Tang et al. further discloses the rotary assembly – at 30, comprises a power output shaft – at 31, and a rotor element - at 32, the power output shaft – at 31, is rotatably mounted to the static assembly – at 20 – see figures 1-3 and the second and third paragraphs on page 4 of the English translation, and the rotor element – at 32, is fixedly connected with the power output shaft – at 31 – see figures 2-3, the motion feedback assembly – at 33, is fixedly connected with the power output shaft – at 31 – see figures 2-3, the rotor element – at 32, the motion feedback assembly – at 33, and the motion detection assembly – at 53, are arranged at intervals along the extending direction of the first axis – longitudinal axis – see figures 2-3 (applicant has not claimed the intervals with respect to any of the claimed components), the motion feedback assembly – at 33, is located between the rotor element – at 32, and the motion detection assembly – at 53 – see figures 2-3 where item 33 is outside of element 32 and is between 32 and 53 given the orientation of 32 and 53 as seen in figure 3, or the motion feedback assembly is located on a side of the motion detection assembly away from the rotor element – not required by the claim given the “or” clause.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 10,610,008 to Wagner et al.
Referring to claim 16, Tang et al. further discloses the rotary assembly – at 30, comprises a power output shaft – at 31, rotatably mounted to the static assembly – at 20 – see figures 2-3 and the second and third paragraphs on page 4 of the English translation. Tang et al. does not disclose the power output shaft has an axial passage, as well as a fluid inlet and a fluid outlet communicated with the axial passage. Wagner et al. does disclose the power output shaft – at 132, has an axial passage – see figure 2A, as well as a fluid inlet and a fluid outlet communicated with the axial passage – see figure 2A and further see column 5 lines 11-33 which incorporates U.S. Patent No. 7,147,468 and as seen in figures 1-3 and 23 where the shaft – at 56 has an axial passage with inlet and outlet at each end as seen in figure 23 and also incorporates US Patent No. 10,449,023 (related to application 15/206,013) which discloses an output shaft – at 116 with passage – at 115 with inlet and outlet at each end of 115. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to take the device of Tang et al. and add the output shaft having an axial passage with fluid inlet and outlet as disclosed by Wagner et al., so as to yield the predictable result of allowing a cleaning/treating fluid to be dispensed by the device without adding an additional fluid passage to the device to make the device easier to assemble, while not making the device larger to accommodate an additional fluid passage, so as to improve the oral care and health of the user as desired.
Claim(s) 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. in view of Wagner et al.
Referring to claim 17, Tang et al. discloses a toothbrush handle, at least comprising a grip housing – not shown and the driving apparatus for oral cleaning according to claim 1 mounted within the grip housing – see rejection of claim 1 detailed earlier and see the English translation where the apparatus of claim 1 would be within an outer housing to be gripped by the user. Tang et al. does not disclose an energy storage component and wherein the energy storage component is electrically connected with the driving apparatus, and the power output shaft of the driving apparatus extends out of the grip housing. Wagner et al. does disclose an energy storage component – at 120, the energy storage component – at 120, is electrically connected with the driving apparatus – at 122,132,134 – see figure 2A, and the power output shaft – at 132, of the driving apparatus extends out of the grip housing – at 106 – see figure 2A. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to take the device of Tang et al. and add the energy storage component of Wagner et al., so as to yield the predictable result of supplying sufficient power to the device while allowing the user to take and use the device in multiple locations as desired. Regarding the 35 U.S.C 112(f) means plus function analysis with respect to the claimed energy storage compartment, item 120 of Wagner et al. is a battery consistent with applicant’s originally filed disclosure.
Referring to claim 18, Tang et al. as modified by Wagner et al. further discloses a liquid storage chamber – connected to passage in 132 of Wagner et al. and connected to passage 115 in incorporated US Patent 10449023, and a fluid pumping unit – see column 5 lines 11-33 of Wagner et al. and – see at 86 in incorporated US Patent 7147468, the pump located within the grip housing – see at 52 in figure 4 of the ‘468 patent, wherein the power output shaft – at 132 of Wagner et al., has an axial passage – see figure 2A of Wagner et al., as well as a fluid inlet and a fluid outlet communicated with the axial passage – see figure 2A of Wagner et al., the fluid inlet of the axial passage can be communicated with the liquid storage chamber – see figure 2A of Wagner e al., and the fluid pumping unit is connected in series in a flow path for communicating the fluid inlet of the axial passage with the liquid storage chamber – see figure 2A of Wagner et al., figure 2A of the ‘023 patent and figure 4 of the ‘468 patent, such that the fluid pumping unit can draw fluid in the liquid storage chamber and allow the fluid to flow out of the fluid outlet of the axial passage through the axial passage – see figure 2A of Wagner et al., figure 2A of the ‘023 patent and figure 4 of the ‘468 patent. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to take the device of Tang et al. as modified by Wagner et al. and add the fluid pumping unit with fluid passage of Wagner et al., so as to yield the predictable result of allowing a cleaning/treating fluid to be dispensed by the device without adding an additional fluid passage to the device to make the device easier to assemble, while not making the device larger to accommodate an additional fluid passage, so as to improve the oral care and health of the user as desired. Tang et al. as modified by Wagner et al. does not disclose the liquid storage chamber is within the grip housing. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to take the device of Tang et al. as modified by Wagner et al. and add the liquid storage chamber within the grip housing as claimed, so as to yield the predictable result of allowing for the device to be more mobile to be used in more locations as desired. Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) analysis with respect to the fluid pumping unit, item 86 of the ‘468 pump is a fluid pump consistent with applicant’s originally filed disclosure.
Referring to claim 19, Tang et al. as modified by Wagner et al. further discloses an oral cleaning device, at least comprising a nursing head – at 104 of Wagner et al., and the brush handle assembly according to claim 17 – see rejection of claim 17 detailed earlier in this office action, the nursing head – at 104, being detachably connected to the power output shaft – at 132 – see figures 1-4B of Wagner et al. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to take the device of Tang et al. as modified by Wagner et al. and add the brush head being detachably connected to the output shaft as disclosed by Wagner et al., so as to yield the predictable result of allowing for the device to be more easily cleaned and maintained as desired.
Referring to claim 20, Tang et al. as modified by Wagner et al. further discloses a liquid storage chamber – connected to passage in 132 of Wagner et al. and connected to passage 115 in incorporated US Patent 10449023, and a fluid pumping unit – see column 5 lines 11-33 of Wagner et al. and – see at 86 in incorporated US Patent 7147468, the pump located within the grip housing – see at 52 in figure 4 of the ‘468 patent, wherein the power output shaft – at 132 of Wagner et al., has an axial passage – see figure 2A of Wagner et al., as well as a fluid inlet and a fluid outlet communicated with the axial passage – see figure 2A of Wagner et al., the fluid inlet of the axial passage can be communicated with the liquid storage chamber – see figure 2A of Wagner e al., and the fluid pumping unit is connected in series in a flow path for communicating the fluid inlet of the axial passage with the liquid storage chamber – see figure 2A of Wagner et al., figure 2A of the ‘023 patent and figure 4 of the ‘468 patent, such that the fluid pumping unit can draw fluid in the liquid storage chamber and allow the fluid to flow out of the fluid outlet of the axial passage through the axial passage – see figure 2A of Wagner et al., figure 2A of the ‘023 patent and figure 4 of the ‘468 patent, the nursing head has a fluid passage – see connected to 107 in figures 1A-2A of Wagner et al., and an outflow opening – at 107, communicated with the fluid passage – see figures 1A-2A of Wagner et al., the power output shaft – at 132, is connected with the nursing head – see figures 1A-2A of Wagner et al., and drives the nursing head to perform a displacement motion – see figures 1A-2A and column 5 of Wagner et al., the fluid outlet of the axial passage is communicated with the fluid passage – see figures 1A-2A of Wagner et al., and the oral cleaner outputs water flow through the outflow opening for irrigation – see figures 1A-2A and column 5 of Wagner et al. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to take the device of Tang et al. as modified by Wagner et al. and add the fluid pumping unit with fluid passage of Wagner et al., so as to yield the predictable result of allowing a cleaning/treating fluid to be dispensed by the device without adding an additional fluid passage to the device to make the device easier to assemble, while not making the device larger to accommodate an additional fluid passage, so as to improve the oral care and health of the user as desired. Tang et al. as modified by Wagner et al. does not disclose the liquid storage chamber is within the grip housing. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to take the device of Tang et al. as modified by Wagner et al. and add the liquid storage chamber within the grip housing as claimed, so as to yield the predictable result of allowing for the device to be more mobile to be used in more locations as desired. Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) analysis with respect to the fluid pumping unit, item 86 of the ‘468 pump is a fluid pump consistent with applicant’s originally filed disclosure.
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claims 6-10 and 12-15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The following patents are cited to further show the state of the art with respect to powered toothbrushes in general:
U.S. Pat. No. 9,144,476 to Iwahori et al. – shows powered toothbrush
U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0374019 to Lin – shows powered toothbrush
U.S. Pub. No. 2024/0057754 to Rengel e al. – shows powered toothbrush
U.S. Pub. No. 2024/0366351 to Ye – shows powered toothbrush
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J PARSLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-6890. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-4pm 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, Peter Poon can be reached at (571) 272-6891. 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.
/DAVID J PARSLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643
Prosecution Insights