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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show
every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the plurality of stabilizing bars set forth in claim 2 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
It should be noted that the stabilizing bar 133 is a single bar extending from the first razor blade head receiving member to the second razor blade head receiving member. See Fig.1 of the drawings. Therefore, a plurality of stabilizing bars has not shown in the drawings.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
3. Claims 1-2 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.
Regarding claim 1, the specification does not explicitly disclose how the plurality of first blade head attachment members 114 are configured to removably attach to the plurality of first razor blade head receiving members 131. The specification also does not explicitly disclose how the plurality of second blade head attachment members 124 are configured to removably attach to the plurality of second razor blade head receiving members 133. The disclosure does not identify the mechanism by which the receiving members and the attachment members are removably attached to one another. In fact, it is unclear how the attachment members and the receiving members are connected to one another.
4. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Regarding claim 2, it is unclear whether claim 2 is intended to be an independent claim or to depend on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
5. 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.
6. Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmidt (9,931,754 B1). Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Schmidt teaches a double-headed razor blade assembly 10, comprising: a handle (34a, 34b, which extend through the main body and its protrusion curve is considered to be a top portion of the handle; Fig. 2), a blade head attachment portion 12 connected to a top portion of the handle, the blade head attachment portion comprising: a plurality of first razor blade head receiving members (14a, 14b), and a plurality of second razor blade head receiving members (14c, 14d); a first razor blade head 18, comprising: a first razor blade head main body 22, a plurality of first razor blades 20 disposed within the first razor blade head main body, and a plurality of first razor blade head attachment members (24, 30, 31) configured to removably attach to the plurality of first razor blade head receiving members (14a, 14b); and a second razor blade head 18, comprising: a second razor blade head main body 22, a plurality of razor blades 20 disposed within the second razor blade head main body 22, and a plurality of second razor blade head attachment members (24, 30, 31) configured to removably attach to the plurality of second razor blade head receiving members (14c, 14d).
Regarding claim 2, as best understood, Schmidt teaches everything noted above including that the blade head attachment portion 12 further comprises: a plurality of stabilizing bars (defined by the cross bars between the legs 14a, 14c and legs 14b, 14d; Fig. 2) to connect the plurality of first razor blade head receiving members to (14a, 14b) the plurality of second razor blade head receiving members (14c, 14d).
7. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sceberras (4,501,066). Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Sceberras teaches a double-headed razor blade assembly 10, comprising: a handle 12, a blade head attachment portion 13 connected to a top portion of the handle 12, the blade head attachment portion comprising: a plurality of first razor blade head receiving members (14, 15), and a plurality of second razor blade head receiving members (14, 15); a first razor blade head 20, comprising: a first razor blade head main body (Fig. 2), a plurality of first razor blades (23, 24) disposed within the first razor blade head main body, and a plurality of first razor blade head attachment members 21 configured to removably attach to the plurality of first razor blade head receiving members (14, 15); and a second razor blade head 20, comprising: a second razor blade head main body (Fig. 2), a plurality of razor blades (23, 24) disposed within the second razor blade head main body, and a plurality of second razor blade head attachment members 21 configured to removably attach to the plurality of second razor blade head receiving members (14, 15). See Figs.1-3 in Sceberras.
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant’s disclosure.
Andrews (6,141,875), Sokoloff (4,989,328), Contaldi (2016/0288350 A1), Andrews (5,522,137) and Jacobson (4,492,025) teach a razor blade assembly.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GHASSEM ALIE whose telephone number is (571) 272-4501. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 am-5:00 pm 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, Boyer Ashley can be reached on (571) . 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.
/GHASSEM ALIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724 September 30, 2026
