Notice of 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 .
Acknowledgement of Amendment
Acknowledgement is here made of applicant's amendments of December 3, 2025, wherein applicant submitted remarks. However, the indication of finality set forth in the previous action is withdrawn and prosecution is reopened in view of the following new ground of rejection. After further examination, the merits of the claim have been carefully considered in light of the applicant’s remarks, and therefore the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
NON-FINAL ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Non-Patent Document U, “Amazon: KUZOR Stainless Steel Bathroom Faucet” (hereby referred to as “KUZOR”). Although the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 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 designer having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains, the invention is not patentable.
PNG
media_image1.png
871
630
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
870
632
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The applicant has claimed the design embodied in less than the entire article. The practice of claiming a design embodied in less than the entire article was confirmed in the decision of In re Zahn, 204 USPQ 988 (CCPA 1980). This practice also opens to the examiner the liberty of relying upon the features of a reference embodied in less than the entire article. The examiner has done so in the following rejection.
The KUZOR reference shows design characteristics which are visually similar to the claimed design in that:
The KUZOR reference consists of a single handle faucet, same as the claimed design;
The KUZOR reference handle is shorter than the spout length, same as the claimed design;
The KUZOR reference shows the back of the handle angling upward, same as the claimed design;
The KUZOR reference shows a squared spout structure, same as the claimed design;
The KUZOR reference shows rounded edges on the faucet, same as the claimed design;
The KUZOR reference shows a squared faucet body, same as the claimed design; and
The KUZOR reference shows flat structure to the surfaces of the faucet, same as the claimed design.
The KUZOR reference is different from the claimed design in that:
The KUZOR reference has slightly rounded corners, unlike the more rounded edges of the claimed design.
The KUZOR reference has a slightly longer handle, unlike the shorter handle of the claimed design.
PNG
media_image3.png
750
537
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
871
757
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a designer of ordinary skill not later than the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to have modified the KUZOR reference by shortening the handle and rounding the edges of the faucet. Moreover, such modification of one known design element for another known design element in the same field would have been within the skill of an ordinarily skilled designer.
“Presence of invention is as essential to granting of design patent as to granting of mechanical patent; obvious changes in arrangement and proportioning are no more patentable in one case than in the other.” In re Stevens 624 O.G. 366; 81 USPQ 362. (1949).
“Rounding corners is obvious expedient in designs.” In re Peet 101 USPQ 203 (1954).
It is well settled that it is unobviousness in the overall appearance of the claimed design, when compared with the prior art, rather than minute details or small variations in design as appears to be the case here, that constitutes the test of design patentability. See In re Frick, 275 F.2d 741, 125 USPQ 191 (CCPA 1960) and In re Lamb, 286 F.2d 610, 128 USPQ 539 (CCPA 1961).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The claim is further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Non-Patent Document V, “Amazon: AVSIILE Bathroom Faucet” (hereby referred to as “AVSIILE”). Although the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 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 designer having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains, the invention is not patentable.
PNG
media_image1.png
871
630
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
873
824
media_image5.png
Greyscale
The applicant has claimed the design embodied in less than the entire article. The practice of claiming a design embodied in less than the entire article was confirmed in the decision of In re Zahn, 204 USPQ 988 (CCPA 1980). This practice also opens to the examiner the liberty of relying upon the features of a reference embodied in less than the entire article. The examiner has done so in the following rejection.
The AVSIILE reference shows design characteristics which are visually similar to the claimed design in that:
The AVSIILE reference consists of a single handle faucet, same as the claimed design;
The AVSIILE reference handle is shorter than the spout length, same as the claimed design;
The AVSIILE reference shows the back of the handle angling upward, same as the claimed design;
The AVSIILE reference shows a squared spout structure, same as the claimed design;
The AVSIILE reference shows rounded edges on the faucet, same as the claimed design;
The AVSIILE reference shows a squared faucet body, same as the claimed design; and
The AVSIILE reference shows flat structure to the surfaces of the faucet, same as the claimed design.
PNG
media_image3.png
750
537
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
661
544
media_image6.png
Greyscale
The AVSIILE reference is different from the claimed design in that:
The AVSIILE reference has slightly rounded corners, unlike the more rounded edges of the claimed design.
The AVSIILE reference has a slightly longer handle, unlike the shorter handle of the claimed design.
It would have been obvious to a designer of ordinary skill not later than the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to have modified the KUZOR reference by shortening the handle and rounding the edges of the faucet. Moreover, such modification of one known design element for another known design element in the same field would have been within the skill of an ordinarily skilled designer.
“Presence of invention is as essential to granting of design patent as to granting of mechanical patent; obvious changes in arrangement and proportioning are no more patentable in one case than in the other.” In re Stevens 624 O.G. 366; 81 USPQ 362. (1949).
“Rounding corners is obvious expedient in designs.” In re Peet 101 USPQ 203 (1954).
It is well settled that it is unobviousness in the overall appearance of the claimed design, when compared with the prior art, rather than minute details or small variations in design as appears to be the case here, that constitutes the test of design patentability. See In re Frick, 275 F.2d 741, 125 USPQ 191 (CCPA 1960) and In re Lamb, 286 F.2d 610, 128 USPQ 539 (CCPA 1961).
Conclusion
The claim stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMANTHA N WOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-6457. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 - 5pm.
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, Brandon Rosati can be reached at 571-270-3536. 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.
/SAMANTHA WOOD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2915
Prosecution Insights