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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/04/2025 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 7, “a bulbous recess and configured to” should be amended as follows: “a bulbous recess and is configured to”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 9-11, 13-15, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al. (KR2020090006899U; refer to the Human Translation mailed with the Advisory Action on 04/20/2023) in view of Ramet et al. (US2015/0020836), Jenner (US2007/0017049) and Yeo et al. (US2013/0284197).
Regarding claim 1, Song discloses a cosmetic tool (Figure 3b) comprising:
a brush head (25, Figure 3b) connected to a first end (right end) of a handle (10) via a ferrule (not labeled, refer to annotated Figure 3b, below);
an aperture (“insertion section”, refer to Page 13 of the translation) disposed on a second end (left end, Figure 3b) of the handle, wherein the first end of the handle is distal from the second end of the handle (best shown in Figure 3b, wherein the aperture and the brush head are disposed on opposing ends of the handle);
a joint (29) configured to fit into the aperture (“one side of the vertical shaft 29 be inserted into the insertion section (not illustrated) of the handle”, refer to Page 13, Paragraph <35> of the translation), wherein the joint comprises a cylindrical post (not labeled, refer to annotated Figure 3b, below) with a bulbous protrusion (not labeled, refer to annotated Figure 3b, below) disposed about the cylindrical post (refer to annotated Figure 3b, below), wherein the aperture is configured to receive the cylindrical post with the bulbous protrusion by engagement (refer to Page 13, Paragraph <35> of the translation); and
a rolling applicator (27) connected to the joint (best shown in Figure 3b), wherein the rolling applicator has a teardrop shape (refer to Figure 3b, wherein the applicator has an end opposite the cylindrical post that is rounded, and the applicator then narrows at a portion adjacent the cylindrical post, thereby defining a teardrop shape), wherein the rolling applicator rotates about a fixed axis of rotation relative to the handle (refer to Figure 3b which shows the rotation arrow; additionally “Here, the above roller (27) is located on the line extending from the handle (10) in the longitudinal direction and the vertical roller (27) is organized to rotate with the vertical shaft (29)”, refer to Page 13, Paragraph <35> of the translation), wherein the fixed axis of rotation of the rolling applicator is coincident with a longitudinal axis along a length of the handle (best shown in Figure 3b; additionally refer to Page 13, Paragraph <35> of the translation which states “Here, the above roller (27) is located on the line extending from the handle (10) in the longitudinal direction”); and
wherein the cosmetic tool has the rolling applicator placed on an opposite end of the brush head (best shown in Figure 3b).
PNG
media_image1.png
831
1219
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Song does not disclose in the embodiment of Figure 3b wherein the aperture has a cylindrical shape; however, Song’s embodiment of Figure 3a discloses a cylindrical aperture (19). Since the shape of the joint (28) of the embodiment of Figure 3a is similarly shaped to that of the joint (29) of the rolling applicator of the embodiment of Figure 3b, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Song’s cosmetic tool of Figure 3b to have the same shaped aperture as that of Figure 3a, since such a modification would have involved combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable results of securing a cosmetic applicator to a handle of a cosmetic tool.
Modified Song does not disclose wherein the aperture comprises a bulbous recess and is configured to retain the joint by engagement with the bulbous protrusion; wherein the rolling applicator comprises material having a cooling property to provide a cooling effect when used; wherein the bulbous protrusion is disposed on the cylindrical post closer to the rolling applicator than to an end of the cylindrical post that is inserted into the aperture to secure the joint within the handle; or that the device has a substantially equal distribution of weight across the handle so that the cosmetic tool has a substantially similar weight ratio between the first and second ends, thereby based on the evenly distributed weight of the first and second ends, the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics.
Ramet discloses a similar cosmetic tool (7, Figures 1-18) comprising a rolling applicator (20) disposed about one end (bottom end, best shown in Figures 2-18) of a handle (6+9), where the rolling applicator is formed of metals such as “aluminum, titanium, steel, stainless steel, nickel, tin, copper, brass, [and] alloys thereof”, (refer to Paragraph [0048]) in order to provide a “sensation of freshness, which improves the well-being and relaxation of the person, while increasing the effectiveness of the product applied”, (refer to Paragraph [0050]), and in order to “transfer a cool sensation to the user’s skin” (refer to Paragraph [0022]). Ramet’s rolling applicator has a joint with a bulbous protrusion (10), that is used for connecting the rolling applicator into an aperture (11) of the handle, where the aperture is cylindrical and has a corresponding bulbous recess (“corresponding shape”, refer to Paragraph [0117]; additionally refer to Figures 2-5, and 8-9) such that the bulbous recess receives the bulbous protrusion to retain the joint by engagement (refer to Figures 2-5 and 8-9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Song’s cosmetic tool such that the aperture comprises a bulbous recess, as taught by Ramet, since such a modification would have involved a change in shape of the aperture and a change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill; additionally such a modification provides the advantage of ensuring proper seating of the joint in the aperture.
It additionally would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Song’s cosmetic tool such that the rolling applicator is formed of metals such as copper and stainless steel, which are materials that have a cooling property and provide a cooling effect when used, as taught by Ramet, since such a modification provides the advantage of providing a sensation of freshness, which improves the well-being and relaxation of the person, while increasing the effectiveness of the product applied and also transfers a cool sensation to the user’s skin.
The combination of Song and Ramet does not disclose wherein the bulbous protrusion is disposed on the cylindrical post closer to the rolling applicator than to an end of the cylindrical post that is inserted into the aperture to secure the joint within the handle or that the device has a substantially equal distribution of weight across the handle so that the cosmetic tool has a substantially similar weight ratio between the first and second ends, thereby based on the evenly distributed weight of the first and second ends, the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics.
Jenner discloses a similar cosmetic tool (1, Figures 1-4) comprising a handle (4) and an applicator head (2) having a joint (3) configured to fit into an aperture (not labeled, refer to Figure 4, wherein the handle is depicted as having a hollow interior; this hollow interior defines an aperture) disposed in one end of the handle (left end with respect to Figure 1), such that the applicator head is retained within the aperture (“simple and sufficiently strong connection”, refer to Paragraph [0004]), wherein the joint comprises a post (refer to Figures 1-3 wherein 3 is depicted as a pole or stake, i.e. a post) with a bulbous protrusion (6, 10, where the bulbous protrusion may “fully extend along the periphery in the circumferential direction”, refer to Paragraph [0008]) disposed about the post (best shown in Figure 3), and wherein the aperture comprises a cylindrical shape with a mating feature (best shown in Figures 2 and 4) to engage with the bulbous protrusion and to retain the joint therein (“simple and sufficiently strong connection”, refer to Paragraph [0004]). Jenner provides different configurations of bulbous protrusions including one configuration wherein the bulbous protrusions are disposed about a substantial entirety of the length of the cylindrical post (see Figures 1-3a) and other configurations wherein a bulbous protrusion is disposed in a single location (see Figure 3e, where the bulbous protrusion may “fully extend along the periphery in the circumferential direction”, refer to Paragraph [0008) on the post, wherein the single location on the post is positioned axially along the post, closer to the applicator than to an end of the post that is inserted into the aperture to secure the joint within the handle (refer to Figure 3e wherein the bulbous protrusion is depicted as being closer to a bottom end/applicator end than it is to a top end/end that is inserted into the aperture). Although the drawings may not be to scale, they can still be relied upon for teaching the general conditions of the claim because the overall relationship is depicted. Jenner demonstrates that the position of a bulbous protrusion may be modified as a matter of design choice to provide equivalent configurations wherein a post is retained within an aperture. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cosmetic tool of the combination of Song and Ramet such that the bulbous protrusion is disposed on the cylindrical post closer to the rolling applicator than to an end of the cylindrical post that is inserted into the aperture to secure the joint within the handle, as taught by Jenner, since such a modification would have involved combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of engaging an applicator head within an aperture of a handle of a cosmetic tool.
The combination of Song, Ramet, and Jenner does not disclose that the device has a substantially equal distribution of weight across the handle so that the cosmetic tool has a substantially similar weight ratio between the first and second ends, thereby based on the evenly distributed weight of the first and second ends, the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics.
Yeo discloses a similar cosmetic applicator (10, Figures 1A-4B) having a first end (left half, refer to Figures 1C-1D) and a second end (right half, refer to Figures 1C-1D) wherein the second end may be “weighted to counterbalance the weight” (refer to Paragraph [0061]) of the first end, where counterbalance is defined by Oxford Languages as “a weight that balances another weight”, i.e., the first and second ends of the applicator have a substantially similar weights, thereby providing the weight of the first end to constitute approximately 50% of the total weight of the tool and similarly, the second end constitutes approximately 50% of the total weight of the tool such that the weight ratio of the both the first and second ends are substantially equal. The limitation “thereby based on the evenly distributed weight of the first and second ends, the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics” is interpreted as a functional limitation; that is, the structural recitation of “the first and second ends of the applicator have a substantially similar weight ratio” is fully capable of, without modification, performing the function of providing control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics. Since Yeo discloses a substantially similar weight ratio between the first and second ends, then Yeo subsequently discloses that the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the cosmetic tool of the combination of Song, Ramet, and Jenner such that the second end counterbalances the first end, as taught by Yeo, where the second end of the combination of Song, Ramet, and Jenner is comprised of the rolling applicator, since such a modification provides the advantage of reducing a user’s fatigue by providing a balanced tool.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner and Yeo discloses the cosmetic tool of claim 1, as applied above. Song further discloses wherein the rolling applicator is disposed about the joint (best shown in Song Figure 3b).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner and Yeo discloses the cosmetic tool of claim 1, as applied above. Song further discloses wherein the rolling applicator comprises an ovular cross-section about a center of the rolling applicator providing varying angles for contact of the rolling applicator with a surface (referring to Song Figure 3b, in a cross-section about the longitudinal axis, the rolling applicator has an ovular shape, thereby permitting a user to vary the angle for contacting the applicator with a surface).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner and Yeo discloses the cosmetic tool of claim 1, as applied above. Per the modification addressed in claim 1, the material of the rolling applicator was modified such that at least an outer surface of the rolling applicator is comprised of an alloy comprising at least one of: Magnesium and Copper (refer to Ramet Paragraph [0048] which discloses that the rolling applicator is formed of copper, where if an applicator formed of copper, it’s outer surface is also formed of copper).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner and Yeo discloses the cosmetic tool of claim 1, as applied above. Per the modification addressed in claim 1, the material of the rolling applicator was modified such that wherein at least an outer surface of the rolling applicator is comprised of stainless steel (refer to Ramet Paragraph [0048] which states that the applicator is formed of stainless steel; if the applicator is formed of stainless steel, it’s outer surface is also formed of stainless steel).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner and Yeo discloses the cosmetic tool of claim 1, wherein the ferrule is integrated into the handle (Merriam-Webster defines integrated as “composed to form a compete and coordinated entity”; the ferrule, along with the brush is composed to form a complete and coordinated entity with the handle when it is attached thereto, as best illustrated in Song Figure 3b).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner and Yeo discloses the cosmetic tool of claim 1, as applied above. The combination does not disclose wherein the handle is tapered across a length of the handle. Yeo discloses that an end of the handle “may be tapered” (refer to Paragraph [0016]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the cosmetic tool of the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner and Yeo such that a length of the handle is tapered, as taught by Yeo, since such a modification would have involved a change in shape and a change in shape is generally recognized as being with the capabilities of one of ordinary skill; additionally such a modification may provide a more comfortable gripping means.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo discloses the cosmetic tool of claim 1, wherein the brush head is tapered (best shown in Song Figure 3b, wherein the distal/free end of the brush is pointed, and the proximal/mounted end is wider than the distal end thereby providing a tapered brush head).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo discloses the cosmetic tool of claim 1, wherein the teardrop-shaped rolling applicator comprises a rounded end (best shown in Song Figure 3b, wherein a distal/left-most end of the rolling applicator is depicted as being round).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo discloses the cosmetic tool of claim 1, wherein the brush head is detachably attached to the handle via the ferrule (refer to Song Page 6 which states “a cosmetic kit…any one applicator…is detachably located on…the…handle).
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo discloses the cosmetic tool of claim 1, wherein the substantially equal distribution of weight across the handle of the cosmetic tool provides a counterweight in order to control momentum of brush strokes (per the modification addressed in claim 1, the second end of the cosmetic tool was modified to be “weighted to counterbalance the weight” of the first end of the cosmetic tool, thereby providing a counterweight).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner and Yeo as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Green (US2013/0068242).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo disclose the cosmetic tool of claim 1, as applied above. The combination does not disclose wherein the second end of the handle comprises a flared end between the handle and the rolling applicator. Green discloses a similar cosmetic tool having a handle (40), the handle having first and second ends (top and bottom ends, refer to left image of Figure 10) and devices (41, 42) for treating a user’s eyelash disposed at each of the first and second ends, the devices being analogous to the rolling applicator and the brush of the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner and Yeo. Both the first and second ends are flared between the handle and the device for treating eyelashes (refer to annotated Green Figure 10, below), thereby providing a more ergonomic handle. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify the cosmetic tool of the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo such that the second end of the handle comprises a flared end between the handle and the rolling applicator, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, additionally, such a modification provides the advantage of increasing the ergonomics of the handle.
PNG
media_image2.png
213
632
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner and Yeo as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gueret (US2010/0269842).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo, discloses the cosmetic tool of claim 1, as applied above. The combination does not thus far disclose wherein at least an outer surface of the rolling applicator is comprised of Zamak.
Gueret discloses a similar applicator (5) having various shapes (refer to Figures 7-10) including an ovular/teardrop shape (refer to Figures 9H and 10), wherein the applicator is joined to a handle (4) having a first end (end opposite applicator, 5) and a second end (end proximate applicator, 5), the handle comprising an aperture disposed at the second end (333, Figure 31; refer to Paragraph [0194] which states that any of the applicators may be provided with any of the fastening means shown in the drawings) and the applicator comprising a joint (110), wherein the joint is configured to fit into the aperture (best shown in Figure 31; additionally refer to Paragraph [0134]). Gueret further discloses that the applicator may be made as a single part out of a number of metals including copper, brass, bronze (refer to Paragraph [0133]) and Zamak (refer to Paragraph [0018]). The combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo discloses the claimed invention except for wherein at least an outer surface of the rolling applicator is comprised of Zamak. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the applicator such that at least an outer surface of the rolling applicator is made of Zamak, as taught by Gueret, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Claims 4, 12, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo as applied to claims 1 and 3 above, and further in view of Grund et al. (US2016/0081456).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo discloses the cosmetic tool of claim 3, wherein the rolling applicator is connected to the second end of the handle via the joint disposed in the aperture (refer to Song Figure 3b). The combination does not disclose that the connection is made using at least one of: a snap fit, a friction fit, and an adhesive.
Grund discloses a similar cosmetic tool (Figures 1-26C) comprising a handle (2104) and applicators (2109, 2010 Figure 23) disposed at opposing ends of the handle, wherein the applicators may “form a snap fit connection with the…handle” (refer to Paragraph [0083]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cosmetic tool of the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo such that the rolling applicator is connected to the second end of the handle via the joint disposed in the aperture using a snap fit, as taught by Grund, since such a modification would have involved combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results of connecting an applicator and a handle.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo discloses the cosmetic tool of claim 1 as applied above. The combination does not disclose wherein the ferrule is angled relative to the handle such that the ferrule provides an orientation for the cosmetic tool. Grund discloses a similar cosmetic tool (Figures 1-26C) comprising a handle (2104) and applicators (2109, 2010 Figure 23) disposed at opposing ends of the handle, the applicators being joined to the handle via ferrules (2013), wherein the ferrule is angled (best shown in Figure 24A) relative to the handle such that the ferrule provides an orientation for the cosmetic tool (the limitation “the ferrule provides an orientation for the cosmetic tool” is a functional limitation, that is, the ferrule comprises the structure of an angle which may function as a means for a user to determine the orientation of the ferrule, i.e. as a user feels for the shape of the ferrule, the user can easily determine which side of the cosmetic tool is facing up or down, thereby providing an orientation for the cosmetic tool) and additionally provides means for applying a desired makeup effect to a user’s face in a repeatable angled design. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cosmetic tool of the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo such that the ferrule is angled relative to the handle, as taught by Grund, since such a modification provides the advantage of providing a desired makeup effect for a user in a repeatable angled design.
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo discloses the cosmetic tool of claim 1, as applied above. The combination does not disclose wherein the handle of the cosmetic tool has a narrower diameter at the second end proximate the rolling applicator compared to a diameter at the first end proximate the brush head; wherein the narrower diameter at the second end proximate the rolling applicator allows a user to utilize utilizes more angled surfaces of surface area of the rolling applicator without having the handle contact skin when in use.
Grund discloses a similar cosmetic tool (1310, Figure 19) comprising a brush type applicator (1312b) on a first end (left end) of a handle (1314) and a rolling type applicator (1312a) disposed on an opposing end (right end) wherein the handle of the cosmetic tool has a narrower diameter at the second end proximate the rolling applicator compared to a diameter at the first end proximate the brush head (best shown in Figure 19), thereby providing a haptic/sense of touch means for a user to recognize which side of the brush is in position for use. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cosmetic tool of the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo such that the handle of the cosmetic tool has a narrower diameter at the second end proximate the rolling applicator compared to a diameter at the first end proximate the brush head, as taught by Grund, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art; additionally, such a modification provides a means for a user to recognize which side of the tool is ready for use, by sense of touch.
The limitation “allows a user to utilize utilizes more angled surfaces of surface area of the rolling applicator without having the handle contact skin when in use” is interpreted as a functional/intended use limitation; that is, the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, Yeo and Grund discloses the cosmetic tool of claim 1 wherein the handle of the cosmetic tool has a narrower diameter at the second end proximate the rolling applicator compared to a diameter at the first end proximate the brush head, where this claimed structure is fully capable of, without modification, performing the function as claimed.
Claims 16-17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al. (KR2009006899; refer to the Human Translation mailed with the Advisory Action on 04/20/2023) in view of in view of Ramet et al. (US2015/0020836), Jenner (US2007/0017049), Makeup.com (https://www.makeup.com/en-ca/product-and-reviews/all-products-and-reviews/wear-sunscreen-under-foundation) and Yeo (US2013/0284197).
Regarding claim 16, Song discloses a method comprising:
providing a cosmetic tool (Figure 3b) having a brush head (25) proximate a first end (right end) of a handle (10) and a rolling applicator (27) proximate a second end (left end) of the handle, wherein the first end of the handle is distal from the second end of the handle (best shown in Figure 3b); and
rotating the rolling applicator relative to the handle about a fixed axis of rotation relative to the handle (“the…roller…is organized to rotate with the vertical shaft”, refer to Page 13, Paragraph <35> of the translation), wherein the fixed axis of rotation of the rolling applicator is coincident with a longitudinal axis along a length of the handle (refer to 3b which shows rotation arrows for the roller, the roller rotating about an axis that extends in a longitudinal direction about a center of the device, i.e. coincident with the longitudinal axis along a length of the handle; additionally refer to Page 13, Paragraph <35> of the translation which states “Here, the above roller (27) is located on the line extending from the handle (10) in the longitudinal direction and the vertical roller (27) is organized to rotate with the vertical shaft (29) be inserted into the insertion section”), wherein the rolling applicator has a teardrop shape (refer to Figure 3b, wherein the applicator has an end opposite the cylindrical post that is rounded, and the applicator then narrows at a portion adjacent the cylindrical post, thereby defining a teardrop shape), wherein the rolling applicator is disposed about a joint (29, refer to Figure 3b), wherein the joint comprises a cylindrical post (not labeled, refer to annotated Figure 3b, below) with a bulbous protrusion (not labeled, refer to annotated Figure 3b, below) disposed about the cylindrical post (refer to Figure 3b);
utilizing the brush head across the skin area of the user (“a brush used for makeup”, refer to Page 13, Paragraph <35> and “a brush may be provided to enable the contents to be evenly spread after a liquid cosmetic product is applied to the face”, refer to Page 6, Paragraph <6>), wherein the brush head is used for applying cosmetics (“a brush used for makeup”, refer to Page 13, Paragraph <35>); and
wherein the cosmetic tool has the rolling applicator placed on an opposite end of the brush head (refer to Figure 3b).
PNG
media_image1.png
831
1219
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Song does not disclose in the embodiment of Figure 3b wherein the aperture has a cylindrical shape; however, Song’s embodiment of Figure 3a discloses a cylindrical aperture (19). Since the shape of the joint (28) of the embodiment of Figure 3a is similarly shaped to that of the joint (29) of the rolling applicator of the embodiment of Figure 3b, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Song’s cosmetic tool of Figure 3b to have the same shaped aperture as that of Figure 3a, since such a modification would have involved combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable results of securing a cosmetic applicator to a handle of a cosmetic tool.
Modified Song does not disclose wherein the rolling applicator comprises material having a cooling property to provide a cooling effect when used, or wherein the aperture comprises a bulbous recess, wherein the bulbous recess is disposed on the cylindrical post closer to the rolling applicator than to an end of the cylindrical post that is inserted into an aperture to secure the joint within the handle; rolling the rolling applicator across an area of skin by a user prior to applying makeup, or that the rolling applicator is placed to provide a substantially equal distribution of weight across the handle so that the cosmetic tool has a substantially similar weight ratio between the first and second two ends, thereby based on the evenly distributed weight of the first and second ends, the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics.
Ramet discloses a similar cosmetic tool (7, Figures 1-18) comprising a rolling applicator (20) disposed about one end (bottom end, best shown in Figures 2-18) of a handle (6+9), where the rolling applicator is formed of metals such as “aluminum, titanium, steel, stainless steel, nickel, tin, copper, brass, [and] alloys thereof”, (refer to Paragraph [0048]) in order to provide a “sensation of freshness, which improves the well-being and relaxation of the person, while increasing the effectiveness of the product applied”, (refer to Paragraph [0050]), and in order to “transfer a cool sensation to the user’s skin” (refer to Paragraph [0022]). Ramet’s rolling applicator has a joint with a bulbous portion (10), that is used for securing/connecting the rolling applicator into an aperture (11) of the handle, where the aperture has a cylindrical shape with a corresponding bulbous recess (“corresponding shape”, refer to Paragraph [0117]; additionally refer to Figures 2-5, and 8-9) such that the bulbous recess receives the bulbous protrusion to retain the joint by engagement (refer to Figures 2-5 and 8-9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Song’s cosmetic tool such that the aperture includes a bulbous recess, as taught by Ramet, since such a modification would have involved a change in shape of the aperture and a change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill; additionally such a modification provides the advantage of ensuring proper seating of the joint in the aperture.
It additionally would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Song’s cosmetic tool such that the rolling applicator is formed of metal, which is a material that has a cooling property and provides a cooling effect when used, as taught by Ramet, since such a modification provides the advantage of providing a sensation of freshness, which improves the well-being and relaxation of the person, while increasing the effectiveness of the product applied and also transfers a cool sensation to the user’s skin.
The combination of Song and Ramet does not disclose rolling the rolling applicator across an area of skin by a user prior to applying makeup; however, the combination does disclose that the rolling applicator is used for sun cream/sunscreen (Song discloses that the roller type applicator may be used to apply sun cream, refer to Page 9 of the Song translation). The combination also does not disclose wherein the bulbous protrusion is disposed on the cylindrical post closer to the rolling applicator than to an end of the cylindrical post that is inserted into an aperture.
Makeup.com discloses “For maximum protection, sunscreen should be applied directly onto skin, underneath any makeup” (refer to section titled “How Do I Reapply Throughout the Day?”). Therefore it would have been obvious to roll the rolling applicator across an area of skin by a user, to apply a sunscreen, prior to applying makeup, since Makeup.com teaches that applying sunscreen before makeup provides the advantage of maximum protection.
The combination of Song, Ramet, and Makeup.com does not disclose wherein the bulbous protrusion is disposed on the cylindrical post closer to the rolling applicator than to an end of the cylindrical post that is inserted into an aperture or that the device has a substantially equal distribution of weight across the handle so that the cosmetic tool has a substantially similar weight ratio between the first and second ends, thereby based on the evenly distributed weight of the first and second ends, the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics.
Jenner discloses a similar cosmetic tool (1, Figures 1-4) comprising a handle (4) and an applicator head (2) having a joint (3) configured to fit into an aperture (not labeled, refer to Figure 4, wherein the handle is depicted as having a hollow interior; this hollow interior defines an aperture) disposed in one end of the handle (left end with respect to Figure 1), such that the applicator head is retained within the aperture (“simple and sufficiently strong connection”, refer to Paragraph [0004]), wherein the joint comprises a post (refer to Figures 1-3 wherein 3 is depicted as a pole or stake, i.e. a post) with a bulbous protrusion (6, 10, where the bulbous protrusion may “fully extend along the periphery in the circumferential direction”, refer to Paragraph [0008]) disposed about the post (best shown in Figure 3), and wherein the aperture comprises a cylindrical shape with a mating feature (best shown in Figures 2 and 4) to engage with the bulbous protrusion and to retain the joint therein (“simple and sufficiently strong connection”, refer to Paragraph [0004]). Jenner provides different configurations of bulbous protrusions including one configuration wherein the bulbous protrusions are disposed about a substantial entirety of the length of the cylindrical post (see Figures 1-3a) and other configurations wherein a bulbous protrusion is disposed in a single location (see Figure 3e, where the bulbous protrusion may “fully extend along the periphery in the circumferential direction”, refer to Paragraph [0008) on the post, wherein the single location on the post is positioned axially along the post, closer to the applicator than to an end of the post that is inserted into the aperture to secure the joint within the handle (refer to Figure 3e wherein the bulbous protrusion is depicted as being closer to a bottom end/applicator end than it is to a top end/end that is inserted into the aperture). Although the drawings may not be to scale, they can still be relied upon for teaching the general conditions of the claim because the overall relationship is depicted. Jenner demonstrates that the position of a bulbous protrusion may be modified as a matter of design choice to provide equivalent configurations wherein a post is retained within an aperture. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cosmetic tool of the combination of Song, Ramet, and Makeup.com such that the bulbous protrusion is disposed on the cylindrical post closer to the rolling applicator than to an end of the cylindrical post that is inserted into the aperture to secure the joint within the handle, as taught by Jenner, since such a modification would have involved combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of engaging an applicator head within an aperture of a handle of a cosmetic tool.
The combination of Song, Ramet, Makeup.com, and Jenner does not disclose that the device has a substantially equal distribution of weight across the handle so that the cosmetic tool has a substantially similar weight ratio between the first and second ends, thereby based on the evenly distributed weight of the first and second ends, the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics.
Yeo discloses a similar cosmetic applicator (10, Figures 1A-4B) having a first end (left half, refer to Figures 1C-1D) and a second end (right half, refer to Figures 1C-1D) wherein the second end may be “weighted to counterbalance the weight” (refer to Paragraph [0061]) of the first end, where counterbalance is defined by Oxford Languages as “a weight that balances another weight”, i.e., the first and second ends of the applicator have a substantially similar weights, thereby providing the weight of the first end to constitute approximately 50% of the total weight of the tool and similarly, the second end constitutes approximately 50% of the total weight of the tool such that the weight ratio of the both the first and second ends are substantially equal. The limitation “thereby based on the evenly distributed weight of the first and second ends, the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics” is interpreted as a functional limitation; that is, the structural recitation of “the first and second ends of the applicator have a substantially similar weight ratio” is fully capable of, without modification, performing the function of providing control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics. Since Yeo discloses a substantially similar weight ratio between the first and second ends, then Yeo subsequently discloses that the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the cosmetic tool of the combination of Song, Ramet, Makeup.com, and Jenner such that the second end counterbalances the first end, as taught by Yeo, where the second end of the combination of Song, Ramet, Makeup.com, and Jenner is comprised of the rolling applicator, since such a modification provides the advantage of reducing a user’s fatigue by providing a balanced tool.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Song, Ramet, Makeup.com, Jenner and Yeo discloses the method of claim 16 further comprising: providing a cooling sensation on the skin area of the user via a material on an outer surface of the rolling applicator, wherein the cooling sensation causes outer layers of skin in an area of application to contract (“transfer a cool sensation to the user’s skin” (refer to Ramet Paragraph [0022]; where providing a cooling sensation/cold massage to skin causes a temporary tightening/contraction of the skin).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Song, Ramet, Makeup.com, Jenner, and Yeo discloses the method of claim 17, wherein the rolling applicator comprises an ovular cross-section about a center of the rolling applicator providing varying angles for contact of the rolling applicator with the skin area of the user (referring to Song Figure 3b, in a cross-section about the longitudinal axis, the rolling applicator has an ovular shape, thereby permitting a user to vary the angle for contacting the applicator with a surface).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al. (KR20090006899U; refer to the Human Translation mailed with the Advisory Action on 04/20/2023) in view of in view of Ramet et al. (US2015/0020836), Jenner (US2007/0017049), Yeo et al. (US2013/0284197) and Grund et al. (US2016/0081456).
Regarding claim 20, Song discloses a system (Figure 3b) comprising:
a brush head (25, Figure 3b) connected to a first end (right end) of a handle (10) via a ferrule (not labeled, refer to annotated Figure 3b, below);
a rolling applicator (27) connected to a second end (left end) of the handle, wherein the rolling applicator has a teardrop shape (refer to Figure 3b, wherein the applicator has an end opposite the cylindrical post that is rounded, and the applicator then narrows at a portion adjacent the cylindrical post, thereby defining a teardrop shape), wherein the first end of the handle is distal from the second end of the handle (refer to Figure 3b wherein the first and second ends are disposed on opposite ends of the handle), wherein the rolling applicator rotates relative to the handle (refer to Figure 3b which shows the rotation arrow; additionally “Here, the above roller (27) is located on the line extending from the handle (10) in the longitudinal direction and the vertical roller (27) is organized to rotate with the vertical shaft (29) be inserted into the insertion section”, refer to Page 13, Paragraph <35> of the translation), wherein the rolling applicator rotates on a fixed axis (refer to Figure 3b which shows the rotation arrow; additionally “Here, the above vertical roller (27) is located on the line extending from the handle (10) in the longitudinal direction and the vertical roller (27) is organized to rotate with the vertical shaft (29) be inserted into the insertion section”, refer to Page 13, Paragraph <35> of the translation), and wherein the rolling applicator comprises an ovular cross-section about a center of the rolling applicator providing varying angles for contact of the rolling applicator with the skin area of the user (referring to Song Figure 3b, in a cross-section about the longitudinal axis, the rolling applicator has an ovular shape, thereby permitting a user to vary the angle for contacting the applicator with a surface);
a joint (29), wherein the rolling applicator is disposed about the joint (best shown in Figure 3b), wherein the joint comprises a cylindrical post (not labeled, refer to annotated Figure 3b, below) with a bulbous protrusion (not labeled, refer to annotated Figure 3b, below) disposed about the cylindrical post (refer to Figure 3b);
an aperture (“insertion section”, refer to Page 13, Paragraph <35> of the translation) disposed in the handle,
wherein the system has the rolling applicator placed on an opposite end of the brush head (best shown in Figure 3b).
PNG
media_image1.png
831
1219
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Song does not disclose in the embodiment of Figure 3b wherein the aperture has a cylindrical shape; however, Song’s embodiment of Figure 3a discloses a cylindrical aperture (19). Since the shape of the joint (28) of the embodiment of Figure 3a is similarly shaped to that of the joint (29) of the rolling applicator of the embodiment of Figure 3b, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Song’s cosmetic tool of Figure 3b to have the same shaped aperture as that of Figure 3a, since such a modification would have involved combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable results of securing a cosmetic applicator to a handle of a cosmetic tool.
Modified Song does not disclose wherein the aperture comprises a bulbous recess; or that the bulbous protrusion is disposed about the cylindrical post closer to the rolling applicator than to an end of the cylindrical post that is inserted into the aperture to secure the joint within the handle; or wherein the rolling applicator comprises material having a cooling property to provide a cooling effect when used; or that the device has a substantially equal distribution of weight across the handle so that the system has a substantially similar weight ratio between the first and second ends, thereby based on the evenly distributed weight of the first and second ends, the system provides control to keep the system steady during application of cosmetics or wherein the handle is tapered across a length of the handle or wherein the joint is disposed in the aperture via at least one of: a snap fit, a friction fit, and an adhesive.
Ramet discloses a similar system (7, Figures 1-18) comprising a rolling applicator (20) disposed about one end (bottom end, best shown in Figures 2-18) of a handle (6+9), where the rolling applicator is formed of metals such as “aluminum, titanium, steel, stainless steel, nickel, tin, copper, brass, [and] alloys thereof”, (refer to Paragraph [0048]) in order to provide a “sensation of freshness, which improves the well-being and relaxation of the person, while increasing the effectiveness of the product applied”, (refer to Paragraph [0050]), and in order to “transfer a cool sensation to the user’s skin” (refer to Paragraph [0022]). Ramet’s rolling applicator has a joint with a bulbous portion (10), that is used for connecting the rolling applicator into an aperture (11) of the handle, where the aperture has a cylindrical shape with a corresponding bulbous recess (“corresponding shape”, refer to Paragraph [0117]; additionally refer to Figures 2-5, and 8-9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Song’s system such that the aperture comprises a bulbous recess, as taught by Ramet, since such a modification would have involved a change in shape of the aperture and a change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill; additionally such a modification provides the advantage of ensuring proper seating of the joint in the aperture.
It additionally would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Song’s cosmetic tool such that the rolling applicator is formed of metal, which is a material that has a cooling property and provides a cooling effect when used, as taught by Ramet, since such a modification provides the advantage of providing a sensation of freshness, which improves the well-being and relaxation of the person, while increasing the effectiveness of the product applied and also transfers a cool sensation to the user’s skin.
The combination of Song and Ramet does not disclose that the bulbous protrusion is closer to the rolling applicator than to an end of the cylindrical post that is inserted into the aperture to secure the joint within the handle or that the system has a substantially equal distribution of weight across the handle so that the cosmetic tool has a substantially similar weight ratio between the first and second ends, thereby based on the evenly distributed weight of the first and second ends, the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics, that the handle is tapered across a length of the handle, or that the joint is disposed in the aperture via at least one of: a snap fit, a friction fit, and an adhesive.
Jenner discloses a similar cosmetic tool (1, Figures 1-4) comprising a handle (4) and an applicator head (2) having a joint (3) configured to fit into an aperture (not labeled, refer to Figure 4, wherein the handle is depicted as being hollow; this hollow interior defines an aperture) disposed in one end of the handle (left end with respect to Figure 1), such that the applicator head is retained within the aperture (“simple and sufficiently strong connection”, refer to Paragraph [0004]), wherein the joint comprises a post (refer to Figures 1-3 wherein 3 is depicted as a pole or stake, i.e. a post) with a bulbous protrusion (6, 10, where the bulbous protrusion may “fully extend along the periphery in the circumferential direction”, refer to Paragraph [0008]) disposed about the post (best shown in Figure 3), and wherein the aperture comprises a cylindrical shape with a mating feature (best shown in Figures 2 and 4) and retains the joint by engagement with the bulbous protrusion (“simple and sufficiently strong connection”, refer to Paragraph [0004]). Jenner provides different configurations of bulbous protrusions including one configuration wherein bulbous protrusions are disposed about a substantial entirety of the length of the cylindrical post (see Figures 1-3a) and other configurations wherein a bulbous protrusion is disposed in a single location (see Figure 3e) on the post, wherein the single location on the post is positioned axially along the post, closer to the applicator than to an end of the post that is inserted into the aperture to secure the joint within the handle (refer to Figure 3e). Although the figures may not be to scale, they can still be relied upon since the general configuration is depicted. Jenner demonstrates that the position of bulbous protrusion may be modified as a matter of design choice to provide equivalent configurations wherein a post is retained within an aperture. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cosmetic tool of the combination of Song and Ramet such that the bulbous protrusion is disposed on the cylindrical post closer to the rolling applicator than to an end of the cylindrical post that is inserted into the aperture to secure the joint within the handle, as taught by Jenner, since such a modification would have involved combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of engaging an applicator head within an aperture of a handle of a cosmetic tool.
The combination of Song, Ramet, and Jenner does not disclose the system has a substantially equal distribution of weight across the handle so that the cosmetic tool has a substantially similar weight ratio between the first and second ends, thereby based on the evenly distributed weight of the first and second ends, the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics; wherein the handle is tapered across a length of the handle; or wherein the joint is disposed in the aperture via at least one of: a snap fit, a friction fit, and an adhesive.
Yeo discloses a similar system (10, Figures 1A-4B) having a first end (left half, refer to Figures 1C-1D) and a second end (right half, refer to Figures 1C-1D) wherein the second end may be “weighted to counterbalance the weight” (refer to Paragraph [0061]) of the first end, where counterbalance is defined by Oxford Languages as “a weight that balances another weight”, i.e., the first and second ends of the applicator have a substantially similar weights, thereby providing the weight of the first end to constitute approximately 50% of the total weight of the tool and similarly, the second end constitutes approximately 50% of the total weight of the tool such that the weight ratio of the both the first and second ends are substantially equal. The limitation “thereby based on the evenly distributed weight of the first and second ends, the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics” is interpreted as a functional limitation; that is, the structural recitation of “the first and second ends of the applicator have a substantially similar weight ratio” is fully capable of, without modification, performing the function of providing control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics. Since Yeo discloses a substantially similar weight ratio between the first and second ends, then Yeo subsequently discloses that the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cosmetic tool of the combination of Song, Ramet, and Jenner such that the second end counterbalances the first end, as taught by Yeo, where the second end of the combination of Song, Ramet, and Jenner is comprised of the rolling applicator, since such a modification provides the advantage of reducing a user’s fatigue by providing a balanced tool.
Yeo also discloses that an end of the handle “may be tapered” (refer to Paragraph [0016]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the cosmetic tool of the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo such that a length of the handle is tapered, as taught by Yeo, since such a modification would have involved a change in shape and a change in shape is generally recognized as being with the capabilities of one of ordinary skill; additionally such a modification may provide a more comfortable gripping means.
The combination does not disclose that the connection is made using at least one of: a snap fit, a friction fit, and an adhesive.
Grund discloses a similar cosmetic tool (Figures 1-26C) comprising a handle (2104) and applicators (2109, 2010 Figure 23) disposed at opposing ends of the handle, wherein the applicators may “form a snap fit connection with the…handle” (refer to Paragraph [0083]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cosmetic tool of the combination of Song, Ramet, Jenner, and Yeo such that the rolling applicator is connected to the second end of the handle via the joint disposed in the aperture using a snap fit, as taught by Grund, since such a modification would have involved combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results of connecting an applicator and a handle.
Response to Arguments
Declaration under 37 CFR 1.132
The declaration under 37 CRF 1.132 filed 08/04/2025 is insufficient to overcome the rejection of claims 1-5, 7-17, 19-21, and 23 based upon 35 U.S.C. 103 as set forth herein.
Applicant declares that no other method works as well as the Beautyblender brushes with the cooling roller ball to de puff skin areas in need; however, applicant’s declaration amounts to mere allegation. The declaration provides no evidence of alternative tools and methods used, outcomes of those alternative tools and methods, or a degree to which the Beautyblender tool and method outperforms similar tools and methods. Objective data includes photographs, testing data, measurements, etc. that could prove that the Beautyblender method outperforms similar tools and methods.
Further, the declaration does not tie any particular feature of the claimed invention directly to the reasons why the invention outperforms other known methods in the art, i.e. no specific limitation that is recited in the claims is directly tied to the improved performance of the Beautyblender brush with the cooling roller ball.
35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant's arguments filed 08/04/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Argument #1 (see Page 10 of Arguments):
Song discloses a shaft with a flared end that is inserted into the handle, but this shaft is cylindrical and does not include a bulbous protrusion nor is there any teaching that would suggest positioning a retention feature closer to the rolling applicator side.
Response #1:
Indeed, Song discloses a bulbous protrusion (see cropped and annotated Song Figure 3a and cropped and annotated Song Figure 3b). While Song does not disclose that the bulbous protrusion is located closer to the applicator side, in the current rejection, Song is modified with the teaches of Jenner to provide the claimed configuration.
PNG
media_image3.png
576
862
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
624
848
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Argument #2 (see Page 11 of Arguments):
Ramet does not teach a cylindrical post with a bulbous protrusion, nor the claimed spatial orientation of the bulbous end; Yeo does not address the structural features of rolling applicator assemblies or their joints.
Response #2:
Ramet is not relied upon for the claimed spatial orientation of the bulbous end, rather Jenner is relied upon in the current rejection for this teaching. Yeo is not being relied upon for the teaching of a bulbous protrusion.
Argument #3 (see Page 11 of Arguments):
The cited prior art references do not suggest or disclose “wherein the rolling applicator rotates about a fixed axis of rotation relative to the handle”. The Office action cites to Song to disclose this claimed limitation. However, Song discloses “the vertical roller is organized to rotate with the vertical shaft inserted into the insertion section”. Song does not disclose the claimed limitation of where the roller rotates about the shaft.
Response #3:
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “the roller rotates about the shaft”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
As stated on Page 13 of the Song translation, “the second applicator (25) is comprised of…a vertical roller (27) and a vertical shaft (29) penetrating through the above vertical roller (27)…the…vertical roller (27) is located on the line extended from the handle (10) in the longitudinal direction and the vertical roller (27) is organized to rotate with the vertical shaft (29) as the axis by making one side of the vertical shaft (29) be inserted into the insertion section”. It is noted that an axis is an imaginary line and does not represent any particular structure of the claimed invention, i.e. the claimed “fixed axis of rotation relative to the handle” is interpreted as an imaginary line extending through and beyond a center of Song’s handle, and can be represented by the dashed line in the annotated Song Figure 3b, below. It’s further noted that the rolling applicator is shown to have a rotational arrow that indicates a rotation of the rolling applicator, this arrow is shown to rotate with respect to the dashed line/fixed axis of rotation, i.e. rotation is about a fixed axis of rotation. This means that if the handle was held stationary, the rolling applicator would be permitted to rotate about the handle and with respect to the fixed axis that extends through the handle.
PNG
media_image5.png
891
1164
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Argument #4 (see Page 12 of Arguments):
The cited prior art references, alone or in combination, do not disclose or suggest the claimed limitation “wherein the cosmetic tool has the rolling applicator placed on an opposite end of the brush head to provide a substantially equal distribution of weight across the handle so that the cosmetic tool has a substantially similar weight ratio between the first and second ends, the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics.
Yeo teaches away from the claimed substantially equal distribution of weight across the handle because Yeo balances the weight of the shaped member on the opposite end and centralizes the weight distribution around the handle’s end.
Response #4:
Song already teaches the cosmetic tool having a rolling applicator placed on an opposite end of the brush head.
Yeo, Paragraph [0061] discloses “Handle 12 may be weighted to counterbalance the weight of the shaped member”. Yeo does not teach against providing a substantially similar weight ratio across the handle so that the cosmetic tool has a substantially similar weight ratio. In Yeo’s tool, the handle is depicted as having a length nearly the same as that of the applicator portion (30), as best shown in Yeo Figure 1D. Yeo discloses that the handle is “weighted” to counterbalance the weight of the applicator portion, 30, i.e. the two sides of the handle are substantially identical in weight and therefore Yeo teaches the cosmetic tool has a substantially similar weight ratio, i.e. the right side of the tool weighs substantially the same as the left side of the tool. Applicant argues that Yeo centralizes the weight around the handle’s end; however, this is nowhere to be found in the teachings of Yeo. Rather, Yeo simply states that a right hand side of the applicator is weighted so as to act as a “counterbalance” to a left hand side of the applicator (refer to Yeo Paragraph [0061]). Applicant recites that the instant invention aims to facilitate an even and controlled application by balancing both ends of the cosmetic tool and this balancing of both ends is exactly the aim of Yeo as well. Thus, there is no discernable difference between the weight balance of Yeo and the weight balance of the instant application. Applicant’s specification describes the weight ratio (x/y) that provides the substantially equal weight ratio to mean “x being the percentage of weight in the one end, and y the percentage in the other, having x be as close to y in weight” (see Page 7, lines 10-12 of Applicant’s specification). In using the explanation provided by Applicant’s specification, the weight of a left side of Yeo’s applicator is represented by the variable x and the weight of a right side of Yeo’s applicator is represented by the variable y. Since Yeo describes the right side as being weighted to “counterbalance” the left side of the applicator, where counterbalance is defined by Oxford Languages as “a weight that balances another weight”, i.e. the weighted right side/variable y is substantially equal to that of the left side/variable x so as to provide x to be as close to y in weight, then each side constitutes approximately 50% of the weight, thereby meeting the definition of “having x be as close to y in weight” provided by Applicant and thereby meeting the claimed limitation of “provide a substantially equal distribution of weight across the handle so that the cosmetic tool has a substantially similar weight ratio between the first and second ends, thereby based on the evenly distributed weight of the first and second ends, the cosmetic tool provides control to keep the cosmetic tool steady during application of cosmetics”.
Argument #5 (see Pages 13-15 of Arguments):
Dependent claims 2-5, 7-15, 21 and 23 are allowable since the independent claims from which they depend, are allowable.
Response #5:
Independent claims 1, 16, and 20 are not in condition for allowance since applicant’s arguments have not persuaded the office to withdrawn the rejection, nor has the claimed invention been found to be novel or non-obvious over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH WOODHOUSE whose telephone number is (571)272-5635. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9am - 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, EDELMIRA BOSQUES can be reached at 571-270-5614. 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.
/SARAH WOODHOUSE/Examiner, Art Unit 3772