DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 18, 27-28, 30 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toda, JP 2009/233291 A in view of Doan, US 2008/0159973 A1. 3
Regarding claims 18, 28, 30 and 34, Toda discloses a decorated artificial nail and the method steps of decorating a natural nail (N) by forming a socket (4) in an operatively upper surface of an artificial nail (11a) that is formed onto the natural human fingernail (N). The operatively forward end of the artificial nail (11a) extending forward of a free edge of the natural nail (figure 7a-b). The socket (4) being complementary shaped and sized to a pavilion of a cut diamond (2, jewel/diamond, [0020] of translation) that is secured in the socket. The diamond (2) having been cut into a shape that includes a crown supported by a pavilion. Forming the socket (4) into a conical shape (figure 7a) in the artificial nail (11a) at a position forward of the free edge of the natural nail (N, see annotated figure 7a) by drilling (with drill bit, 3) the socket (4) through the artificial nail (11a) to accommodate a diamond (2) of which the pavilion height exceeds the thickness of the artificial nail (see figures 7a-b), and drilling the socket with a diameter at the upper surface of the artificial nail that is substantially the same as a diameter of the diamond at a girdle (figure 7a-b). Inserting the diamond (2) with a culet of the diamond and at least part of facets surrounding the culet to extend from an . operatively lower surface of the artificial nail (11, figures 7a-b). Securing at least part of the pavilion of the diamond in the socket by an adhesive (5) comprising a clear base gel ([0037] of the translation) that is compatible with the artificial nail and the diamond. Then, sealing and finishing the operatively upper surface of the artificial nail and the crown of the diamond and any part of the diamond which may extend above the socket ([0047] of the translation). This step is done by covering the operatively upper surface of the artificial nail and the crown and any part of the girdle and the pavilion which may extend above the socket with a top clear coat.
PNG
media_image1.png
1012
684
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Toda does disclose the step of curing the adhesive between the pavilion of the diamond and the sidewalls of the socket ([0052] of the translation).
Toda fails to disclose the step of coating two layers on top of the artificial nail and the diamond, i.e., a clear acrylic layer with a top base gel applied on top. Toda only discloses coating the top surface of the artificial nail and the exposed surfaces of the diamond ([0047]). Toda also fails to disclose the final steps of curing the top base gel and shaping and buffing an upper surface of the cured top base gel layer. However, the method steps of coating the finger nail with an acrylic and then with a top coat of a gel material is disclosed in Doan to produce a more durable coating on the fingernail, which resists chips and scratches ([0006]) and in claims 9 and 17. Therefore, it would have been obvious, prior to the earliest effective filing date, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use acrylic with a gel top coating for Toda’s final coat to provide a more durable coating for the user’s fingernails. The step of shaping and polishing the final cured coatings of a person’s fingernails is old and well-known method of improving the aesthetics of finger nails.
Regarding claim 27, Toda discloses a drill bit having the same angle as the socket being formed (theta-2 in figures 9a-b).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 25 and 33 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 18, 27-28, 30 and 34 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACK W LAVINDER whose telephone number is (571)272-7119. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday 9-4pm (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, Jason San can be reached at 571-272-6531. 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.
JACK W. LAVINDER
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3677
/JACK W LAVINDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3677