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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for domestic priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (e)).. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) as follows:
Claim 23 is not supported by the provisional application, as there is no mention of the limitation, “wherein the continuous first thread and continuous second thread are non-fusible structural support members that do not melt during formation of the eyelash filaments”. Specifically, there is no mention of the thread material, only the placement of the threads.
For the purpose of examination, the priority date for claims 1, 4-10, 13-18, and 21-22 is 09/17/2021.
The priority date for claim 23 is 09/16/2022.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
Claim 1 recites “a latitudinal direction” for placing the first and second threads, and the at least one magnetic element. The specification does not define or disclose a latitudinal direction. For examination purposes, the Examiner is interpreting the “latitudinal direction” as a north and south direction when viewing the eyelash system from a top view, consistent with Fig. 2A1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 23 is not supported by the provisional application or the instant application, as there is no mention of the limitation, “wherein the continuous first thread and continuous second thread are non-fusible structural support members that do not melt during formation of the eyelash filaments”. Specifically, there is no mention of the thread material, only the placement of the threads.
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(s) 1, 4-6, 14-15, 21 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lotti (US 20210100306 A1) in view of Rabe et al (US 20090217938 A1), herein referred to as Rabe.
Regarding claim 1, Lotti discloses an artificial eyelash extension system (refer to Paragraphs [0025], [0033], Figs. 5A-8C; various embodiments of arranging multiple sets or rows of artificial lash extensions are disclosed; each stacked arrangement of the multiple rows of lash extensions (200), as shown in Figs. 5A-8C, forms an artificial eyelash extension system) comprising:
a plurality of eyelash filaments (refer to annotated Figs. 2, 8C below), each having a base (refer to annotated Figs. 2, 8C below) and a tip (208);
a support strip (712A+722A) defined at the bases of the eyelash filaments (refer to Paragraph [0035], annotated Fig. 8C below; each artificial lash extension (200) has a support base (206), with one or more of the multiple artificial hairs of the lash extension protruding out of the front side of the support base; the two support bases (206) stacked together form the support strip); and
wherein said plurality of eyelash filaments (refer to annotated Figs. 2, 8C below) comprises a first layer of eyelash filaments (725A) and a second layer of eyelash filaments (715A) that is superimposed over the first layer of eyelash filaments (725A) (refer to Paragraph [0061], annotated Fig. 7A below; the artificial lashes from the second set (725A) are arranged underneath artificial hairs from the first set (715A));
PNG
media_image1.png
766
651
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
454
647
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
293
570
media_image3.png
Greyscale
the support strip (712A+722A) comprises a continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A) and a continuous second thread (additional material-support thread of 712A) that extend along a longitudinal direction of the support strip (712A+722A) (refer to Paragraphs [0038]-[0039]; the artificial hairs are knotted to a base thread to align the artificial hairs, then a support thread is placed orthogonal to the artificial hairs for the artificial hairs to melt onto, forming the full bases (712A, 722A)), wherein the continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A) and the continuous second thread (additional material-support thread of 712A) extend substantially entire longitudinal length of the support strip (712A+722A) (refer to Paragraph [0038]; the support thread is formed orthogonal to the lashes as part of the base (712A or 722A) and thus extends across the artificial hairs).
Lotti does not explicitly disclose wherein the continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A) and continuous second thread (additional material-support thread of 712A) are spaced from each other in a latitudinal direction of the support strip (712A+722A).
Although this is not explicitly disclosed, Lotti does disclose that each base is formed of two threads (knotted thread and additional material thread), with the artificial hair melted onto these threads (refer to Paragraphs [0038]-[0039]). There are two predictable solutions, the additional material thread can either be placed on top of the knotted thread or latitudinally distanced from the knotted thread. As Lotti discloses that the additional material thread is melted into the roots of the artificial hairs to form the base (refer to Paragraph [0038]), placing the additional support thread distally of the knotted thread ensures that the hairs melt onto this additional thread. Thus, each of the base boxes (712A, 722A) depicted in Fig. 7A represent a knotted thread at the first end, farthest from the lashes (715A, 725A) and the additional material thread at the second end, closest to the lashes (715A, 725A), such that the continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A) and continuous second thread (additional material-support thread of 712A) are spaced from each other in a latitudinal direction of the support strip (712A+722A) (refer to annotated Fig. 7A below).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the placement of the continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A) and continuous second thread (additional material-support thread of 712A) as taught by Lotti, such that the two threads are spaced from each other in a latitudinal direction of the support strip (712A+722A), to ensure that the additional thread is melted into the roots of the artificial hairs to form the bases (712A, 722A) of the support strip (712A+722A) (refer to Paragraphs [0038]-[0039]).
Further, Lotti does not explicitly disclose the continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A) is applied to a lower side of the first layer of eyelash filaments (725A) and the continuous second thread (additional material-support thread of 712A) is applied to an upper side of the second layer of eyelash filaments (715A).
Although this limitation is not explicitly disclosed, as previously mentioned in the above modification, each base (712A, 722A) is formed of two latitudinally distanced threads, a knotting thread and additional material thread (refer to annotated Fig. 7A below). There are a limited number of placements of the additional material thread; the additional material thread can be placed on either the top or bottom of each lash layer base (712A, 722A). The limited number of placements is further restricted by the assembly of the two lash layers (710A, 720A). As the two lash layers (710A, 720A) need to be attached to each other to form the assembly (refer to Paragraph [0054]), the presence of an additional thread between the bases of the two layers (712A, 722A) would impede their connection, leaving only configurations where the additional material thread is on top of the uppermost layer (710A) (second thread is applied to an upper side of the second layer of eyelash filaments) and the bottom of the lowermost layer (720A) (the first thread is applied to a lower side of the first layer of eyelash filaments).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the placement of the continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A) and continuous second thread (additional material-support thread of 712A) as taught by Lotti, such that the continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A) is applied to a lower side of the first layer of eyelash filaments (725A) and the continuous second thread (additional material-support thread of 712A) is applied to an upper side of the second layer of eyelash filaments (715A) to ensure that the bases of the two layers (712A, 722A) can be adhered together.
PNG
media_image4.png
262
666
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
268
482
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Lotti is silent to at least one magnetic element being embedded within the support strip, wherein the at least one magnetic element is placed between the first layer of eyelash filaments and the second layer of eyelash filaments in a vertical direction; and the at least one magnetic element is disposed between the continuous first thread and the continuous second thread in the latitudinal direction.
Rabe discloses an eyelash extension system in the same field of endeavor (refer to Abstract), Lotti can be modified by Rabe to meet these limitations as follows:
Place magnetic elements in each base (712A, 722A) which forms the support strip (712A+722A) in the same fashion as the backbone (204) and closure (206) of Rabe. Rabe discloses wherein the support strip of the eyelash assembly is formed by layering (refer to Paragraph [0047], annotated Fig. 2 below; the system (200) includes a plurality of eyelash extensions (202) attached to a backbone (204) and a closure (206) which abuts against the backbone (204)). The two layers (204, 206) of the eyelash extension system (200) can be attached together by alternate methods, adhesive (refer to Paragraph [0049]; adhesive is applied to the surfaces (208, 209) of the backbone (204) and the closure (206) to attach the surfaces (208, 210) together) or magnets (refer to Paragraph [0051]; the backbone (204) and closure (206) may be coupled together by the magnetic force between two magnets). To form the support strip structure, Rabe demonstrates adhesive coupling and magnetic coupling as viable alternatives, wherein the magnetic coupling option embeds magnetic material in one or more of the backbone (204) and/or the closure (206) (refer to Paragraphs [0048]-[0049], [0051]; the backbone (204) and closure (206) which together form the support strip are comprised of a plastic material which has embedded magnetic particles).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the adhesive coupling of the eyelash layers as taught by Lotti with magnetic coupling, by embedding magnetic particles in the support base of one or both layers (712A, 722A), as Rabe teaches adhesive and magnetic couplings as viable alternatives for coupling lash layers (refer to Paragraphs [0048]-[0049], [0051]).
PNG
media_image6.png
290
674
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Positioning magnetic elements vertically between the first base (722A) and second base (712A) based on the teachings of Lotti and Rabe. Lotti discloses vertically stacking the lash layers by applying adhesive to the topside of the base (722A) of the first set of extensions (720A) (refer to Paragraph [0055]), such that the adhesive is sandwiched between the two base layers (712A, 722A) in a vertical direction. As mentioned above, Rabe then teaches magnetic coupling by embedding magnetic material in one or both of the bases (204, 206) (refer to Paragraph [0051]). The magnetic material can be positioned anywhere within each base (204, 206), top, bottom and/or throughout the base (204, 206) (refer to Paragraph [0051]; the backbone (204) and closure (206) may be made in whole or in part of the material providing the magnetic coupling). Positioning the magnetic material between the two layers of Lotti (topside of base (722A) of the first layer (720A)) improves the contact and coupling of the two layers. Thus, in substituting the adhesive of Lotti with the magnetic material of Rabe, one would have had a reasonable expectation of success in placing the magnetic material between the first (722A) and second (712A) bases and further the first layer of eyelash filaments (725A) and second layer of eyelash filaments (715A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have positioned the at least one magnetic element as taught by Rabe, between the first layer of eyelash filaments (725A) and the second layer of eyelash filaments (715A) in a vertical direction of Lotti, as Lotti teaches the positioning of adhesive between vertically layered lashes (refer to Paragraph [0055]), and Rabe teaches magnetic material as an alternative coupling method to adhesive.
Positioning magnetic elements latitudinally between the first base (722A) and second base (712A) based on the teachings of Lotti and Rabe. As mentioned previously, Lotti teaches applying adhesive to the top side of the first base (722A) (refer to Paragraph [0055]), such that the adhesive is latitudinally placed between the continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A) and the continuous second thread (additional material-support thread of 712A) (refer to annotated Fig. 7A below), and Rabe teaches substituting adhesive with magnetic material (refer to Paragraph [0051]). By substituting the adhesive layer with a layer of magnetic material, the magnetic material also extends latitudinally between the continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A) and the continuous second thread (additional material-support thread of 712A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have positioned the at least one magnetic element as taught by Rabe, latitudinally between the continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A) and the continuous second thread (additional material-support thread of 712A) of Lotti, as Lotti teaches the latitudinal positioning of adhesive (refer to Paragraph [0055]), and Rabe teaches magnetic material as an alternative coupling method to adhesive.
PNG
media_image7.png
259
479
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 4-6, Lotti and Rabe disclose the system of claim; Lotti further discloses wherein the first layer of eyelash filaments (722A) is arranged at a first angle with respect to the support strip (712A+722A) while the second layer of eyelash filaments (712A) is arranged at a second angle with respect to the support strip (712A+722A) wherein the first angle is obtuse and the second angle is acute (refer to Paragraphs [0033], [0034] [0048], [0053], annotated Fig. 2 below; each layer includes multiple artificial eyelash extensions that extend in obtuse and acute angle directions as depicted in Fig. 2; thus, a first layer (710A) has lashes (715A) arranged at a first obtuse angle to the support strip (712A+722A) and the second layer (720A) has lashes (725A) arranged at an acute angle to the support strip (712A+722A)).
PNG
media_image8.png
706
642
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Lotti and Rabe disclose the system of claim 1; Lotti is silent to wherein the system is adapted to attach to a user's skin without application of additional glue to natural eyelashes.
As mentioned above Rabe demonstrates magnetic coupling as an alternative to adhesive coupling (refer to Paragraphs [0048]-[0049], [0051]; the backbone (204) and closure (206), which together form the support strip, are comprised of embedded magnetic particles). Thus, the modified system of Lotti and Rabe is adapted to attach to a user's skin without application of additional glue to natural eyelashes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the adhesive coupling of the eyelash layers to the natural lashes as taught by Lotti (refer to Paragraph [0055]) with the magnetic coupling, as taught by Rabe, as Rabe teaches magnetic coupling as an alternative to adhesive coupling (refer to Paragraphs [0048]-[0049], [0051]).
Regarding claim 15, Lotti and Rabe disclose the system of claim 1; Lotti discloses wherein the eyelash extension system is a wisp, cluster, flare, or individual eyelash extension system (refer to Paragraph [0040]; the lash extension (200) includes artificial hairs arranged into clusters).
Regarding claim 21, Lotti and Rabe disclose the system of claim 1; with Lotti further disclosing wherein the continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A) is placed on a distal side of the continuous second thread(additional material-support thread of 712A) (refer to Paragraphs [0038]-[0039], annotated Fig. 7A below; based on the modification in claim 1, the two threads (additional material-support thread of 712A and 722A) are spaced from each other in a latitudinal direction of the support strip (712A+722A)).
PNG
media_image9.png
380
490
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 22, Lotti and Rabe disclose the system of claim 1; with Lotti further disclosing wherein the continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A) is placed on a proximal side of the continuous second thread (additional material-support thread of 712A) (refer to Paragraphs [0038]-[0039], annotated Fig. 7A below; based on the modification in claim 1, the two threads (additional material-support thread of 712A and 722A) are spaced from each other in a latitudinal direction of the support strip (712A+722A)).
PNG
media_image10.png
380
493
media_image10.png
Greyscale
(New) Regarding claim 23, Lotti and Rabe disclose the system of claim 1; with Lotti further disclosing wherein the continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A) and continuous second thread (additional material-support thread of 712A) are non-fusible structural support members that do not melt during formation of the eyelash filaments (refer to Paragraph [0038]; Examiner understands non-fusible as consistent with the Merriam-Webster definition as unable to be melted easily; one or more of the artificial hairs or the additional support thread material can melt to form the base, meaning only one element is required to melt to form the base; in the instance the heat melts the artificial hairs as disclosed, the support thread is not melted and is thus a non-fusible support member).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lotti (US 20210100306 A1) in view of Rabe et al (US 20090217938 A1), herein referred to as Rabe as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Choe (US 20050061341 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Lotti and Rabe disclose the system of claim 1; neither Lotti or Rabe et al. disclose the system comprising an additional layer of glue applied to the continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A), the continuous second thread (additional material-support thread of 712A), and a space between the continuous first thread (additional material-support thread of 722A) and the continuous second thread (additional material-support thread of 712A).
Choe discloses an artificial eyelash extension system (64) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [0048]). The artificial eyelash extension system (64) comprises a support strip (20f), with a first thread (60) and a second thread (60’) that extend along a longitudinal direction of the support strip and are spaced from each other in a latitudinal direction of the support strip (refer to annotated Fig. 11C below). The lash system further comprises an additional layer of glue applied to the first continuous thread (60), the second continuous thread (60’), and a space between the first continuous thread (60) and the second continuous thread (60’) (refer to Paragraphs [0048] - [0050] and Figs, 11A-11C; adhesive (62, 62’) is applied to a first attachment thread (60), the attachment section (64a) between the first (60) and second thread (60’), and the second thread (60’)). The additional glue prevents loss of the artificial hairs from the lash strips by forming a secure integral base (refer to Paragraph [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the support strip of Lotti and Rabe with an additional layer of glue applied to the first continuous thread (60), the second continuous thread (60’), and a space between the first continuous thread (60) and the second continuous thread (60’) as taught by Choe, in order to securely attach the lashes to the support base (refer to Paragraph [0050]).
PNG
media_image11.png
265
551
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 7-9, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lotti (US 20210100306 A1) in view of Rabe et al (US 20090217938 A1), herein referred to as Rabe, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (WO 2019093577 A1), herein referred to as Lee. For Lee, refer to the provided translation.
Regarding claim 7, Lotti and Rabe disclose the system of claim 1; neither Lotti or Rabe et al. disclose the magnetic elements being a plurality of individual magnets distributed along the longitudinal direction.
Lee discloses an artificial eyelash system (100) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph 34), wherein the at least one magnetic element (130, 140) comprises a plurality of individual magnets (130, 140) distributed along the longitudinal direction of the support strip (110) (refer to Paragraph 34, annotated Fig. 5 below; the false eyelash includes separation preventing magnet plates (130), and attachment magnet plates (140)). This configuration of magnets allows the user to cut the artificial lashes to fit their eye size, while still retaining the magnetic coupling (refer to Paragraph 14).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the embedded magnetic elements of Lotti and Rabe with the plurality of individual magnets (130, 140) as taught by Lee in order to allow the user to cut the artificial lashes to fit their eye size, while still retaining the magnetic coupling (refer to Paragraph 14).
.
PNG
media_image12.png
424
734
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 8-9, Lotti, Rabe and Lee disclose the system of claim 7; neither Lotti or Rabe disclose wherein a liquid glue is applied to the individual magnets.
Lee further discloses, wherein a liquid glue is applied to the individual magnets (130, 140) (refer to Paragraphs 68-69; a liquid protective coating layer (150) is applied to the magnets (130, 140), wherein this coating (150) is a synthetic resin). The protective coating layer protects the natural lashes of the user from being directly exposed to the magnets (refer to Paragraph 68).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the embedded magnetic elements of Lotti and Rabe with the application of liquid adhesive to a plurality of individual magnets (130, 140) as taught by Lee, in order to protect the user’s natural lashes (refer to Paragraph 68).
PNG
media_image13.png
244
399
media_image13.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image14.png
290
316
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Lotti and Rabe disclose the system of claim 1; neither Lotti or Rabe disclose wherein the at least one magnetic element is placed where there are no eyelash filaments.
Lee discloses an artificial eyelash system (100) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph 34), wherein the at least one magnetic element (130, 140) is placed where there are no eyelash filaments (120) (refer to Paragraphs 41, 46, 60 and annotated Fig. 5 below; the false eyelash hair (120) may be disposed on one side of the strip member (110)). By placing the magnets (130, 140) where there are no lashes (120), the magnetic mating surfaces are not impeded by the lashes, improving their coupling.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the magnetic support strip of Lotti and Rabe by placing magnets where eyelash filaments are not placed as taught by Lee to improve the coupling of the layered lashes.
PNG
media_image15.png
161
265
media_image15.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lotti (US 20210100306 A1) in view of Rabe et al (US 20090217938 A1), herein referred to as Rabe, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of De la Poterie et al. (US 20210337943 A1), herein referred to as De la Poterie.
Regarding claims 16-18, Lotti and Rabe disclose the system of claim 1; neither Lotti or Rabe disclose wherein said at least one magnetic element comprises a set of at least five magnetic cuboids, which have a length of approximately 1 mm, a width of approximately 1 mm and a height of 0.4 mm.
De la Poterie discloses a magnetic lash system in the same field of endeavor (refer to Abstract). The magnetic lash system comprises a plurality of eyelash filaments (32), a support strip (34) defined at the support bases of the eyelash filaments which comprises a set of at least five magnetic cuboids (refer to Paragraphs [0089], [0098]; the magnetized base comprises four or more magnets; the magnets are parallelepiped in shape, which is a form of a cuboid), wherein said magnetic cuboids have a length between 0.5mm-6.0mm, a width of 0.5mm-6mm, and a height of between 0.1mm-2.0mm (refer to Paragraphs [0098]-[0099]; the parallelepiped magnets have a thickness, or height, in the range of 0.1mm - 2.0mm, a width in the range of 0.5mm - 6.0mm and a length in the range of 0.5mm - 6mm). The plurality of magnetic elements ensures satisfactory adhesion (refer to Paragraph [0091]) while being thin and discrete (refer to Paragraph [0049]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the magnetic elements as taught by Lotti and Rabe, to be a set of at least five magnetic cuboids, which have a length between 0.5mm-6.0mm, a width of 0.5mm-6mm, and a height of between 0.1mm-2.0mm as taught by De la Poterie, as De la Poterie teaches the plurality of magnetic elements ensures satisfactory adhesion (refer to Paragraph [0091]) while being thin and discrete (refer to Paragraph [0049]).
Further, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the specific dimensions of a length of approximately 1 mm, a width of approximately 1 mm and a height of 0.4 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges [ or optimum value ] involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. MPEP 2144.05-II-A
Furthermore, since Applicants have not disclosed that these modifications solve any stated problem or are for any particular purpose (refer to Paragraph [33] of the specification; the magnetic blocks can have dimensions between 0.25mm to 1.5mm) and it appears that the device would perform equally well with either designs refer to , these modifications are a matter of design choice. Absent a teaching as to criticality of the length, width and height of the magnets, this particular arrangement is deemed to have been known by those skilled in the art since the instant specification and evidence of record fail to attribute any significance (novel or unexpected results) to a particular arrangement. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553,555,188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975). MPEP 2144.05.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s arguments that Lotti does not disclose continuous threads, Paragraphs [0038]-[0039] specifically state that the artificial hairs are knotted to a base thread to align the artificial hairs, then a support thread is placed orthogonal to the artificial hairs for the artificial hairs to melt onto, forming the full bases (712A, 722A). The support thread being placed orthogonal to the artificial threads is thus longitudinally and continuously extended across the eyelash filaments as described in the above rejection.
The argument that the support thread is not a continuous structural member but a temporary member does not follow, as Paragraph [0038] states that heat is applied to the base, which is formed of eyelash hairs and an additional support thread, thereby melting the hairs onto the support thread. The support thread then forms the base with the melted hairs as a fixed member.
The argument that the thread is fully melted is also in contrast to Paragraph [0038], which states the hair or the additional material can be melted. This means that two embodiments are disclosed, one where the hair melts and the thread does not, and one where the thread melts, but the hair does not. In the latter embodiment, which is relied upon for the rejection, the thread is not melted or “omitted”. Further, the embodiment relied upon for this rejection is not the alternative embodiment without support threads, as is made clear in the above rejection.
In response to the argument that the depicted support bases as blocks means there are no threads included, Paragraph [0061] specifically discloses the figures as illustrations depicting the arrangement of the lashes and bases, with Paragraphs [0038]-[0039] describing what materials are used to form the bases (knot thread, support thread, melted hairs).
In response to the argument that Rabe does not disclose magnetic coupling with threads, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
In response to Applicant’s arguments that Choe has single layer lashes, Paragraph [0034] explicitly discloses interposing segments (layers) of lashes (20c, 20d, 20e). Figs. 11A-11C and Paragraphs [0048]-[0050] explicitly disclose the layering of the threads.
In response to the argument that Lee does not disclose a multilayer lash system with threads, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Examiner recommends Applicant amend the independent claim to more specifically detail how the arrangement of the thread, glue, magnets, lash layers and double sided tape form a system that is different from the prior art of record, including previously mentioned relevant art.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Adriena J Webb Lyttle whose telephone number is (571)270-7639. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-support 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, Eric Rosen can be reached at (571) 270-7855. 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.
/ADRIENA J WEBB LYTTLE/Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/EDELMIRA BOSQUES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772