DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the communications filed on 8/8/2025.
The Examiner notes claims 1-3, 6-7, 10-11, 14, 21 are currently pending and have been examined; claim(s) 4-5, 8-9, 12-13, & 15-20 is/are canceled without prejudice, claim(s) 1 & 6 is/are currently amended, and claim(s) 21 is/are newly added; all other claims are original or previously presented. Please see the Response to Amendments and Response to Arguments sections below for more details.
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) 1-2 & 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MIZUTA MAKOTO (JP 2008183093 A) in view of ENOMOTO WATARU et al. (WO 2019111868 A1) further in view of XI et al. (US 20180360204), hereinafter Mizuta, Enomoto, & Xi, respectively.
Regarding claim 1 & 6. (Each claim status is listed above in the Status of Claims section) Mizuta discloses a brush bristle material comprising …twisted core- sheath complex monofilaments [Fig 1; Pg2:¶4-¶5 of the translation; the bristle has is a twisted core-sheath composite (i.e. complex) monofilament] whose core part is constituted by synthetic resin A and sheath part is constituted by synthetic resin B that differs in type from synthetic resin A [Fig 1-3; Pg2:¶5 & Pg2:¶8 of the translation; the core (4) is made of a different synthetic resin than the sheath (5)], wherein a cross-section of the core-sheath complex monofilaments in a direction orthogonal to an axis of fiber has a … shape [Fig 1-3; the bristle’s (1) cross-section has a shape], and the synthetic resin A is polyethylene terephthalate or polybutylene terephthalate, and the synthetic resin B is … [Pg2:¶9; the core can be polybutylene terephthalate (PBT) and the sheath can be polypropylene terephthalate].
Mizuta is silent in regards to the monofilament being S-twisted or Z-twisted (Per the Applicant’s specification ¶11 this is twisted to the right or twisted to the left), or wherein a cross-section of the core-sheath complex monofilaments in a direction orthogonal to an axis of fiber has a cocoon shape, or the synthetic resin B is polytrimethylene terephthalate or a mixture of polytrimethylene terephthalate and polybutylene terephthalate.
However Enomoto teaches a brush bristle that is S-twisted or Z-twisted and characterized in that a cross-section of the monofilaments in a direction orthogonal to an axis of fiber has a cocoon shape [Abstract], and that a polyester elastomer can .
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the twisted core-sheath complex monofilament as disclosed by Mizuta to have the twist be either S-twisted or Z-twisted and characterized in that a cross-section of the core-sheath complex monofilaments in a direction orthogonal to an axis of fiber has a cocoon shape as taught by Enomoto for the purpose of providing a soft and high feeling of volume including many voids inside which can liquid or powder product to apply with the bristle [Enomoto: Pg2:¶5-¶6]. Furthermore, combining S twist and Z twist is preferable because the internal void portion can be increased further increasing the amount of liquid or powder product that the bristle can apply to a surface [Enomoto: Pg2:¶5-¶6].
However Xi teaches a bristle material that can be used in a makeup brush material; the material is formed of at multiple resins that include the synthetic resin A is polyethylene terephthalate or polybutylene terephthalate [¶41; the first resin can be either polyethylene terephthalate or polybutylene terephthalate (PBT)], and the synthetic resin B is polytrimethylene terephthalate or a mixture of polytrimethylene terephthalate and polybutylene terephthalate [¶41; another resin can be polytrimethylene terephthalate (PTT)].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the resin B for the sheath as taught by Mizuta to be polytrimethylene terephthalate as taught by Xi as an alternative resin material used in forming bristles. It is noted that Mizuta teaches a core/sheath combination of PBT/polypropylene terephthalate and Xi teaches that polypropylene terephthalate is interchangeable with polytrimethylene terephthalate (PTT), see ¶41.
Regarding claim 6, Enomoto teaches the use of a combination of S-twist and Z-twist monofilaments because the internal void portion can be increased further increasing the amount of liquid or powder product that the bristle can apply to a surface [Enomoto: Pg2:¶5-¶6].
Regarding claim 2. Mizuta as modified teaches the makeup brush bristle material according to claim 1, characterized in that the core-sheath complex monofilament has a narrow tip part having a tapered shape [Mizuta: Fig 1].
Regarding claim 7. Mizuta as modified teach a makeup brush characterized by using, at least partially, the makeup brush bristle material according to claim 1 [The bristles of Mizuta as modified can be used in a makeup brush].
Regarding claim 10. Mizuta as modified teaches a makeup brush characterized by using, at least partially, the makeup brush bristle material according to claim 2 [The bristles of Mizuta as modified can be used in a makeup brush].
Regarding claim 14. Mizuta as modified teaches a makeup brush characterized by using, at least partially, the makeup brush bristle material according to claim 4 [The bristles of Mizuta as modified can be used in a makeup brush].
Regarding claim 21. Mizuta as modified teaches the makeup brush according to claim 7, wherein in conditions where the makeup brush is installed on a rotating table of a surface property tester so that an ear part of the makeup brush contacts a surface of the table roughly at right angles and is fixed horizontally to the table, when the ear part of the makeup brush is moved in a horizontal direction relative to the surface of the table, a ratio of maximum values of resulting forces applied in a vertical direction and a horizontal direction is 2.18 or higher [Since the claimed bristles and brush are taught by the prior art, the brush would be capable of having a ratio of the maximum values of resulting forces be 2.18 or higher].
Claim(s) 3 & 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuta in view of Enomoto further in view of Xi further in view of SEKINO EIICHI et al. (KR 20030040026 A), hereinafter Sekino.
Regarding claim 3. Mizuta as modified teaches the makeup brush bristle material according to claim 2, but is silent in regards to characterized in that the narrow tip part having a tapered shape is branched.
However Sekino teaches a bristle with cocoon shaped cross-section characterized in that the narrow tip part having a tapered shape is branched [Fig 1a-1b; ¶27 of the translation].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the tapered tip as taught by Mizuta as modified to have the narrow tip part having a tapered shape is branched as taught by Sekino for the purpose of increasing the bristle’s ability to reach into small gaps or spaces that a bristle that was not branched could not [Sekino: ¶46].
Regarding claim 11. A makeup brush characterized by using, at least partially, the makeup brush bristle material according to claim 3 [The bristles of Mizuta as modified can be used in a makeup brush].
Response to Arguments
35 U.S.C. 103 Rejection
Applicant's arguments, see Pages 5-8, filed 8/8/2025 have been fully considered but are moot in light of the new grounds of rejection, see above for details.
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 AARON R MCCONNELL whose telephone number is (303)297-4608. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 0700-1600 MST [0900-1800 EST] 2nd Friday 0700-1500 MST [0900-1700 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, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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.
/AARON R MCCONNELL/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723