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 .
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) 1-3, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minato (JP 7129623 B2), in view of Aizenberg (US 2018/0249801 A1), Inox (JP 2016163699 A), and further in view of Suzuki (EP 0272034 A2), translations provided, and Miles (US 2012/0097181 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Minato teaches an eyelash curling device comprising:
a first stick (8) including a first handle (82) and a first tip (81) connected to the first handle (see Figures 9-10);
a second stick (83) including a second handle (handling part of 83; see Figure 9) and a second tip (tip/front of 83; see Figures 9-10) connected to the second handle,
wherein the first stick and the second stick are physically separated from each other (see Figure 10), and user's eyelashes are curled by contacting and moving the first tip, which is heated, along a user's eyelashes while the second tip of the second stick, which is not heated, is located between a user's eyelashes and eyelids (par. 32 of translation such that the stick 8 is heated, see Figures 9-10; the device is fully capable of being used in such manner).
Minato is silent to explicitly the first tip being formed of a material different from the first handle and wherein a surface of the first handle is formed of a material having a lower thermal conductivity than the first tip.
Aizenberg teaches a device in the same field of endeavor of hair curling devices (abstract). Aizenberg teaches the device comprises a handle portion (12) and an iron tip portion (see Figures and [0003]). Aizenberg teaches the handle may be made of a thermally non-conductive material such as plastic and the iron portion may be made of thermally conductive material such as metal or certain ceramics ([0004-0005]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the tip and handle to be made of different materials, and the handle to be non-conductive while the tip is conductive, as taught by Aizenberg, such that the handle can be safe for handling while using the heated tip as an iron for curling the hair.
Minato is further silent to a body part accommodating the first stick and the second stick, wherein the body part comprises: a heating part for heating the first tip of the first stick accommodated therein.
Inox teaches a lash curling device in the same field of endeavor of eyelash curling devices (abstract). Inox teaches the device comprises a stick including handle (5) and a heated tip portion (6) for curling the lashes (see Figures and abstract). Inox teaches the device comprises a body (7) that has a heating part (8) for heating the tip of the stick and the heating part being adjacent to the tip portion such as to only heat the tip portion (see figures and [0033-0035], [0040]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device to have a body with a heating unit adjacent to the tip portion, as taught by Inox, rather than having the heating means within the heated curling device, as it would provide a housing with direct heating means for heating the tip of the first rod and therefore allow using the device as a kit and be portable and convenient.
Inox teaches the body may hold more than one device (see Figure 5) but does not teach a second non-heated device. Minato teaches the first stick is heated and the second stick is non-heated. Minato in view of Inox is silent to wherein the heating part is adjacent to the first tip of the first stick, and is spaced apart from the second tip by a predetermined distance, so that the heating part heats only the first tip of the first stick not the second tip of the second stick, when the first and second sticks are accommodated in the body part. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the body part to include only a heating part for heating the tip portion of the first stick of Minato, since the second stick of Minato is not heated. Therefore, the modified device would hold both sticks but only having heating means corresponding to the stick that must be heated.
The references are silent to the body having a control part that controls the heating part to heat the first tip to a predetermined temperature.
Suzuki teaches a system in the same field of endeavor of lash curling systems (abstract). Suzuki teaches the system comprises a heated eyelash curling device (6) and a body (1) for heating the eyelash curling device. Suzuki teaches the curling portions are made of heat conductive material ([0009]) and the body has a control part and supplies controllable hot air ([0012], [0018], [0020]-[0021]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the body to include a control part, as taught by Suzuki, as to allow controlling the heat levels of the heating device and switching the device on or off as needed.
Minato teaches the first tip has a cylindrical shape in a longitudinal direction (see Figure 10; the distal end of 83 has a cylindrical shape with a circular cross-section), but does not teach it having a cylindrical uniform cross section.
PNG
media_image1.png
325
362
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Miles teaches a device used for curling eyelashes comprising two forming members (10, 15), each having cylindrical shape and a uniform cross-section along its length (see Figure 1). Miles teaches this configuration achieves a rolling effect to curl the lashes instead of conventional crimping or pressing that may damage the eyelashes (see at least abstract, [0002], [0008-0010], [0019]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the shape of the first tip of Minato, to have a uniform cylindrical cross-section along its length, as taught by Miles, because it would provide a rolling mechanism that achieves eyelash curling and is less damaging to the eyelashes.
Regarding claim 2, Minato in view of Aizenberg, Inox and Suzuki and Miles teaches the eyelash curling device of claim 1 (see rejection above). Minato teaches the first tip (83) has a first width and wherein the first handle (82) has a width greater than the first width (see Figures 9-10; 82 has a greater width than 81).
Regarding claim 3, Minato in view of Aizenberg, Inox, Suzuki and Miles teaches the eyelash curling device of claim 2 (see rejection above). Minato teaches the sticks (83) and (83) together have a cylindrical-semi-circular arrangement (See Figure 11). Although Minato does not teach the second tip of the second stick has a semi-cylindrical shape, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the tip of the first stick to have a cylindrical shape and the tip of the second stick to have a semi-circular shape (or vice versa), since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change is shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 IV B). Both arrangements would ensure a curl shape to the lashes.
Regarding claim 7, Minto teaches an eyelash curling device comprising:
a first stick (8) including a first handle (82) and a first tip (81) connected to the first handle (see Figures 9-10);
a second stick (83) including a second handle (handling part of 83; see Figure 9) and a second tip (tip/front of 83; see Figures 9-10) connected to the second handle,
wherein the first stick and the second stick are physically separated from each other (see Figure 10), and user's eyelashes are curled by contacting and moving the first tip, which is heated, along a user's eyelashes while the second tip of the second stick, which is not heated, is located between a user's eyelashes and eyelids (par. 32 of translation such that the stick 8 is heated, see Figures 9-10; the device is fully capable of being used in such manner).
Minato is silent to explicitly the first tip being formed of a material different from the first handle and wherein a surface of the first handle is formed of a material having a lower thermal conductivity than the first tip.
Aizenberg teaches a device in the same field of endeavor of hair curling devices (abstract). Aizenberg teaches the device comprises a handle portion (12) and an iron tip portion (see Figures and [0003]). Aizenberg teaches the handle may be made of a thermally non-conductive material such as plastic and the iron portion may be made of thermally conductive material such as metal or certain ceramics ([0004-0005]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the tip and handle to be made of different materials, and the handle to be non-conductive while the tip is conductive, as taught by Aizenberg, such that the handle can be safe for handling while using the heated tip as an iron for curling the hair.
Minato is further silent to a body part accommodating the first stick and the second stick, wherein the body part comprises: a heating part for heating the first tip of the first stick accommodated therein.
Inox teaches a lash curling device in the same field of endeavor of eyelash curling devices (abstract). Inox teaches the device comprises a stick including handle (5) and a heated tip portion (6) for curling the lashes (see Figures and abstract). Inox teaches the device comprises a body (7) that has a heating part (8) for heating the tip of the stick and the heating part being adjacent to the tip portion such as to only heat the tip portion (see figures and [0033-0035], [0040]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device to have a body with a heating unit adjacent to the tip portion, as taught by Inox, rather than having the heating means within the heated curling device, as it would provide a housing with direct heating means for heating the tip of the first rod and therefore allow using the device as a kit and be portable and convenient.
Inox teaches the body may hold more than one device (see Figure 5) but does not teach a second non-heated device. Minato teaches the first stick is heated and the second stick is non-heated. Minato in view of Inox is silent to wherein the heating part is adjacent to the first tip of the first stick, and is spaced apart from the second tip by a predetermined distance, so that the heating part heats only the first tip of the first stick not the second tip of the second stick, when the first and second sticks are accommodated in the body part. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the body part to include only a heating part for heating the tip portion of the first stick of Minato, since the second stick of Minato is not heated. Therefore, the modified device would hold both sticks but only having heating means corresponding to the stick that must be heated.
The references are silent to the body having a control part that controls the heating part to heat the first tip to a predetermined temperature.
Suzuki teaches a system in the same field of endeavor of lash curling systems (abstract). Suzuki teaches the system comprises a heated eyelash curling device (6) and a body (1) for heating the eyelash curling device. Suzuki teaches the curling portions are made of heat conductive material ([0009]) and the body has a control part and supplies controllable hot air ([0012], [0018], [0020]-[0021]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the body to include a control part, as taught by Suzuki, as to allow controlling the heat levels of the heating device and switching the device on or off as needed.
Minato does not teach wherein an exposed portion of the first tip that protrudes from the first handle has a cylindrical shape extending along a longitudinal direction and having a constant first width such that a cross-section of the exposed portion is circular.
Miles teaches a device used for curling eyelashes comprising two forming members (10, 15), each having cylindrical shape and a uniform cross-section along its length (see Figure 1). Miles teaches this configuration achieves a rolling effect to curl the lashes instead of conventional crimping or pressing that may damage the eyelashes (see at least abstract, [0002], [0008-0010], [0019]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the shape of the first tip of Minato, to have a uniform cylindrical cross-section along its length, as taught by Miles, because it would provide a rolling mechanism that achieves eyelash curling and is less damaging to the eyelashes.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minato (JP7129623B2), in view of Aizenberg (US2018/0249801 A1), Inox (JP2016163669A), Suzuki (EP0272034A2), Miles (US 2012/0097181 A1), and further in view of Kawamura (JP3101488U), translations provided.
Regarding claim 4, Minato in view of Aizenberg, Inox, Suzuki and Miles teaches the eyelash curling device of claim 2 (see rejection above), but is silent to wherein the first tip comprises a first portion exposed to an outside of the first handle and a second portion positioned inside the first handle.
Kawamura teaches a heated eyelash curler wherein the first tip comprises a first portion exposed to an outside of the first handle and a second portion positioned inside the first handle (see Figure 1 and pages 1-2 of translation; the tip is part of a core within the handle).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the tip of the stick to have a portion inside of the handle (i.e., a core), as taught by Kawamura, such that the tip can be part of the handle and therefore more secure within the handle rather than being adhered to it and an end side.
The references are silent to wherein at least a portion of the second portion of the first tip has a second width greater than the first width.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the core within the handle be wider than the tip, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change is shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 IV B). Applicant does not disclose any criticality to this limitation, such that it the portion inside the handle may be wider or the same with than the tip outside of the handle. It may provide the advantage of greater securement of the core within the handle since it would fill up more space inside the handle and therefore provide a more solid attachment configuration.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minato (JP7129623B2), in view of Aizenberg (US2018/0249801 A1), Inox (JP2016163669A), Suzuki (EP0272034A2), Miles (US 2012/0097181 A1), and further in view of Edwards (US 5,273,058), and Lee (KR200358500Y1), translations provided.
Regarding claim 5, Minato in view of Aizenberg, Inox and Suzuki and Miles teaches the eyelash curling device of claim 1 (see rejection above), but is silent to wherein each of the first handle and the second handle has a polygonal column shape, and wherein at least a portion of the first stick and the second stick has different colors.
Edwards teaches a device in the same field of endeavor of hair curling devices (abstract). Edwards teaches the device comprises a guard that goes over the handle and has a polygonal shape as to prevent the tool from rolling off a table or other level surface when placed thereon (Col. 5, ll. 15-20). It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the handles have a polygonal shape since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change is shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 IV B). Applicant does not disclose any criticality to this limitation. Having a polygonal shape would provide the advantage of preventing the sticks from rolling off a table or a flat surface.
Lee teaches a device in the same field of endeavor of hair curling devices (abstract). Lee teaches the different rollers having different diameters are made different colors as to help distinguish them apart (abstract). It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the handles have each stick have a different color since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change is shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 IV B). Applicant does not disclose any criticality to this limitation. Having them be different colors would provide the advantage of distinguishing them apart and therefore prevent the user from accidentally using the heated stick closer to their eyes and body.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minato (JP7129623B2), in view of Aizenberg (US2018/0249801 A1), Inox (JP2016163669A), Suzuki (EP0272034A2), Miles (US 2012/0097181 A1), and further in view of McMullen (US5,590,669), translations provided.
Regarding claim 6, Minato in view of Aizenberg, Inox and Suzuki and Miles teaches the eyelash curling device of claim 1 (see rejection above). Inox teaches wherein the body part comprises: a case part in which the first tip of the first stick and at least a portion of the first handle part are accommodated (see Figures).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the body part to include only a heating part for heating the tip portion of the first stick of Minato, since the second stick of Minato is not heated. Therefore, the modified device would hold both sticks but only having heating means corresponding to the stick that must be heated.
Suzuki teaches a switch (13) that controls the operation of the control part ([0008]) and a status display part for displaying a heating state of the first tip (see Figure 2; the body has a display that shows the status of the device).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the body to include a control part, as taught by Suzuki, as to allow controlling the heat levels of the heating device and switching the device on or off as needed.
Inox teaches the body can be in the form of a container with an opening that receives the stick (see Figure 6). It would have been It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have a cap, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change is shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 IV B). Applicant does not disclose any criticality to this limitation. Adding a cap to the container provides a closure that advantageously secures the heated stick within the body and therefore prevent it from accidentally slipping out of the container.
The references are silent to a battery that supplies power to the control part and the heating part.
McMullen teaches a system in the same field of endeavor of eyelash curling systems (abstract). McMullen teaches the system comprises a curler (10) and a heating body (50) and the body is controlled via switch (50). McMullen teaches the heating element within the body may be supplied with power from batteries, an electrical cord, or other means (col. 1 ll. 50-55). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device to include a battery as it is one way to supply power to the heating unit of the device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-7 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.
With respect to applicant’s arguments that Minato’s first tip cannot be uniformly cylindrical, it should be noted that Minato teaches the entire tip (81) being heated and not only the concave portion (81A) (see paragraphs [0037-0039] of translation) and although it discloses the tip has a U-shaped cross-section along part of its length, it does not mention any disadvantages or teach away from other configurations. Therefore, the modification of the tip in view of Miles (i.e., being entirely cylindrical), does not destroy or teach away from the principle of operation or cooperation of the two sticks of Minato and only provides an alternative mechanism of curling (e.g., rolling versus crimping/bending/pressing), that Miles discloses as being advantageous over conventional lash crimpers due to being less damaging.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 attached to this office action.
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 LINA FARAJ whose telephone number is (571)272-4580. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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.
/LINA FARAJ/ Examiner, Art Unit 3772 /EDELMIRA BOSQUES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772