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 .
Claims 1-6 have been examined.
Claims 7-14 remain withdrawn from examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS submitted on 9/2/2025 have been received and reviewed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments based upon the latest amendment with respect to amended claim(s) 1-6 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection addresses the features are shown below. It is noted that the latest amendment includes extensive changes including particular features of the tool, the tip, and tool being coupled to the CNC milling machine.
The arguments by the applicants include teaching by the BEAUCAMP reference and how tool does not teach of the claimed monocrystalline diamond tip. It is noted that the SUDO reference, as shown below, teaches of this particular feature as the cutter itself is stated as diamond which would encompass the claimed tip. Wherein, the cutter of SUDO as the working tool, this tool can be operated by the CNC milling machine of BEAUCAMP. The combination of the features known in forming of molds and wherein, these features would be operable in forming cosmetic products.
The latest amendment have corrected the issues raised in the claim objections and rejections based upon 112, which are now withdrawn.
The previous rejection of the claims were based upon the claimed prior to the latest amendment. However, based upon the latest amendment, see the rejection of the claims below.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-2, and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SUDO (US 2003/0175379 A1) in view of BEAUCAMP (US 2017/0246728 A1) and KAMEN (US 5200173 A).
Re 1, regarding formation of a mould, see SUDO wherein, a cutter 100 is provided to form the mold, see [0054, 0077], the cutter being of diamond, and wherein, the cutter end provides for machining of a mirror surface finish, see [0072]..
SUDO does not teach of a cnc milling machine, nor of the mold in forming a cosmetic products.
Wherein, the concept of a system for the realization of a mould (see teaching by BEAUCAMP in abstract regarding shaping tool to perform grinding operation used to prepare molds) (for cosmetic products, this is seen as an intended use of the formed mold), the system comprising:
at least one numerically controlled milling machine (see [0006, 0022-0029] of a polishing machine to shape a workpiece, machine having a tool, and the machine having seven axes of control) having a plurality of axes including A-axis, B-axis, X-axis, Y-axis, Z-axis, C-axis, V-axis, wherein at least the axes A-axis, B-axis, X-axis, Y-axis, Z-axis are configured to realize the mould, which includes at least one raw or semi-finished piece or a raw or semi-finished mould to cast the cosmetic products;
and a working tool coupled to the at least one numerically controlled milling machine, the working tool having a monocrystalline diamond (see [0006, 0042], of the rigid pellets that can be comprised of diamonds for the working surface of the tool) wherein the tool having a tip (see teaching by BEAUCAMP, see Figs. 5a, 5b, regarding different shaped tools) remove, compress, and polish excess material from the at least one raw or semi-finished piece, or the raw or semi-finished mould for making finished products having high-precision cast cosmetic products with a surface finish (see abstract, wherein the mold cavity surface having a smooth surface finish).
Wherein, the mold is for forming cosmetic products is an intended use of the mold. Whereupon, the claimed invention is in regards to the working tool that forms a mold is seen in SUDO that teaches of cutter and further, the concept of a milling tool that acts upon the various axes of control are shown in the BEAUCAMP reference.
See teaching by KAMEN of molded cosmetic product having a surface furnish, see abstract, see also molds having surface characteristics, and in which the molded products will obtain the uniform high-gloss finishes, see Col. 1, lines 10-17, see also Col. 3, lines 25-39.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the cutter of SUDO with the use of a CNC milling as taught by BEAUCAMP and with the mold utilized in the cosmetic industry as taught by KAMEN, see KSR rationale, MPEP2143, as combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Re 2 (upon 1), wherein (see in SUDO and BEAUCAMP) the working tool is a monocrystalline diamond holding tool comprising the monocrystalline diamond tip (see SUDO of diamond cutter; see BEAUCAMP [0006, 0042] of the diamonds being hold upon the tool) adapted to remove material from the at least one raw or semi-finished piece, or the raw or semi-finished mould and perform lapping of thereon for a smooth brilliant finish with a shiny surface and sharp edges (see BEAUCAMP, [0057, 0080] regarding the tool being moved and to smooth to grind/polish for the surface finish, see also [0061] of the tool pressed against the workpiece and rotating to remove material, and [0042] of the pellets being diamond, and thus to remove the material to form the surface finish).
Re 4 (upon 1), wherein the working tool is a hydro type working having a cylinder comprising the monocrystalline diamond tip shaped to create different effects on the finished product, including a "pearl" effect or a "necklace effect”.
(regarding the terminology of “pearl” or “necklace” effect, other similar terminology include iridescent, nacreous, pearly, and lustrous)
The formation of the effect upon the finished product is an intended use of the apparatus. Wherein, the teaching of BEAUCAMP can be considered as being capable of such operation, see also SUDO (US 2003/0175379 A1), see [0003] of the lustrous finish, and see also [0054, 0077] using a diamond.
Re 5 (upon 1), wherein the working tool is a said at least one zetina type working tool that is a cylinder in shape of a comb with a fixed cutting edges, and works with a side facing the at least one raw or semi-finished piece to create a satin and a brushed effect on the at least one raw or semi-finished piece.
(see terminology that includes mirror surface as alternative for satin)
The formation of the effect upon the finished product is an intended use of the apparatus. Wherein, the teaching of BEAUCAMP can be considered as being capable of such operation, see also OKAJIMA (US 2006/0144198 A1), see [0035, 0054, 0068], of using a diamond tip 1 and machining to form a mirror surface. See also SUDO (US 2003/0175379 A1), see regarding mirror surface machining, and also [0054, 0077] using a diamond.
Re 6 (upon 1), wherein the working tool for making the finished mould for cast cosmetic products is suitable for precision machining in cosmetics and the shape of the working tools vary allowing to obtain different finishing effects.
The formation of the effect upon the finished product is an intended use of the apparatus. Wherein, the teaching of BEAUCAMP can be considered as being capable of such operation.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SUDO in view of BEAUCAMP and KAMEN as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of MORFINO (US 2011/0218668 A1).
Re 3 (upon 1), wherein the working tool is a hammer type working tool that comprises the monocrystalline diamond tip with a shape for hammering to obtain a hammer-tip or "hammered" effect on the finished product.
Though SUDO does not teach of hammering via the working tool, the formation of the effect upon the finished product is an intended use of the apparatus. Wherein, the teaching of BEAUCAMP can be considered as being capable of such operation. Wherein, the claimed hammered effect is of a different usage, and wherein, see also MORFINO (US 2011/0218668 A1), see [0140].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have further modify the system of the modified SUDO with the hammered effect as taught by MORFINO as a known operation of the cnc machine to form the effect, see KSR rationale, MPEP2143, as combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892 form.
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 EMMANUEL S LUK whose telephone number is (571)272-1134. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 to 5.
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, Xiao S Zhao can be reached at 571-270-5343. 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.
/EMMANUEL S LUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights