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 Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 8, “the silver” should be corrected to –the layer of silver-- for consistent wording.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
No claim limitations are interpreted under 112(f).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 3, 4, 6, 7, 17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 7 and 20 each recite “a thickness of the layer of silver ranges from about 10 to about 30 µm.” The wording suggests that the thickness is different, e.g. variable across the surface, and covers the range from 10 to 30 µm. It appears the intent is to claim a thickness in a range from 10 µm to 30 µm. The meaning is not clear. For the purpose of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as and may be corrected to --a thickness of the layer of silver is between about 10 and about 30 µm--.
The term “about” in claims 3, 4, 6, 7, 17, 19, and 20 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, the following are indefinite:
claim 3: the composition
claim 4: the covered surface area
claims 6, 7, 19, and 20: the layer thickness
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.
Claims 1, 2, and 4-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bayerle (US 2020/0253350) in view of Kou (CN 211431087).
PNG
media_image1.png
417
798
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Bayerle discloses:
A hair iron (100, ¶23), comprising:
a first arm (104, ¶24) and a second arm (106) movable relative to each other between an open position and a closed position (¶24);
one or both of the first and second arms having a heater (130, 132) for heating hair placed between the first and second arms during use (¶25), wherein the heater includes a ceramic substrate (160, ¶30) having a resistive trace (164, ¶31, on outer face according to ¶38) for heating upon connection to power, and
Bayerle does not disclose:
on a side of the ceramic substrate opposite the resistive trace, a layer of silver.
Bayerle teaches that the hair contact surface “may be formed directly by a surface of each heater 130, 132 or formed by a material covering each heater 130, 132, such as a shield or sleeve” (¶25).
Kou relates to the problem of temperature gradients in ceramic heaters (¶5) and is thus pertinent to the problem at hand. Kou teaches, for a ceramic resistance heater in an electronic cigarette, a ceramic substrate having a heat conducting layer of silver, silver-palladium, or silver-platinum (¶13) that is 10-15 µm thick (¶20). The silver layer is formed on the green ceramic body by dip coating or spray coating and sintering (¶18) or printing and sintering (¶50). “By attaching a thermally conductive layer with a thermal conductivity greater than that of the ceramic substrate to the outside of the ceramic substrate, the heat distribution on the surface of the ceramic heating element can be quickly balanced, making the surface temperature of the ceramic heating element uniform. At the same time, the presence of the thermally conductive layer reduces the requirement for the thermal conductivity of the ceramic substrate, allowing the use of low thermal conductivity materials, thereby reducing power consumption and reducing the temperature of the bonding wire area” (¶25). Silver is also a low temperature sintering material, which gives more options for the ceramic material (¶26). The temperature gradient is reduced (¶48-¶49). The silver layer may be a monolithic film or may not cover the whole area, and be formed as a mesh, with gaps to allow for different thermal expansion (¶54 “shrinkage”). Kou is not limited to the needle (cylindrical) heating elements; the “heat-conducting layer can also be added to a designated area on one or both sides of the plate-type heating element” (¶49).
COMBINATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hair iron of Bayerle by adding a coating of silver, silver-palladium, or silver-platinum to the heating surface, i.e. the hair contact surface of Bayerle, as taught by Kou, to obtain the benefit of uniform surface temperature.
Regarding claim 2, Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou teaches:
the layer of silver is a composition of silver and platinum (Kou: ¶13).
Regarding claim 4, Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou does not explicitly teach:
the layer of silver covers the side of the ceramic substrate in a range of about 80% to about 95% of a surface area of said side.
Kou teaches either a monolithic layer or a layer with regular voids, such as a grid, to allow for differential thermal expansion during sintering and use (¶54). The arrangement with voids reduces the area over which the heat is evenly spread by the conductive silver layer. Kou teaches that the “product of the effective area ratio of the mesh and the thickness of the mesh is not less than the thickness of the heat-conducting layer without mesh” (¶22, see also ¶76). Thus, if the area of the conductive layer is decreased, the thickness must be increased to provide the heat conduction effect. Also, keeping thickness constant, the effective area ratio (area covered by the conductive layer) is a result effective area for the conduction effect, and the reduced temperature gradient across the heater.
According to MPEP § 2144.05 §II.A, it has been held that "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). In this case, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the layer of silver cover about 80% to about 95% of the surface area of the ceramic substrate to reduce the temperature gradient because it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 5, Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou does not teach:
the layer of silver includes two layers of silver.
It has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, see MPEP § 2144.04 §§ VI.B. The specification does not describe a new and unexpected result of having two layers.
MODIFICATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hair iron of Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou by forming the layer as two layers. Kou discloses that the thickness of the silver layer determines its ability to balance heat distribution (¶19, ¶52, ¶69, ¶71). Forming the layer as multiple layers would not interfere with the thickness requirement, so one of ordinary skill would have a reasonable expectation of success by forming the layer as two layers.
Regarding claim 6, Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou does not explicitly teach:
each layer of the two layers of silver includes a thickness of about 10 to about 20 μm.
Kou explicitly teaches a thickness of 10-15 μm for pure silver, and also teaches that the layer may be a mixture of silver with platinum or palladium. Kou further teaches a requirement of that the product of the thermal conductivity of the thermally conductive layer and the thickness of the thermally conductive layer is greater than 5500 mW/K (¶19) and that a thicker layer provides improved ability to balance heat distribution (52). Silver has a thermal conductivity of about 429 W/mK. Platinum has a thermal conductivity of about 72 W/mk. Palladium has a thermal conductivity of about 75 W/mK.
MODIFICATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hair iron of Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou by forming each layer with a thickness of about 10 to about 20 μm. This is more than the explicitly taught total thickness of 10-15 μm for pure silver. The increased thickness is obvious to provide the required total product of thermal conductivity and thickness when using a mixture of silver with platinum or palladium, or it would be obvious to provide a thicker layer to improve the performance in balancing heat distribution (¶52, ¶69).
Regarding claim 7, Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou teaches:
a thickness of the layer of silver ranges from about 10 to about 30 μm (Kou: ¶20, 10–15 μm for silver, ¶19, ¶52, ¶69, ¶71).
Regarding claim 8, Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou teaches:
the silver defines one or more patches of silver (¶76 “monolithic film” is one patch, “grid” is multiple patches, though the patches are connected).
Regarding claim 9, Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou does not explicitly teach:
the one or more patches of silver have pluralities of sides paralleling pluralities of edges of the ceramic substrate.
The purpose of the silver layer is to provide a uniform temperature across the heater (see combination statement). Thus, it would be obvious to approach as close as possible to the edges of the heater to avoid gradients. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hair iron of Bayerle to have the silver layer with sides very close to and parallel to the sides of the heater to provide a uniform temperature near the edges of the heater.
Regarding claim 10, Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou teaches:
the side of the ceramic substrate has a rectangular planar shape (see Bayerle Fig 1)
Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou does not explicitly teach:
the layer of silver defines two or more rectangular patches of silver on said side.
Kou teaches a monolithic film or an arrangement with voids to allow for differential thermal expansion during sintering and use (¶54), such as a grid of silver (¶76). It is likely that the grid is connected in one piece, and the squares within the grid are empty, forming “patches” without silver. Nonetheless, one might consider the grid to include intersecting linear patches. The instant specification ascribes no significance nor criticality to the shape or arrangement of the patches, stating “The pattern of the silver 200 may be of nearly an infinite variety” (p.8) and “other embodiments are possible, especially in numbers of patches, orientations, and shapes of the patches, including irregular or random shapes, and coverage area of the patches” (p.15). It appears that Kou’s monolithic film or grid would perform equally as well as the claimed shape because Kou performs the same function of balancing heat distribution (¶52, ¶69). MPEP 2144.04 describes “various common practices which the court has held normally require only ordinary skill in the art and hence are considered routine expedients.” Among these are aesthetic design changes and changes in shape.
MODIFICATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hair iron of Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou to have any arrangement of patches of silver because matters relating to ornamentation only which have no mechanical function cannot be relied upon to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art, see MPEP §2144.04 §§ I and because the shape is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant.
Claims 11, 12, 13, and 14 pertain to the shape or arrangement of patches and are rejected for the same reasons as claims 9 and 10.
Regarding claim 15, Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou, as described above with reference to claim 1 and for the same reasons, teaches:
A hair iron (100, ¶23), comprising:
a first arm (104, ¶24) and a second arm (106) movable relative to each other between an open position and a closed position (¶24); and
on both of the first and second arms, a heater (130, 132) for heating hair placed between the first and second arms during use (¶25), wherein the heater further includes a ceramic substrate (160, ¶30) having on a first side two resistive traces (164a, 164b, ¶32, on outer face according to ¶38) for heating the hair upon connection to power, and
on a second side of the ceramic substrate opposite the first side, a layer of silver (as taught by Kou for the reasons described above in the combination statement for claim 1).
The combination does not explicitly teach:
wherein the layer of silver defines four rectangular patches of silver on said second side.
This modification is obvious for the same reasons described above with reference to claim 10.
Regarding claim 16, Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou does not explicitly teach:
each patch of the four rectangular patches has pluralities of sides paralleling pluralities of edges of the ceramic substrate.
The purpose of the silver layer is to provide a uniform temperature across the heater (see combination statement). Thus, it is desirable to approach as close as possible to the edges of the heater to avoid gradients, and to cover the space efficiently. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hair iron of Bayerle to have the silver layer with sides very close to and parallel to the sides of the heater and to each other to provide a uniform temperature near the edges of the heater and across the heater.
Claim 17 corresponds to claim 4 above and is rejected for the same reasons.
Claims 18 and 19 correspond to claims 5 and 6 above and are rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 20, Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou teaches:
a thickness of the layer of silver ranges from about 10 to about 30 μm (Kou: ¶20, 10–15 μm for silver, ¶19, ¶52, ¶69, ¶71).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bayerle (US 2020/0253350) in view of Kou (CN 211431087), and further in view of Baudry (US 4,973,826).
Regarding claim 3, Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou does not teach:
the composition is about 80% silver and about 20% platinum.
Kou teaches that the silver-platinum heat dissipation layer is the same material as the heating layer (¶50). Kou does not specify what portion of the heating layer, nor the specific composition of the heating layer. Using the same material makes logistics easier by reducing the number of materials that must be purchased or prepared.
Baudry teaches a heating element with a conducting compound formed of 80-100% silver and 20-0% platinum (see end of claim 11).
COMBINATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hair iron of Bayerle as modified by the silver layer of Kou by using s composition of about 80% silver and about 20% platinum because Baudry teaches that this is appropriate for a conductor of a heating (resistance) layer, and thus by the teaching of Kou is also appropriate for the heat conducting layer. Kou provides sufficient teaching to adapt the layer thickness to provide even heat distribution for various materials including this 80/20 mix (¶52, ¶69).
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ford (US 2012/0227758) discloses a hair iron with independently operating square or rectangular (¶96) zones to provide a non-uniform heating effect (¶68). Ford provides another line of reasoning for providing the silver in separate patches.
PNG
media_image2.png
239
530
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
187
388
media_image3.png
Greyscale
KR 200371097 discloses a prior art hair iron wherein the hot plate 2 is made of aluminum, and in some cases, a technique of coating silver powder or ceramic powder is used to prevent hair from being damaged by applying anion or far-infrared rays to the hair.
PNG
media_image4.png
338
572
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding ‘002 claim 1, Yamasaki (EP 2319352) discloses:
A hair iron (100, ¶40), comprising:
a first arm (2, ¶41) and a second arm (3) movable relative to each other between an open position and a closed position (¶41);
one or both of the first and second arms having a heater (23, 33, ¶45) for heating hair placed between the first and second arms during use, wherein the heater includes
PNG
media_image5.png
1188
610
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Chan (US 2008/0092915) teaches applying nanosilver to a hair contact surface of a hair iron for antibacterial effects (¶38).
KR 200316872 teaches a hair iron wherein the hair contact “plate is coated with silver (Ag) which has antibacterial, antifungal, sterilizing, and therapeutic effects by emitting silver ions (Ag+) to the surface” (¶5).
Nagasako (GB 2431326 A) discloses a hair iron having a ceramic (57) heater with embedded resistance (58) and a heat conductive member 63 including silver particles in a resin layer 63.
PNG
media_image6.png
330
606
media_image6.png
Greyscale
KR 200355303 discloses a hair iron with a layer of titanium dioxide powder mixed with silver powder 3 on the heat transfer plate 13 (hair contact surface) to provide the benefit of the pharmacological effects of the silver, including killing bacteria.
PNG
media_image7.png
591
598
media_image7.png
Greyscale
JP H0633390 U teaches a multilayer ceramic heater with resistive traces 14 formed on layer 10 and a coating of silver paste on the heat dissipation plate 32.
PNG
media_image8.png
383
451
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOPAZ L ELLIOTT whose telephone number is (571)270-5851. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 a.m. - 4 p.m. 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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached on (571) 270-5569. 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.
/TOPAZ L. ELLIOTT/Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 3761