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 .
This office action is a response to an amendment filed 11/12/2025.
Claims 1-8, 10-16, and 18-20 are pending.
Claims 1-8, 10-16, and 18-20 are amended.
Claims 9 and 17 are cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 11/12/2025 have been fully considered but the newly amended limitations have changed the scope of the claims. Applicant's amendment necessitated new citations to the amended limitations and a re-interpretation of the cited prior art based on the new scope. Rejections based on the previously cited prior art follow.
Applicant’s amendment overcame the objection to the specification made in the previous Office action.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-8, 10-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Publication No. 2015/0375525 to Yamasaki (hereinafter Yamasaki ‘525), in view of Japanese Patent Publication No. JP2015186565A to Mifuji (hereinafter Mfujii. English translation of JP JP2015186565A is included and cited in this office action).
Regarding claim 1, Yamasaki ‘525 teaches an applying system (System with applied drawing material ink, see p40, 24-25, Abs., p236-238, Yamasaki ‘525) comprising:
a drying apparatus that dries a first applying material applied to a surface of a nail (Drying of ink with apparatus, where the ink can be a first applied material of two different applied materials on a nail, see p75, 78, p144, Fig. 6, 159, 24-25, p40, 155, Yamasaki ‘525);
an applying apparatus that applies a second applying material on the surface of the nail with the first applying material dried by the drying apparatus in between (Drawing apparatus applies materials to nails, including a second material to a second region of a nail, after a first region has been applied with a first material and dried, see p40, Figs. 8 to 9, p75, 78, p144, Fig. 6, 159, 24-25, p40, 155, Yamasaki ‘525);
a display (Display, see p50-51, Yamasaki ‘525);
and at least one hardware processor (Control central processing unit, see p134-135, Yamasaki ‘525) configured to:
sense that the nail is placed in the drying apparatus (Sensing of finger with nail into a shelter unit drying apparatus, see p175, p75-76, Yamasaki ‘525);
count, from a timing at which it is sensed that the nail is placed in the drying apparatus, an elapsed time of a drying operation started in the drying apparatus (An elapsing drying time is counted for a drying operation that can start at the point in time that a finger with nail is sensed to be inserted into a shelter unit drying apparatus, see p171, p175-176, p75-76, Yamasaki ‘525), and in response to an elapsed time exceeding a predetermined set time, switch a guidance display displayed on a display to a guidance display which guides a user to apply another applying material (After a determined elapsed drying time has ended ( i.e., exceeding the determined time), a display can be switched to provide instructions that include instructions to a user to insert a finger for printing. This includes instructions displayed to apply a further material to a finger nail after a previous region of the nail has already been drawn with material and which had included a drying process with an elapsing drying counter, meaning the display is switched to provide instructions to a user to insert a nail for further drawing, which occurs after the first drawing and drying with elapsed counter, see Fig 9 step S23 (a 1st Drawing) -> S25 -> S27 ->S28 (NO) -> S11-S15 (another drawing material)-> S16 (Instructions displayed for guidance to user to insert finger in relation to applying the further another material); p217, p192-194, P201-204, p176, p171, p175-176, p75-76, Yamasaki ‘525)
While Yamasaki ‘525 teaches all the limitations as noted, and although the claims are not nearly so specific, Yamasaki ‘525 suggests (see p155), but does not explicitly teach an interpretation where a second material is applied to a nail consecutively after a first material.
However, Mifuji from the same or similar field of nail apparatuses, more explicitly teaches a second material is applied to a nail consecutively after a first material (A second material, such as ink design is applied to a nail after a first material, such as a base coat, has been applied to the nail and after the base coat is dry, where a drawing process on finger nails can be completed one at a time for each finger at a time, or in a sequentially manner. Display of detailed instruction to user during for applying a design (after a dried basecoat) can also be provided (i.e. guidance), see p142, p103, p128, p2-3, p71, Mifuji).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the nail apparatus and operation as described by Yamasaki ‘525 and incorporating consideration of a completion of a drawing process of a nail, that includes multiple applied material, be performed consecutively, as taught by Mifuji.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better focus on completing an entire process of drawing a finger nail before consecutively proceeding to drawing another finger nail, which can provide a preview of completed result on a finger without having to wait for each initial stage of individual nail drawing be sequentially completed for each finger, thus setting a priority of drawing as desired and as suggested by Mufuji and in non-preferred embodiments of Yamasaki ‘525 (see p142, p103, p128, p2-3, p71, Mifuji; p155, Yamasaki ‘525).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Yamasaki ‘525 and Mifuji teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Yamasaki ‘525 further teaches wherein an at least one hardware processor (Control central processing unit, see p134-135, Yamasaki ‘525) is configured to wait until a timing or a planned timing at which a first applying material applied on a surface of a nail completes drying before switching a guidance display displayed on the display to a guidance display which guides a user to apply a second applying material (After a time of a drying process is complete, a display changes to notify next step, such as a for placing finger for drawing another layer (second material), see Fig 9 step S23 (a 1st Drawing) -> S25 -> S27 ->S28 (NO) -> S11-S15 (another drawing material)-> S16 (Instructions displayed for guidance to user to insert finger in relation to applying the further another material); p217, p192-194, P201-204, p176, p171, p175-176, p75-76, Yamasaki ‘525).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Yamasaki ‘525 and Mifuji teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Yamasaki ‘525 further teaches wherein a timing or a planned timing differs depending on a type of a first applying material (Timing that includes time for drying a material, can differ depending on the types of material that have different properties such as viscosity. Different times are reflected by the different drying times, see P159, Table 4, Yamasaki ‘525).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Yamasaki ‘525 and Mifuji teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Yamasaki ‘525 further teaches wherein an applying apparatus is communicatively connected to a drying apparatus (application and drying are connected through control apparatus, see Figs. 5, 226-227, p134-137, p75, Fig. 2, Yamasaki ‘525), and wherein a display and an at least one hardware processor are provided in the applying apparatus (Display on device, and controller cpu are part of apparatus, see Figs. 5, p203-204, p134-137, Fig. 2, Yamasaki ‘525).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Yamasaki ‘525 and Mifuji teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Yamasaki ‘525 further teaches wherein an at least one processor (CPU processing unit, see p134-135, Yamasaki ‘525) is configured to wait until a timing or a planned timing at which a first applying material applied on a surface of a nail completes drying (A system waits until a first material applied to dries, see Fig. 9, p171, p175-176, p75-76,, Yamasaki ‘525) before allowing start of an applying operation of a second applying material by an applying apparatus (After a time of a drying process is complete, the next steps can continue, such as a proceeding to applying a second material to a region (second material), see Fig 9 step S23 (a 1st Drawing) -> S25 -> S27 ->S28 (NO) -> S11-S15 (another drawing material)-> S16 (Instructions displayed for guidance to user to insert finger in relation to applying the further another material); p217, p192-194, P201-204, p176, p171, p175-176, p75-76,, Yamasaki ‘525) .
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Yamasaki ‘525 and Mifuji teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Yamasaki ‘525 further teaches wherein a timing or a planned timing differs depending on a type of a first applying material (Timing that includes time for drying a material, can differ depending as a result of material properties such as viscosity, as reflected by the different drying times, and which affect planned times, see P159, Table 4, Yamasaki ‘525)
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Yamasaki ‘525 and Mifuji teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Yamasaki ‘525 further teaches wherein an applying apparatus is communicatively connected to a drying apparatus (application and drying are connected through control apparatus, see Figs. 5, 226-227, p134-137, p75, Fig. 2, Yamasaki ‘525), and wherein an at least one hardware processor is provided in the applying apparatus (A controller cpu is part of apparatus for applying material, see Figs. 5, p203-204, p134-137, Fig. 2, Yamasaki ‘525).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Yamasaki ‘525 and Mifuji teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Yamasaki ‘525 further teaches wherein a predetermined set time differs depending on a type of a first applying material (Timing that includes time for drying a material, can differ depending on the types of material that have different properties such as viscosity. Different times are reflected by the different drying times, see P159, Table 4, Yamasaki ‘525).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Yamasaki ‘525 and Mifuji teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Yamasaki ‘525 further teaches wherein an at least one hardware processor (CPU processing unit, see p134-137, Yamasaki ‘525) is further configured to, in response to an elapsed timeAfter a determined elapsed time of a drying process is complete ( i.e., exceeding the determined time), the next steps can continue, such as a proceeding to applying a second material to a region (second material), see Fig 9 step S23 (a 1st Drawing) -> S25 -> S27 ->S28 (NO) -> S11-S15 (another drawing material)-> S16 (Instructions displayed for guidance to user to insert finger in relation to applying the further another material); p217, p192-194, P201-204, p176, p171, p175-176, p75-76,, Yamasaki ‘525).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Yamasaki ‘525 and Mifuji teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Yamasaki ‘525 further teaches wherein a predetermined set time differs depending on a type of a first applying material (Timing that includes time for drying a material, can differ depending on the types of material that have different properties such as viscosity. Different times are reflected by the different drying times, see P159, Table 4, Yamasaki ‘525).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Yamasaki ‘525 and Mifuji teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Yamasaki ‘525 further teaches wherein an at least one hardware processor notifies that a start of an applying operation of a second applying material is allowed on a display (In a process that verifies application and drying of materials as they are consecutively applied to nails, a display is used to provide instructions that include instructions to a user to insert a finger for printing. This includes instructions displayed to apply a further material (e.g. a second material) to a finger nail after a previous region of the nail has already been drawn, therefore, since the process first verified application before continuing onto a display and further material application, the hardware controller processes provides an indication that applying a material is allowed by displaying the instructions to apply a next material, see Fig 9 step S23 (a 1st Drawing) -> S25 -> S27 ->S28 (NO) -> S11-S15 (another drawing material)-> S16 (Instructions displayed for guidance to user to insert finger in relation to applying the further another material); p217, p192-194, P201-204, p176, p171, p175-176, p75-76,, Yamasaki ‘525).
Claim 14 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.
Claim 15 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 2.
Claim 16 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 6.
Claim 18 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 11.
Claim 19 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.
Claim 20 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 3.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamasaki ‘525, in view of Mifuji, and in further view of US Patent Publication No. 2022/0035516 to Tokunaga (hereinafter Tokunaga).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Yamasaki ‘525 and Mifuji teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Yamasaki ‘525 further teaches an applying apparatus and drying apparatus (Printing and drying
apparatus, see Fig. 5, 226-227, p134-137, p75, Fig. 2, Yamasaki ‘525)
Yamasaki ‘525 does not explicitly teach wherein a display and at least one processor are provided in an external apparatus that is communicatively connected to an apparatus.
However, Tokunaga from the same or similar field of nail apparatuses, teaches wherein a display and at least one processor are provided in an external apparatus that is communicatively connected to an apparatus (A display with processor connected and external to an apparatus, see Fig. 1A, p22-26, 31, Tokunaga).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the nail apparatus and operation as described by the combination that includes Yamasaki ‘525 and incorporating an external display and processor, as taught by Tokunaga.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better permit greater flexibility in operation of an apparatus by including use of a ubiquitous external device capable of serving an apparatus termina interface and permit remote control (see 22-26, 31, Fig 1., Tokunaga).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Mor Yosef et al., US Patent Publication No. 2020/0205549, teaches an apparatus for applying a nail polish material, and which includes a separate drying element.
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 EMILIO J SAAVEDRA whose telephone number is (571)270-5617. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30am-5:30pm (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, Robert E Fennema can be reached at (571) 272-2748. 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.
/EMILIO J SAAVEDRA/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117