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 .
Response to Amendment
The proposed amendments filed 05/11/2026 have been entered. Claims 17-31 and 43-45 are currently pending. Claims 43-45 are newly added.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 17, 21, 23, 24, 28-31, and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2021/0022473 (Hurter hereinafter).
Regarding claim 17, Hurter teaches a nail treatment device that discloses a housing having an opening and a nail treatment space configured to receive a hand and one or more nails of a user for a curing process (Figures 1 and 2 with opening 20 in housing 10/12 for hand to enter for treatment); one or more LED light sources on the housing for generating light in the nail treatment space for performing the curing process (¶ 44 with LEDs 104 in Figure 7); and a sensing and controlling system comprising a plurality of touchless sensors on the housing configured to sense placement of the hand of the user in the nail treatment space (¶ 34), the sensing and controlling system comprising a control circuit including a circuit board on the housing containing programmed instructions (¶ 44 with board 78) and, the touchless sensors including a hand activated sensor on the housing activated by movement of the hand of the user to control the LED light sources and the curing process (¶ 34), the touchless sensors programmable using the programmed instructions to control a plurality of functions of the nail product curing system and various aspects of the curing process responsive to touchless activation of the hand activated sensor by the movement of the hand of the user (¶ 34 where the motion sensors are set up to at least start the curing process of the Led lights within the housing).
Regarding claim 21, Hurter’s teachings are described above in claim 17 where Hurter further discloses a cooling system on the housing configured to perform a cool down of the nail treatment space (heat sinks 102 and vents 108).
Regarding claim 23, Hurter’s teachings are described above in claim 17 where Hurter further discloses that the control circuit is configured to control operation of the array of LED light sources including power, brightness, peak wavelength, on/off, and time of operation (¶ 44 of Hurter).
Regarding claim 24, Hurter’s teachings are described above in claim 17 where Hurter further discloses that the LED light sources include one or more UVC light emitting diodes (UVC LEDs) configured to sterilize the nail treatment space (¶ 44 of Hurter details the use of LED wavelengths from 100-400 depending on the requirements and it is known that providing wavelengths of 200-280 nm will also serve to sterilize a surface).
Regarding claim 28, Hurter’s teachings are described above in claim 17 where Hurter further discloses that that the LED light sources comprise light emitting diodes (LEDs) having a peak wavelength intensity of between 230-470 µm (¶ 44 of Hurter).
Regarding claim 29, Hurter’s teachings are described above in claim 17 where Hurter further discloses that one or more of the LED light sources comprise color LEDs configured for skin treatment of the user (¶ 44 of Hurter).
Regarding claim 30, Hurter’s teachings are described above in claim 17 where Hurter further discloses that that the touchless sensors comprise an element selected from the group consisting of optical sensors, capacitance sensors, IR sensors, laser TOF sensors, camera sensors, and voice sensors (Hurter ¶ 34 details optical sensors).
Regarding claim 31, Hurter’s teachings are described above in claim 17 where Hurter further discloses that that the touchless sensors include feedback sensors configured to employ vibration and indicators to indicate the parameters of the curing process (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation the display at 26 is a feedback sensor to indicate the parameter [time] of the curing process).
Regarding claim 43, Hurter’s teachings are described above in claim 17 where Hurter further discloses that the movement of the hand of the user comprises waving of the hand of the user (The motion sensor of Hurter is fully capable of activating when the hand is present and performing a wave).
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 18 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0022473 (Hurter) in view of US 2021/0289921 (Hsieh hereinafter).
Regarding claim 18, Hurter’s modified teachings are described above in claim 17 but are silent with respect to a radio transmission controller in signal communication with the circuit board configured as a supplement to the touchless sensors for inputting information to the sensing and controlling system.
However, Hsieh teaches a nail curing device that discloses a radio transmission controller in signal communication with the circuit board configured as a supplement to the touchless sensors for inputting information to the sensing and controlling system (¶ 41 discloses the ability for a device to transmit instructions to the nail treatment device of Hurter).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the controller of Hurter with the radio transmitter of Hsieh to allow for remote communications by user.
Regarding claim 27, Hurter’s modified teachings are described above in claim 18 where the combination of Hurter and Hsieh would further disclose that the radio transmission controller includes a rf technology selected from the group consisting of Bluetooth, LTE, RFID, GPRS, Wi-Fi, IrDA, UWB, Zig-Bee, NFC, and a smart phone App (¶ 23 of Hsieh details the use of Wi-Fi).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0022473 (Hurter) in view of US 2019/0320775 (Cheng hereinafter).
Regarding claim 19, Hurter’s teachings are described above in claim 17 but are silent with respect to a light blocker on the housing proximate to the opening configured to prevent light from escaping the nail treatment space, the light blocker comprising a light absorbing material.
However, Cheng teaches a nail treatment device that discloses a light blocker on the housing proximate to the opening configured to prevent light from escaping the nail treatment space (¶ 27-30 discloses a light absorbing layer along the inside of the treatment chamber 203), the light blocker comprising a light absorbing material (¶ 27-30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the treatment chamber of Hurter with the light blocker and absorbing material of Cheng to protect the user from harmful effects.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0022473 (Hurter) in view of US 11425981 (Vasquez hereinafter).
Regarding claim 20, Hurter’s teachings are described above in claim 17 but are silent with respect to an external LED lamp on the housing configured to allow inspection and/or curing of the nail product externally of the nail treatment space.
However, Vasquez teaches a manicurist station that discloses an external LED lamp on the housing configured to allow inspection and/or curing of the nail product externally of the nail treatment space (Figure 1, flexible and external lamp “A” with the use of LED lighting taught in Hurter).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the housing of Hurter with the external light of Vasquez to allow for a technician or user to have a specific light to check the results of the manicure.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0022473 (Hurter) in view of US 2015/0184938 (Tanihara hereinafter).
Regarding claim 22, Hurter’s teachings are described above in claim 21 where Hurter further discloses that the cooling system comprises a fresh air inlet, and a heated air outlet (Figure 7 of Hurter with inlet from 12 then through 108 then out vents 24).
Hurter is silent with respect to a cooler and the cooler comprising a fan, a turbine, an evaporative cooler, a piezo cooler, or a peltier cooler.
However, Tanihara teaches a nail curing device that discloses the use of a cooler and that cooler is a fan (¶ 43 with Figure 1 and fan 18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cooling structure of Hurter with the teachings of Tanihara to improve the cooling airflow and preventing overheating.
Claims 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0022473 (Hurter) in view of US 2017/0135173 (Huang hereinafter).
Regarding claim 25, Hurter’s teachings are described above in claim 17 but are silent with respect to a base for the housing having a magnetic fastening system and a rounded edge proximate to the opening.
However, Huang teaches a nail treatment device that discloses a base for the housing having a magnetic fastening system (Figure 5 magnetic fastener 4) and a rounded edge proximate to the opening (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation the rounded edges of 31 are proximate to the opening at 301).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the nail curing device of Hurter with the base and magnetic fixtures of Huang to allow for easy assembly and protection to the surface which the nail treatment device resides.
Regarding claim 26, Hurter’s modified teachings are described above in claim 25 where the combination of Hurter, Hsieh, and Huang would further disclose that the base includes a pin alignment system (Alignment by 98 of Hurter in Figure 6 with ¶ 44).
Claims 44 and 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0022473 (Hurter) in view of US 2021/0161272 (Wu hereinafter).
Regarding claim 44, Hurter’s teachings are described above in claim 17 but are silent with respect that the hand activated sensor is located on an outside of the housing.
However, Wu teaches a nail treatment device that discloses hand activated sensor is located on an outside of the housing (¶ 8 and 42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the location of a motion sensor on Hurter to be external as taught by Wu to allow for a user to start the nail treatment cycle without placing their hand inside the treatment area.
Regarding claim 45, Hurter’s teachings are described above in claim 17 but are silent with respect that the programmed instructions include a plurality of curing recipes that can be switched using the hand activated sensor and the movement of the hand of the user.
However, Wu teaches a nail treatment device that discloses a set of programmed instructions that include a plurality of curing recipes that can be switched using the hand activated sensor and the movement of the hand of the user (¶ 53 and 55 detail the changes able to be made to the nail treatment programs applied).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the programming of Hurter with the changeable programs of Wu to allow for more customizable curing programs to be applied.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 17-31 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.
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 CONNOR J. TREMARCHE whose telephone number is (571)272-2175. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 0700-1700 Eastern.
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, MICHAEL HOANG can be reached at (571) 272-6460. 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.
/CONNOR J TREMARCHE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights