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 § 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 10 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 6-9 appear to recite different configurations in which the hairs of the hair extensions may be manipulated by a user, as claim 1 requires “the plurality of hair strands are configurable between a plurality of configurations” (in other words, means the hair strands can be manipulated into a plurality of configurations) and claims 6-9 describe the plurality of configurations. As with natural hair, hair strands of hair extensions can be gathered, manipulated, and arranged in many different positions, styles, etc. However, claim 10 appears to require the specific configuration (wrapped ponytail or bun) be provided and be configured to be secured to the scalp. Yet, the hair extension of the instant application does not appear to be provided in a wrapped ponytail, ponytail or bun as a final product, instead, the user manipulates the hair strands into these styles/configurations; therefore, it is improper to claim a configuration which is achieved by the user.
It is unclear if claim 10 is attempting to positively recite the hair extension further comprises one or more securement means or if the claim is simply providing an intended use recitation where during use securement means are used to secure the hair in a wrapped ponytail or “wrapped configuration”. Furthermore, if the securement means are being positively recited, it is unclear if the securement device is actually part of the hair extension or a different/separate element which does not form part of the hair extension. If the securing means is separate from the hair extension, there is an inconsistency in the language of the preamble and that of body of the claim, thus making their scope unclear. The preamble recites a hair extension indicating that the claims are directed to the sub-combination (hair extension). However, a positive recitation of one or more securement means including at least one of a clip, pin and elastic, means a combination (system or kit) is being claimed, thus indicating that the claims are directed to the combination of the hair extension and the one or more securement means. For purposes of examination, the claim is being interpreted as positively reciting one or more securement means which secure (directly or indirectly) the hair strands to the scalp of the wearer.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 11 and 12 do not further limit the subject matter of claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-3, 11-13 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park (US 20080047572).
Regarding claim 1, Park discloses a hair extension (Refer to Figures 1-4 and Abstract) comprising: a base (3,5) including an inner portion and an outer portion, wherein the inner portion of the base comprises: a mesh cap (5, Refer to paragraph 0019 which states 5 may be of the mesh type) including a drawstring (7) moveably coupled to the mesh cap at an outer edge of the mesh cap, the mesh cap having an inner surface (surface with 11 and contacting 3) and an outer surface (surface to which the hairs 2 attach and extend from) opposite the inner surface; and a fabric piece (3, Refer to paragraph 0019 which states 3 may be a mesh or lace material, both of which are fabric) coupled to the inner surface of the mesh cap; and a plurality of hair strands (2) extending from the outer surface of the mesh cap and covering the mesh cap, the plurality of hair strands forming a structure of the base, wherein the inner portion of the base is configured to be attached to the hair of the wearer, and wherein the plurality of hair strands are configurable between a plurality of configurations (the hair strands 2 are able to be manipulated and arranged in different configurations/styles as desired by the user).
Regarding claim 2, Park discloses a fastener (4) movably coupled to the drawstring of the mesh cap (Refer to Figures 1-4).
Regarding claim 3, Park discloses the fastener (4) is configured to secure the inner portion of the base to the hair of the wearer (Refer to Figures 1-4).
Regarding claim 11, Park discloses the fabric piece (3) is configured to be in contact with the hair of the wearer (Refer to paragraphs 0017 and 0020).
Regarding claim 12, Park discloses the fabric piece (3) is configured to conceal the hair of the wearer when the inner portion of the base is attached to the hair of the wearer (Refer to paragraphs 0017 and 0020).
Regarding claim 13, Park discloses the base includes two combs (8) attached to opposite sides of the inner portion of the base (Refer to Figure 3).
Regarding claim 15, Park discloses the plurality of hair strands are fabricated from at least one of synthetic materials and natural materials, wherein the synthetic materials include at least one of nylon, acrylic, polyester, plastic, and vinyl, and wherein the natural materials include at least one of silk, human hair, and animal hair (Refer to paragraph 0023 where Park explains the hair strands are natural human hair).
Regarding claim 16, Park discloses a method of extending hair comprising: providing a hair extension (Refer to Figures 1-4) including: a base (3,5) including an inner portion and an outer portion, wherein the inner portion of the base comprises: a mesh cap (5) including a drawstring (7) included within an outer edge of the mesh cap, the mesh cap having an inner surface (surface with 11 and contacting 3) and an outer surface (surface having hairs 2) opposite the inner surface; and a fabric piece (3) secured to the inner surface of the mesh cap, the fabric piece positioned within the outer edge of the mesh cap and covering at least a majority of the inner surface of the mesh cap (3 covers the inside of 5 and elements 10 of fabric piece 3 couple to elements 11 of mesh cap 5, where 10 and 11 are on the outer edges of 3 and 5, respectively (Refer to Figures 3 and 4); thus, the fabric piece covers a majority of the inner surface of the mesh cap), the fabric piece configured to conceal hair of the wearer of the hair extension; and a plurality of hair strands (2) individually extending from the outer surface of the mesh cap, the plurality of hair strands forming a structure of the base; securing the base of the hair extension onto the hair of the wearer; and styling the plurality of hair strands into one of a plurality of configurations (Refer to paragraphs 0016, 0021 and 0025, where donning of extensions/wigs requires styling (e.g. combing, arranging/manipulating, parting, etc.) of the hair strands in order to provide the desired aesthetic).
Regarding claim 17, Park discloses securing the base of the hair extension on the hair of the wearer comprises: placing the inner portion of the base in contact with the hair of the wearer; tightening the drawstring around the hair of the wearer; and fastening the tightened drawstring in place with a fastener (Refer to paragraphs 0018, 0021 and 0025).
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 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park and Ombres (US 20220053861).
Regarding claim 4, Park discloses the hair extension of claim 1 above; however, Park does not disclose the plurality of hair strands are braided into a plurality of braided hair strands. The hair strands provided by Park are capable of being braided and it is well-known for users to style the hair of hair extensions in various styles including braids as demonstrated by Ombres (Refer to paragraph 0030). The hair extension of Ombres is depicted as having generally straight hair but Ombres explains “the hair may be styled in a number of ways, including braids or a bun, for example” (Refer to paragraph 0030). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hair extension of Park such that the plurality of hair strands be braided into a plurality of braided hair strands as Ombres demonstrates it is well-known and conventional to style such hair strands into braids, creating a braided hair extension configuration.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Park and Ombres disclose the hair extension of Claim 4, wherein the plurality of hair strands and at least one comb (8 of Park) provide the structure to the base.
Regarding claims 6-9, the combination of Park and Ombres disclose the hair extension of Claim 4, wherein the plurality of hair strands are configurable between a plurality of configurations and the plurality of configurations include: i) a ponytail configuration where each of the plurality of braided hair strands hangs freely from the outer portion of the base, ii) a wrapped ponytail configuration where a first portion of the plurality of braided hair strands hang freely from the outer portion of the base, and a second portion of the plurality of braided hair strands are wrapped around the first portion, and iii) a bun configuration where each of the plurality of braided hair strands are wrapped around the outer portion of the base. As explained in the rejection of claim 4 above, the hair strands may be provided in a braided configuration and the braids are capable of being manipulated into different configurations such as a ponytail, wrapped ponytail or bun.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Park and Ombres disclose the hair extension of claim 9, wherein the plurality of braided hair strands that are configurable into the wrapped ponytail, and wrapped configurations are secured to a scalp of the wearer using one or more securement means (combs 8 of Park); however, the combination does not disclose the one or more securement means include at least one of a clip, a pin, and an elastic. Although Park provides combs (8) as securement means for securing the hair strands (and hair extension as a whole) to the user’s scalp, alternative fasteners (e.g. clips, comb clips, pins, elastics, adhesives, crimping sleeves, etc.) are commonly used instead of or in combination with such combs as demonstrated by Ombres. The hair extension of Ombres provides pins (142) at intervals around the circumference of the hair extension (Refer to paragraph 0046 and Figure 8) for securing to the user’s scalp. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the combs with pins in the hair extension of the combination of Park and Ombres, as Ombres demonstrates pins are art-recognized equivalent fasteners.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park and Rice (US 20230371633).
Regarding claim 14, Park discloses the hair extension of claim 1; however, Park does not disclose one or more accessories are attached to one or more of the plurality of hair strands, wherein the one or more accessories include contrasting hair strands, ornaments, or charms. It is well known and common practice in the art to provide decorative elements/accessories on hair strands of hair extensions as demonstrated by Rice. The hair extension of Rice provides vertically extending strands (120) of which resemble the hair of the user (Refer to paragraph 0030), where the strands “may be any combination of colors” “such as “blond, red, orange, black, brown, white, blue, purple, pink, amber, tan, light brown, dark brown or combinations thereof” (Refer to paragraph 0031) and the strands may include other accessories (121) such as “filigree tubes, pearls, hairpins, beads braiding string, coils, feathers, shells,…..colored acrylic yarn, braid ornaments, decorative safety pins,…dream catcher ornament, rhinestone clips, wooden beads, rubber bands, etc.” (Refer to paragraph 0034). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hair extension of Park to include contrasting hair strands, ornaments and/or charms attached to the hair strands as taught by Rice in order to enhance the aesthetic appeal of the hair extension.
Claims 4-10 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park and Ivonmelda (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAAsS2k06Zo).
Regarding claims 4 and 6-9, Park discloses the hair extension of claim 1; however, Park does not disclose the plurality of hair strands are braided into a plurality of braided hair strands, the plurality of configurations include a ponytail configuration where each of the plurality of braided hair strands hangs freely from the outer portion of the base, a wrapped ponytail configuration where a first portion of the plurality of braided hair strands hang freely from the outer portion of the base, and a second portion of the plurality of braided hair strands are wrapped around the first portion, and a bun configuration where each of the plurality of braided hair strands are wrapped around the outer portion of the base.
Park provided the plurality of hair strands attached to the base. Although Park does not disclose they are braided, it is well-known and conventional to style hair extensions and wigs as desired including forming braids and arranging the braids in different styles (ponytail, bun, etc.) as demonstrated by Ivonmelda. The tutorial provided by Ivonmelda outlines a method of creating a hair extension and installing the hair extension to form a wrapped ponytail. As best shown at timestamp 1:03-4:20, the extension provides a base with a drawstring and a plurality of hairs are attached to the base, similar to the configuration of Park, where the plurality of hairs are braided into a plurality of braids. The extension is placed over the user’s natural hair and secured thereto using a clip and the drawstring as shown in timestamp 7:03-7:19 which is also similar to how Park discloses the extension is attached to the user’s hair. Ivonmelda then teaches the braided hair strands can be arranged in a wrapped ponytail by selecting a few braided hair strands and wrapping them around an outer portion of the base as shown in timestamp 7:20-7:33. This is just one example of how the braids may be styled as the braids are capable of being manipulated into various styles such as a bun. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hair extension disclosed by Park to such that the plurality of hair strands be braided into a plurality of braided hair strands, whereby the plurality of hair strands are configurable between a plurality of configurations including a ponytail, wrapped ponytail or bun, as Ivonmelda demonstrates it is conventional to braid such hair strands to form a plurality of braided hair strands which are configurable into different braided styles (ponytail, bun, etc.) performed to style the hair of a hair extension into a well-known hair style.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Park and Ivonmelda disclose the hair extension of claim 4 above, wherein the plurality of hair strands (2 of Park which were modified to be in a braided configuration, per the rejection of claim 4 above) and at least one comb (8, Refer to Figures 3 and 4 of Park) provide structure to the base.
Regarding claims 18-20, Park discloses the method of claim 16 above; however, Park does not disclose braiding the plurality of hair strands into a plurality of braided hair strands, where the plurality of configurations include a ponytail configuration, a wrapped ponytail configuration, and a wrapped configuration and wrapping at least a portion of the plurality of hair strands around the outer portion of the base to configure the plurality of hair strands into at least one of the wrapped ponytail configuration and the wrapped configuration. Park provided the plurality of hair strands attached to the base but does not disclose they are braided and styled into a wrapped ponytail or wrapped configuration. However, it is well-known and conventional to style hair extensions and wigs as desired including creating a wrapped ponytail with braided hair as demonstrated by Ivonmelda. The tutorial provided by Ivonmelda outlines a method of creating a hair extension and installing the hair extension to form a wrapped ponytail. As best shown at timestamp 1:03-4:20, the extension provides a base with a drawstring and a plurality of hairs are attached to the base, similar to the configuration of Park, where the plurality of hairs are braided into a plurality of braids. The extension is placed over the user’s natural hair and secured thereto using a clip and the drawstring as shown in timestamp 7:03-7:19 which is also similar to how Park discloses the extension is attached to the user’s hair. Ivonmelda then teaches the braided hair strands can be arranged in a wrapped ponytail by selecting a few braided hair strands and wrapping them around an outer portion of the base as shown in timestamp 7:20-7:33. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Park to include braiding the plurality of hair strands into a plurality of braided hair strands and styling the plurality of braided hair strands into a wrapped ponytail configuration by wrapping at least a portion of the plurality of hair strands around the outer portion of the base as Ivonmelda teaches this steps are conventionally performed to style the hair of a hair extension into a well-known hair style.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Park and Ivonmelda as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Lee (US 20140251362).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Park and Ivonmelda disclose the hair extension of claim 9 above, wherein the plurality of braided hair strands that are wrapped in the wrapped ponytail and wrapped configurations are secured to a scalp of the wearer using one or more securement means (8 of Park secure the hair strands to the scalp of the wearer); however, the combination does not explicitly state the one or more securement means include at least one of a clip, a pin, and an elastic. The securement means (8) provided by Park are in the form of combs (8). Although Park is silent regarding the combs being clips, it is conventional in the art for such wig combs to be in the form of clip combs as demonstrated by Lee (Refer to Figure 2 and paragraph 0032 “wig clips 140 have comb-like teeth 141”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hair extension of the combination of Park and Ivonmelda such that the one or more combs for securing the hair strands to the scalp of the wearer be clip combs as Lee demonstrates it is well-known and conventional for such securing means to be provided in the form of clip combs as they provide a resilient means which improves retention and prevents sliding.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over combination of Park and Ivonmelda as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Ferreira (US 20140311518).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Park and Ivonmelda disclose the hair extension of claim 9 above, wherein the plurality of braided hair strands that are configurable to be wrapped in the wrapped ponytail configuration or the bun configuration are configured to be secured to the scalp of the wearer; however, the combination does not disclose one or more securement means capable of securing the hair strands to the scalp of the wearer, where the one or more securement means include at least one of a clip, a pin, and an elastic. Ivonmelda shows the ends of the wrapped hair strands being tucked in place but does not specify or depict using additional securement means to retain the wrapped hair strands in place. Despite this, it is well-known and conventional to use hair pins to secure the wrapped hair strands with a hair pin as demonstrated by Ferreira (Refer to paragraph 0013 which describes conventional steps of forming a wrapped ponytail, which includes “wrapping the selected strands of hair” and “securing it with an ordinary hair pin” and paragraph 0034). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hair extension of the combination of Park and Ivonmelda to include a pin for securing the hair strands in wrapped configurations to the scalp of the wearer as taught by Ferreira in order to ensure a wrapped configuration is maintained and does not unravel/unwrap.
Claims 1-3, 11-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20190059487) and Romm (US 9155344).
Regarding claim 1, Kim et al. disclose a hair extension comprising a base including an inner portion and an outer portion, wherein the inner portion of the base comprises a mesh cap (135) including a drawstring (150, 170) moveable coupled to the mesh cap at an outer edge of the mesh cap, the mesh cap having opposing inner and outer surfaces and a plurality of hair strands (160) extending from the outer surface of the mesh cap and covering the mesh cap, the plurality of hair strands forming a structure of the base (Refer to Figures 1-7). However, Kim et al. do not provide a fabric piece secured to the inner surface of the mesh cap, the fabric piece positioned within the outer edge of the mesh cap and covering at least a majority of the inner surface of the mesh cap, the fabric piece configured to conceal hair of a wearer of the hair extension. Romm demonstrates it is well-known and conventional in the art for the base of a hair extension to have more than one layer, where the hair is secured to one mesh layer (203) and a fabric layer (205) is secured to the inner layer of the mesh layer (203) so as to be within the outer edge of the mesh layer and covering at least a majority thereof, as the inner layer forms a “soft barrier that does not put stress on a user’s hair and/or scalp and does not feel abrasive” and provide a wicking effect by facilitating “a flow of moisture away through evaporation” while exuding “harmful elements with perspiration” (Refer to col. 6 lines 8-32). The fabric layer is also described as being able to conceal the user’s hair (Refer to col. 6 lines 16-19). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hair extension of Kim et al. such that the base include a fabric piece secure to the inner surface of the mesh cap such that the fabric piece positioned within the outer edge of the mesh cap, cover at least a majority of the inner surface of the mesh cap and be configured to conceal hair of the wearer as taught by Romm in order to provide a soft barrier that does not put stress on a user’s hair and/or scalp and promotes wicking of perspiration for a more comfortable feel. One of ordinary skill in the art appreciates the additional fasteners (140, 145) provided by Kim et al. would still be provided on the inner most surface of the base to permit coupling with the user’s hair.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, the combination of Kim et al. and Romm disclose the hair extension of claim 1 above, Kim et al. further disclose a fastener (drawstring clamp, Refer to Figure 6) movably coupled to the drawstring of the mesh cap and the fastener is configured to secure the inner portion of the base to the hair of the wearer.
Regarding claims 11 and 12, the combination of Kim et al. and Romm disclose the hair extension of claim 1 above, wherein the fabric piece is configured to be in contact with the hair of the wearer and is configured to conceal the hair of the wearer when the inner portion of the base is attached to the hair of the wearer. As explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, the hair piece of Kim et al. was modified per the teachings of Romm to include an inner fabric layer disposed over the inner surface of the mesh cap; thus, the fabric layer/piece contacts the user’s hair. The material of the fabric layer is disclosed by Romm as being concealing.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Kim et al. and Romm disclose the hair extension of claim 1 above, Kim et al. further disclose the base includes two combs (140, 145) attached to opposite sides of the inner portion of the base (Refer to Figure 3)
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Kim et al. and Romm disclose the hair extension of claim 1 above, Kim et al. further disclose the plurality of hair strands are fabricated from at least one of synthetic materials or natural materials, wherein the synthetic materials include at least one of nylon, acrylic, polyester, plastic, or vinyl, and wherein the natural materials include at least one of silk, human hair, or animal hair (Refer to paragraph 0018).
Claims 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kim et al. and Romm as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bias (US 20060174905).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Kim et al. and Romm disclose the hair extension of claim 1 above; however, the combination does not disclose the plurality of hair strands are braided into a plurality of braided hair strands. It is well-known and conventional of hair of a hair extension to be provided in various configurations such as straight, wavy, curly, braided, twisted, etc. as demonstrated by Bias. The hair extension of Bias provides a plurality of hair strands which include “straight hair strands 14, wavy or curly hair strands 18, braided hair strands 20 or a combination thereof” (Refer to paragraph 0027 and claim 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hair extension of the combination of Kim et al. and Romm such that the plurality of hair strands be braided into a plurality of braided hair strands as Bias teaches it is conventional to provide a plurality of braided hair strands as the hair strands of a hair extension.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Kim et al., Romm and Bias disclose the hair extension of claim 4 above, wherein the plurality of hair strands and at least one comb (140, 145, Refer to Figure 3 of Kim) provide the structure to the base.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Kim et al., Romm and Bias disclose the hair extension of claim 4 above, wherein the plurality of configurations include a ponytail configuration, a wrapped ponytail configuration, and a bun configuration. Kim et al. explain the hair strands may be provided in a ponytail/wrapped ponytail configuration (Refer to paragraph 0029 and Figure 1 which depicts the ponytail as a wrapped ponytail) and a bun configuration (Refer to paragraphs 0032, 0036 and 0037 and Figures 5 and 6).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Kim et al., Romm and Bias disclose the hair extension of claim 6 above, wherein in the ponytail configuration, each of the plurality of braided hair strands hangs freely from the outer portion of the base (Refer to Figure 1 of Kim et al. and recall the plurality of strands were modified to be a plurality of braided strands per the teachings of Bias in the rejection of claim 4 above, where claim 7 depends from claim 4).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Kim et al., Romm and Bias disclose the hair extension of claim 6 above, wherein in the wrapped ponytail configuration, a first portion of the plurality of braided hair strands hang freely from the outer portion of the base, and a second portion of the plurality of braided hair strands are wrapped around the first portion (Refer to Figure 1 of Kim et al. which depicts some of the hair strands wrapped around the ponytail and recall the plurality of strands were modified to be a plurality of braided strands per the teachings of Bias in the rejection of claim 4 above, where claim 8 depends from claim 4).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Kim et al., Romm and Bias disclose the hair extension of claim 8 above, wherein in the bun configuration, each of the plurality of braided hair strands are wrapped around the outer portion of the base (Refer to Figure 5 of Kim et al. and recall the plurality of strands were modified to be a plurality of braided strands per the teachings of Bias in the rejection of claim 4 above, where claim 9 depends from claim 4).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Kim et al., Romm and Bias disclose the hair extension of claim 8 above, wherein the plurality of braided hair strands that are wrapped in the wrapped ponytail configuration or the bun configuration are configured to be secured to a scalp of the wearer using one or more securement means (140,145), and wherein the one or more securement means include at least one of a clip, a pin, or an elastic (Refer to paragraphs 0030 and 0031 which explain the fasteners 140,145 may be clips).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/27/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Park does not provide a fabric piece as claimed and Park fails to provide a plurality of hairs extending from the outer surface of the mesh cap.
As explained in the rejection of claims 1 and 16 above, Park provides a base (3,5) which includes a mesh cap (5, Refer to paragraph 0019 which states 5 may be of the mesh type) having an inner surface (surface with 11 and contacting 3) and an outer surface (surface to which the hairs 2 attach and extend from) opposite the inner surface, where a plurality of hairs extend from the outer surface, and a fabric piece (3, Refer to paragraph 0019 which states 3 may be a mesh or lace material, both of which are fabric) coupled to the inner surface of the mesh cap.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20130247930 demonstrates it is well-known for ponytail hair extensions to be provided with braided portions of hair wrapped around the outer portion of the ponytail (Refer to paragraph 0028). The following patent references demonstrate it is well-known to provide hair strands of hair extensions in the form of a plurality of braids: US D426349, US 20150013708 and US 20230371633. The following patent references demonstrate it is well-known to attach decorative element/accessories to hair/hair extensions: US 4406296 and US 6206011. US 20140251362 teaches a lace piece (120) may extend along an entirety of a base so as to form an inner layer thereof.
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 TATIANA L NOBREGA whose telephone number is (571)270-7228. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4pm.
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, Thomas Barrett can be reached at 571-272-4746. 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.
/TATIANA L NOBREGA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799