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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/8/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-6, 12-15, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn et al. (US 10,159,292) in view of Lotti (US 11,219,260).
Ahn et al. discloses an applicator for an artificial eyelash extension system having a plurality of filaments to which a first adhesive is disposed on a first surface thereof and to be attached to a user's natural eyelashes, the applicator comprising a tip portion (1804) having an adhesive area (col. 10, lines 38-40) located on a predetermined portion of an upper surface thereof and a second adhesive (col. 10, lines 38-40) applied to the adhesive area; and a tab portion (1816) connected to the tip portion and configured to be gripped by a user, wherein a second surface of the filaments of the artificial eyelash extension system is temporarily fixed to the second adhesive, and a second adhesive strength of the second adhesive is smaller than a first adhesive strength of the first adhesive (see Figure 18; col. 8, lines 38-45) and the second adhesive is configured to contact the plurality of eyelash filaments while being substantially spaced apart from the support strip of the artificial eyelash extension system (Fig. 14D).
Ahn et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the first adhesive disposed on the support strip and the plurality of filaments; the adhesive is applied continuously from an opposition between the support strip and one-half of the filament’s average length to a distance that is equal to or less than one-half of the filament’s average length. Lotti teach an artificial eyelash system comprising a plurality of eyelash filaments, each eyelash filaments comprising a base and a tip (see claim 1; Fig. 6); a support strip attached to the bases the eyelash filaments and an adhesive is disposed on the support strip and disposed on a portion of the plurality of eyelash filaments that continuously extend outward from the support strip (“An adhesive may be applied to the top of each lash fusion with a set during the manufacturing process” col. 3, lines 45-50). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the artificial eyelashes of Ahn et al. contain an adhesive on the support strip and disposed on a poritonf ot eh plurality of eyelash filaments that continuously extend outward from the support strip, apply adhesive to the top of a lash fusion was well known in the art to apply the artificial lash fusion to the user’s eyelashes.
Ahn et al. further discloses: Claim 2, the tip portion (1804) and the tab portion (1816) are connected in a bent form with a predetermined angle (see Figure 18). Claim 4, Claim 5, the tip portion (1804) includes a first edge located adjacent to a support strip of the artificial eyelash extension system to be attached thereof and a second edge (1814) located on the opposite side of the first edge and connected to the tab portion (see Figure 18). Claim 6, the first edge has a first width and the second edge has a second width smaller than the first width (see Figure 18). Claim 12, the adhesive area of the tip portion is spaced apart from the first edge by a first distance, and portions of filaments to which the first adhesive are applied are positioned between the first edge and the adhesive area (see Figure 18). Claim 13, the first adhesive disposed on the first surface of the filaments and the second adhesive disposed on the adhesive area are spaced apart by a second distance when viewed in cross section (col. 8, lines 25-45). Claim 14, the first adhesive and the second adhesive do not overlap each other (see Figure 18). Claim 15, the artificial eyelash extension system comprises a ready-to-use artificial eyelash extension system having the first adhesive which is a pre-applied adhesive element before being packaged for sale to a user (col. 8, lines 25-45). Claim 16, the ready-to-use artificial eyelash extension system comprises the plurality of filaments (1802), each having a base and a tip; a support strip (1818) attached to the bases of the filaments; and the first adhesive disposed on at least one of the support strip and the plurality of filaments (see Figure 18; col. 8, lines 25-45). Claim 18, the first adhesive comprises an adhesive that retains its stickiness during storage of the artificial eyelash extension system (col. 8, lines 25-45).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn et al. (US 10,159,292) in view of Lotti (US 11,219,260) as applied to claims 1, 2, 4-6, 12-15, and 17-19 above, and further in view of Simard (US 9,877,567).
The combination of Ahn et al. and Lotti disclose the claimed invention except for the predetermined angle is an acute angle smaller than 90 degrees. Simard teaches an ergonomic cosmetic applicator wherein the handle of the applicator has a pivot to allow for the handle to be freely rotatable and positionable from 0 to 180 degrees to allow the user to lean on the cheek or forehead for additional support during application to the eyelashes without the hand being in a light of sight between the eye and mirror (col. 8, lines 5-40). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the device of Ahn et al. as modified by Lotti to be made with a positionable handle as taught by Simard to allow for the user to choose any acute angle to allow for additional support during application.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn et al. (US 10,159,292) in view of Lotti (US 11,219,260) as applied to claims 1, 2, 4-6, 12-15, and 17-19 above, and further in view of Aylott (US 3,935,872).
The combination of Ahn et al. and Lotti disclose the claimed invention except for the tip portion has a trapezoidal shape which the width becomes narrower form the first edge to the second edge. Aylott teaches an eyelash applicator having multiple tip portion configurations including a trapezoidal shape (see Figure 8). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the tip shape of Ahn et al. and Lotti be a trapezoidal shape as taught by Aylott since multiple alternative suitable shapes of the applicator can be used to achieve the desired results.
Claim(s) 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn et al. (US 10,159,292) in view of Lotti (US 11,219,260) as applied to claims 1, 2, 4-6, 12-15, and 17-19 above, and further in view of Corradine (GB 487,918).
The combination of Ahn et al. and Lotti disclose the claimed invention except for a third edge located on the opposite side of the second edge and the third edge having a third width greater than the second with and the tab portion has an opening at the center there of with an elongated circular shape with curved edges. Corradine teaches a cosmetic stencil device comprising multiple handle configurations including a third edge (Figure 1) located on the opposite side of the second edge and the third edge having a third width greater than the second with and the tab portion has an opening at the center thereof with an elongated circular shape with curved edges (22) (see Figure 4). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the tab portion of Ahn et al. and Lotti be made with different configurations as taught by Corradine to improve flexibility of the tab member.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn et al. (US 10,159,292) in view of Lotti (US 11,219,260) as applied to claims 1, 2, 4-6, 12-15, and 17-19 above, and further in view of Chipman et al. (US 2022/0338585).
The combination of Ahn et al. and Lotti disclose the claimed invention except that the first adhesive is double-sided tape instead of pressure-sensitive adhesive. Chipman et al. shows that double-sided tape and pressure sensitive adhesives are an equivalent structure known in the art (paragraphs 151-153). Therefore, because these two adhesives were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to substitute a double-sided tape for a pressure sensitive adhesive.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/13/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that Ahn does not disclose an adhesive applied to a specific adhesive area of a tip portion such that the adhesive is structurally configured to selectively contact the eyelash filaments while remaining substantially spaced about from a support strip of an artificial eyelash system is not persuasive. Ahn discloses col. 10, lines 35-50 in reference to Figure 14 “An artificial eyelash 1418 is disposed on, and temporarily adhered to, the main body 1014 of the artificial eyelash applicator 1402. The artificial eyelash 1418 may be temporarily adhered to the main body 1404 using an adhesive disposed oat least partially along a length of the main body.” See Figure
PNG
media_image1.png
438
378
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL RUNNING STEITZ whose telephone number is (571)272-1917. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:30pm 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, Eric Rosen can be reached at 571-270-7855. 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.
/RACHEL R STEITZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772
4/14/2026
Prosecution Insights