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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/30/2026 has been entered.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. GB2106504.0, filed on 05/07/2021.
For the purpose of examination, the priority date for claims 1, 3-4, 6-12, and 14-23 is 05/07/2021.
Claim Objections
Claims 21- 23 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 21, “wherein the plate is removable from the wall”, should be corrected to, “wherein the plate is configured to be removable from the wall”, as this is a functional limitation.
Claim 22, last line, “the width being measured in the width direction”, is redundant and should be omitted.
Claim 23, line 6, “an external wall removably attached”, should be corrected to, “an external wall configured to be removably attached”, as this is a functional limitation.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6-12, and 14-23 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “substantially planar” in claims 1 and 22 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially planar” 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. For examination purposes, “substantially planar” is interpreted as planar.
The term “substantially orthogonal” in claims 1 and 22 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially orthogonal” 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. For examination purposes, “substantially orthogonal” is interpreted as orthogonal.
The term “substantially along a direction of airflow” in claims 1 and 23 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially along a direction of airflow” 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. For examination purposes, “the plate extends substantially along a direction of airflow” is interpreted as, “the plate extends along a direction of airflow”.
Dependent claims 3-4, 6-12, and 14-21 are rejected under 112(b) as they contain all the deficiencies of claim 1, from which they depend.
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.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stephens et al. (US 20160206077 A1), herein referred to as Stephens.
Regarding claim 23, Stephens discloses an attachment (100) for a hair care appliance (10) comprising:
an air inlet end (132) for receiving an airflow from the appliance (10) (refer to Paragraph [0077], annotated Fig. 7a below),
an air outlet end (134) for emitting the airflow from the attachment (100) (refer to Paragraph [0070], annotated Fig. 7a below),
a wall (102) defining and extending about an airflow path (130) between the air inlet end (132) and the air outlet end (140) (refer to Paragraph [0070], annotated Fig. 7a below),
an external wall (110) removably attached and surrounding the wall (102) (refer to Paragraphs [0036]; the sleeve (110) is assembled to the first wall (102) using cooperating protrusions; the two parts are then screwed together; thus the external wall is capable of being removably attached to the wall),
PNG
media_image1.png
471
1087
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein internal surfaces of the external wall (refer to annotated Fig. 7b below) and external surfaces of the wall (158) define and enclose an air gap (150)(refer to Paragraph [0071], annotated Fig. 7b below),
PNG
media_image2.png
458
604
media_image2.png
Greyscale
the air gap (150) being isolated from the airflow (130) traveling between the air inlet end (132) and the air outlet end (134) (refer to Paragraphs [0070]- [0071], annotated Fig. 7b above; a second fluid flow path (150) is formed separate from the first fluid flow path (130)), and
a plate (126) located in the airflow path (130) and configured to guide the airflow towards the air outlet end (134) (refer to Paragraph [0078]; the bung (120) flattens and narrows to provide a smooth transition of annular air flow to a rectangular profile of air flow),
wherein the plate (126) extends substantially along a direction of airflow from the air inlet end (132) towards the air outlet end (134) (refer to annotated Fig. 7A above; Examiner is interpreting “extends substantially along a direction of airflow” as extending along the direction of airflow).
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, 3-4, 6-12, 16, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laurent (GB 2561717 A; refer to the provided translation) in view of Courtney et al. (US 20140007448 A1), herein referred to as Courtney.
Regarding claim 1, Laurent discloses an attachment (100) for a hair care appliance (10) comprising:
an air inlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below) for receiving an airflow from the appliance (10) (refer to Paragraph 91; the air is blown into the accessory (100) from the wand),
an air outlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below) for emitting the airflow from the attachment (100) (refer to Paragraph 91; the air is blown through the aperture (51)),
a wall defining and extending about an airflow path between the air inlet end and the air outlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below),
an external wall (56) surrounding the wall of the attachment (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below), and
a plate (50) located in the airflow path and configured to guide the airflow towards the air outlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below) refer to Paragraph 91; the comb (50) bisects the aperture (51) of the dome (53) through the airflow path, and is thereby capable of guiding the air blown through the aperture (51) along the comb (50) surface),
wherein the plate (50) is substantially planar and comprises a non-linear edge proximate to the air outlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below),
wherein the non-linear edge of the plate (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below) extends substantially orthogonal to [[the]]a central longitudinal axis of the attachment (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below),
wherein the plate (50) extends substantially along a direction of airflow from the air inlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below) towards the air outlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below; Examiner is interpreting “extends substantially along a direction of airflow” as extending along the direction of airflow).
PNG
media_image3.png
413
449
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
363
537
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Laurent does not disclose wherein the non-linear edge of the plate (refer to annotated Fig. 7 above) is wider than a maximum width of the external wall (56).
Courtney discloses a nozzle (100) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [0076]) with a double plate structure (refer to annotated Figs. 1b, 1d below) defined in the airflow path for guiding airflow towards an air outlet end (130) (refer to Paragraph [0078]). The edge of this double plate structure (refer to annotated Figs. 1b, 1d below) is wider than a maximum width of an external wall (110) (refer to Paragraph [0077]; the length B-B of the slot forming the fluid outlet (13) is greater than a diameter C-C of the body (110)). This increased width of the double plate structure (refer to annotated Figs. 1b, 1d below) expands the width of the air flow, thus diffusing the outflow along a larger section of hair (refer to Paragraph [0003]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the non-linear edge of the plate (refer to annotated Fig. 7 above) as taught by Laurent, to be wider than the external wall, as taught by Courtney in order to produce a wider air flow path (refer to Paragraph [0003]).
PNG
media_image5.png
195
464
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
473
649
media_image6.png
Greyscale
2. (Cancelled)
Regarding claim 3, Laurent and Courtney disclose the attachment according to claim 1; Laurent further discloses wherein the non-linear edge (51) when viewed in a plane orthogonal to the plate (50), comprises a wave- shaped profile (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below; when viewing the non-linear edge from a top down plane, the profile is wave shaped, as the viewer would see the peaks and troughs of the wave).
Regarding claim 4, Laurent and Courtney disclose the attachment according to claim 3; Laurent further discloses wherein the wave shaped profile is curved (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below).
PNG
media_image7.png
420
448
media_image7.png
Greyscale
5. (Cancelled)
Regarding claim 6, Laurent and Courtney disclose the attachment according to claim 1; ; Laurent further discloses wherein the non-linear edge (51) when viewed in a plane orthogonal to the plate (50), has a curved profile (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below; viewing the plate (50) from the plane formed by the orthogonal axis would provide a side view of the non-linear edge, which is a curved profile).
PNG
media_image8.png
378
454
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Laurent and Courtney disclose the attachment according to claim 1; Laurent further discloses wherein the plate (50) is configured to divide the airflow path into two equal sections (refer to Paragraph 91, annotated Fig. 7 below; the comb (50) bisects the aperture (51) through which air flows).
PNG
media_image9.png
429
436
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Laurent and Courtney disclose the attachment according to claim 1; Laurent further discloses wherein the wall (53) is disposed about the central longitudinal axis of the attachment (refer to annotated Fig. 7 above).
Regarding claim 9, Laurent and Courtney disclose the attachment according to claim 1; Laurent further discloses wherein the wall (53) comprises an annular wall (53) extending around the central longitudinal axis of the attachment (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below).
PNG
media_image10.png
304
529
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Laurent and Courtney disclose the attachment according to claim 1; Laurent further discloses wherein at least a portion of the wall (53) is tapered (refer to Paragraph 91, annotated Fig. 7 below; the wall (53) is dome shaped and thereby tapered).
Regarding claim 11, Laurent and Courtney disclose the attachment according to claim 1; Laurent further discloses wherein the wall (53) tapers inwardly towards the air outlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below).
Regarding claim 12, Laurent and Courtney disclose the attachment according to claim 10; Laurent further discloses wherein the angle of taper of the wall varies between the air inlet end and the air outlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below).
PNG
media_image11.png
330
555
media_image11.png
Greyscale
13. (Cancelled)
Regarding claim 16, Laurent and Courtney disclose the attachment according to claim 1; Laurent further discloses wherein the air inlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 above) is adapted to receive part of the appliance (10) (refer to Paragraphs 92-93, annotated Fig. 8 below; the attachment (100) engages with the accessory (10) by a third engagement feature at the flexible rim (56) of the dome).
PNG
media_image12.png
327
388
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 22, Laurent discloses an attachment (100) for a hair care appliance (10) comprising:
an air inlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below) for receiving an airflow from the appliance (10) (refer to Paragraph 91; the air is blown into the accessory (100) from the wand),
an air outlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below) for emitting the airflow from the attachment (100) (refer to Paragraph 91; the air is blown through the aperture (51)),
a wall defining and extending about an airflow path between the air inlet end and the air outlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below), and
a plate (50) located in the airflow path and configured to guide the airflow towards the air outlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below) refer to Paragraph 91; the comb (50) bisects the aperture (51) of the dome (53) through the airflow path, and is thereby capable of guiding the air blown through the aperture (51) along the comb (50) surface),
wherein the plate (50) is substantially planar and comprises a non-linear edge proximate to the air outlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below),
wherein the non-linear edge of the plate (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below) extends in a width direction that is substantially orthogonal to a direction of airflow from the air inlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below) towards the air outlet end (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below), and
wherein outermost edges of the plate (50) extend further outside a cross-sectional area of the wall (refer to Paragraph 91, annotated Fig. 7 below; the edges of the plate extend outside the cross sectional area formed by the apex (52) of the dome (53))
the outermost edges of the plate (50) being coupled to one another by the non-linear edge of the plate (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below), the width being measured in the width direction.
PNG
media_image13.png
413
589
media_image13.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image14.png
287
451
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Laurent does not disclose that the plate (50) defines a maximum width of the attachment (100).
Courtney discloses a nozzle (100) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [0076]) with a double plate structure (refer to annotated Figs. 1b, 1d below) defined in the airflow path for guiding airflow towards an air outlet end (130) (refer to Paragraph [0078]). The edge of this double plate structure (refer to annotated Figs. 1b, 1d below) defines a maximum width of the nozzle (100) (refer to Paragraph [0077]; the length B-B of the slot forming the fluid outlet (13) is greater than a diameter C-C of the body (110)). The width of the double plate structure (refer to annotated Figs. 1b, 1d below) expands the width of the air flow, thus diffusing the outflow along a larger section of hair (refer to Paragraph [0003]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the shape of the plate (50) of Laurent to form a maximum width of the attachment, as taught by Courtney, in order to produce a wider air flow path at the air outlet (refer to Paragraph [0003]).
PNG
media_image5.png
195
464
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
473
649
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 14 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laurent (GB 2561717 A; refer to the provided translation) in view of Courtney et al. (US 20140007448 A1), herein referred to as Courtney, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Stephens et al. (US 20160206077 A1), herein referred to as Stephens.
Regarding claim 14, Laurent and Courtney disclose the attachment according to claim 1; neither reference discloses wherein the wall and the external wall each comprises a plurality of retention members configured to retain the wall within the external wall.
Stephens discloses an attachment (100) for a hair care appliance (10) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [0059]). The attachment (100) base includes a wall (158) surrounded by an external wall (120a), the wall (158) and the external wall (120a) each comprise a plurality of retention members (354, 356) configured to retain the wall (158) within the external wall (120a) (refer to Paragraph [0086], Fig. 8b; the inner wall (158) comprises two pairs of ribs (354); the inner surface (120a) of the sleeve (120) has a further set of two pairs of ribs (356); the ribs (354, 356) are aligned together to maintain concentricity of the two attachment parts (110, 190)). The retention members (354, 356) advantageously reduce the chance of hot spots by distancing the wall (158) from the external wall (120a), while providing locating features (358) for correct placement during assembly (refer to Paragraph [0086]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wall and external wall of Laurent and Courtney, with the plurality of retention members (354, 356), as taught by Stephens to reduce hot spots and maintain concentricity of the two walls (refer to Paragraph [0086]).
Regarding claim 17, Laurent and Courtney disclose the attachment according to claim 1; Courtney further discloses retaining the nozzle in the hair dryer with magnets (refer to Paragraph [0172]); however, neither explicitly teaches the attachment comprising a magnet attached to the wall for securing the attachment to the appliance.
Stephens discloses an attachment (100) for a hair care appliance (10) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [0059]). The attachment (100) includes a first wall (102) surrounded by an external wall (110), with magnetic material (104) extending around the face of the first wall (106) refer to Paragraph [0069], Fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the attachment wall of Laurent and Courtney with magnetic material as taught by Stephens in order to enable magnetic attachment of the attachment (100) to the hair care appliance (10) (refer to Paragraph [0069], Fig. 6).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laurent (GB 2561717 A; refer to the provided translation) in view of Courtney et al. (US 20140007448 A1), herein referred to as Courtney as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gandolfo et al. (EP 1834540 A1; refer to the provided translation), herein referred to as Gandolfo.
Regarding claim 15, Laurent and Courtney discloses the attachment according to claim 1, but are silent to the wall comprising a seat configured to accommodate an RFID tag.
Gandolfo discloses a hair dryer (50) with various tools (52) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph 62, Fig, 8; a diffuser (50) and associated tools (52) for use with the diffuser (50) are shown). The wall of the tool (52) comprises a seat configured to accommodate an RFID tag (refer to Paragraph 197, annotated Fig. 13 below; the tool wall contains an RFID tag; it is inherent that the wall also contains a structure or seat inside the wall for containing the RFID tag). The RFID tag permits communication with the diffuser (50) such that a specific program styling the user’s hair based on the tool can be initiated (refer to Paragraph 197).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the attachment wall of Laurent and Courtney to include a seat for accommodating an RFID tag as taught by Gandolfo to use an RFID tag to communicate a tool based styling program with the hair care appliance.
PNG
media_image15.png
329
776
media_image15.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laurent (GB 2561717 A; refer to the provided translation) in view of Courtney et al. (US 20140007448 A1), herein referred to as Courtney, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Orsoff (US 3837581 A).
Regarding claims 18-20, Laurent and Courtney disclose the attachment according to claim 1; neither reference discloses wherein the plate comprises perforations/through holes that extend through the plate in a direction orthogonal to the central longitudinal axis (Examiner understands perforations as being blind or through holes, with through holes being a hole that breaks through to the other side of a plate structure, enabling airflow communication between the opposite sides, consistent with page 10, lines 26-29 of the specification).
Orsoff discloses a hair attachment (10) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Abstract) wherein the top (19) and bottom (20) plates of the nozzle comprises perforations/through holes (48-53) that extend through the top (19) and bottom (20) plates in a direction orthogonal to the central longitudinal axis (refer to annotated Fig. 7 below). The through holes (48-53) provide thin streams of auxiliary air that can be used to control the direction of heated air for styling the hair (refer to col. 1, lines 27-36).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the plate of Laurent and Courtney with the through holes (48-53) as taught by Orsoff in order to provide thin streams of auxiliary air that can be used to control the direction of heated air for styling the hair (refer to col. 1, lines 27-36).
PNG
media_image16.png
362
600
media_image16.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laurent (GB 2561717 A; refer to the provided translation) in view of Courtney et al. (US 20140007448 A1), herein referred to as Courtney, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Torres et al. (US 20140047727 A1), herein referred to as Torres.
Regarding claim 21, Laurent and Courtney disclose the attachment according to claim 1; neither reference discloses wherein the plate is removable from the wall.
Torres discloses a blow dryer attachment (12) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [0083]). The attachment (12) includes a wall (54), and a removable plate (66) (refer to Paragraphs [0105], [0107], Fig. 15; the applicators removable engage to a protruding planar tongue member (60) extending from the nozzle end attachment (54)). The removable engagement advantageously allows for ease of drying the hair when the plate is no longer needed.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the plate of Laurent and Courtney with the removable engagement as taught by Torres, for ease of drying the hair without the plate.
PNG
media_image17.png
260
676
media_image17.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
The outstanding claim 1 objection of “the longitudinal central axis” is withdrawn in view of the newly submitted claim amendment.
The outstanding 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejection of claim 3 is withdrawn in view of the newly submitted claim amendment.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 22, and 23 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. The new rejection of claims 1 and 22 relies on a combination of references (Laurent and Courtney), while a new reference is relied upon for claim 23 (Stephens).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Adriena J Webb Lyttle whose telephone number is (571)270-7639. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 10:00-7:00 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, Edelmira Bosques can be reached at (571) 270-5614. 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.
/ADRIENA J WEBB LYTTLE/Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/RACHEL R STEITZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772
Prosecution Insights