Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/415,737

BEAUTY BRUSH

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jan 18, 2024
Examiner
SOTO, CHRISTOPHER ASHLEY
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Jing Men Jun Kai E-Commerce Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
54%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 54% of resolved cases
54%
Career Allow Rate
59 granted / 110 resolved
-16.4% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+28.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
57 currently pending
Career history
167
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
47.1%
+7.1% vs TC avg
§102
22.8%
-17.2% vs TC avg
§112
26.0%
-14.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 110 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Claim Objections Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein one adapter assembly”, and should be “wherein an adapter assembly” for clarity and to avoid an antecedent error. 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 2-10 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. Claim 2 recites: “disposed on an opposite end surface of the bristles”. Claim 1 recites: “to an opposite end that is of the brush head that is provided with the bristles”. As claimed it is unclear if the recited “opposite end” is referring to the same feature or an entirely different part. For examination purposes, claim 2’s limitation of “opposite end” has been construed as the same introduced in claim 1. 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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Caruso (US 20080022484 A1). Referring to claim 1: Caruso discloses a beauty brush (20, 3, 2, and 1 Fig. 8; capable of applying beauty products), comprising: a brush head (20 Fig. 8), wherein one end surface (end surface of 20 opposite to 3) of the brush head is provided with at least one strand of bristles (bristles of 20 Fig. 8); and a handle (2 and 1 Fig. 8), wherein one end of the handle (end of 2 shown in Fig. 8) is detachably connected (shown detachably connected in Fig. 8) to an opposite end (end of 20 closest to 3 shown in Fig. 8) that is of the brush head (20 Fig. 8) that is provided with the bristles (bristles of 20 Fig. 8). Referring to claim 2: Caruso discloses the beauty brush according to claim 1, wherein one adapter assembly (adapter assembly shaft of 20 which retains bristles shown in Fig. 11 which comprises of 6 shown in Fig. 1 and mates with 3 shown in Fig. 8) extending along an axial direction (shown in Fig. 8) of the brush head (20 Fig. 8) is disposed on an opposite end (end of 20 closest to 3 shown in Fig. 8) surface of the bristles (bristles of 20 Fig. 8), and the adapter assembly (adapter assembly shaft of 20 which retains bristles shown in Fig. 11 which comprises of 6 shown in Fig. 1 and mates with 3 shown in Fig. 8) is detachably connected to the end (end of 2 shown in Fig. 8) of the handle. Referring to claim 3: Caruso discloses the beauty brush according to claim 2, wherein a fastening cavity (cavity of 3 shown in Fig. 8; “which is disposed within the hex shank hole of the shaft 3” [0060]) provided with an opening is disposed at the end (end of 2 shown in Fig. 8) of the handle, and one end of the adapter assembly (adapter assembly shaft of 20 which retains bristles shown in Fig. 11 which comprises of 6 shown in Fig. 1 and mates with 3 shown in Fig. 8) is disposed in (“Brush/duster 20 is rotatably mounted to 3 possibly by one of the various means already disclosed” [0071]) the fastening cavity (cavity of 3 shown in Fig. 8; “which is disposed within the hex shank hole of the shaft 3” [0060]). Referring to claim 4: Caruso discloses the beauty brush according to claim 3, wherein the end of the adapter assembly (adapter assembly shaft of 20 which retains bristles shown in Fig. 11 which comprises of 6 shown in Fig. 1 and mates with 3 shown in Fig. 8) is detachably connected (shown detachably connected in Fig. 8) to the fastening cavity (cavity of 3 shown in Fig. 8; “which is disposed within the hex shank hole of the shaft 3” [0060]), so that the handle (2 and 1 Fig. 8) and the brush head (20 Fig. 8) are separated. Referring to claim 5: Caruso discloses the beauty brush according to claim 4, wherein an extension (end portion of 20/6 shown in Figs. 8 and 1) of the adapter assembly (adapter assembly shaft of 20 which retains bristles shown in Fig. 11 which comprises of 6 shown in Fig. 1 and mates with 3 shown in Fig. 8) is disposed as a first outer hexagon (“a hex shaft such as illustrated by 6 is contemplated for the end-effectors and so a hexagonal hole 8, may be provided into the shaft 3.” [0060]), an inner wall of the fastening cavity (cavity of 3 shown in Fig. 8; “which is disposed within the hex shank hole of the shaft 3” [0060]) is disposed as an inner hexagon, and the first outer hexagon of the adapter assembly cooperates with the inner hexagon of the fastening cavity, so that the handle (2 and 1 Fig. 8) and the brush head (20 Fig. 8) are separated. Referring to claim 6: Caruso discloses the beauty brush according to claim 5, wherein a depth of the fastening cavity (cavity of 3 shown in Fig. 8) is greater than or equal to a length (equal to a length of 10 of 6 which is accommodated in 3 shown in Fig. 10) of the adapter assembly. Referring to claim 7: Caruso discloses the beauty brush according to claim 5, wherein an inner diameter of the fastening cavity (cavity of 3 shown in Fig. 8; “which is disposed within the hex shank hole of the shaft 3” [0060]) is greater than (greater than to have the sufficient tolerances to accommodate the end of 6) or equal to an outer diameter of the adapter assembly (adapter assembly shaft of 20 which retains bristles shown in Fig. 11 which comprises of 6 shown in Fig. 1 and mates with 3 shown in Fig. 8). 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 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caruso (US 20080022484 A1) and Kozak (US 20060228181 A1). Referring to claim 8: Caruso discloses the beauty brush according to claim 4, but is silent on wherein an extension of the adapter assembly is disposed as outer threads, an inner wall of the fastening cavity is disposed as inner threads, and the brush head and the handle are connected and fastened through the threads, so that the handle and the brush head are separated. Kozak in an analogous adapter assembly (10 Fig. 1) teaches an extension (32 Fig. 1) of the adapter assembly (10 Fig. 1) is disposed as outer threads (48 Fig. 1), an inner wall of the similar configuration fastening cavity (fastening cavity of 56 Fig. 1) is disposed as inner threads (58 Fig. 1), and the brush head (similar configuration end of brush head 62 shown in Fig . 1) and the similar configuration handle (18 Fig. 1) are connected and fastened through the threads, so that the handle and the brush head are separated. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the beauty brush of Caruso with the threaded assembly as taught by Kozak for the purpose of increasing the capabilities of the adapter by allowing other end tools to be attached. Referring to claim 9: Caruso as modified teaches the beauty brush according to claim 8, wherein the other end (12 of 18 Fig. 1 of Kozak) of the handle (18 Fig. 1 of Kozak) is disposed as a second outer hexagon, and the second outer hexagon of the handle is detachably connected to a rotating shaft of an electric drill (“The first end portion 14 of the shank 12 is then inserted into a rotary drive tool until the recess 68 in the shank 12 is engaged by a detente mechanism in the rotary drive tool for example.” [0055]). Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caruso (US 20080022484 A1) and Kozak (US 20060228181 A1), as applied above in claim 9, and in further view of Varga (US 20020144370 A1). Referring to claim 10: Caruso as modified teaches the beauty brush according to claim 9, but is silent on wherein the handle may be made of stainless steel, aluminum alloy, or sintered steel. Varga in an analogous adapter (13 Figs. 1-5) wherein the handle (handle surface of 13) may be made of stainless steel (“The adapter 13 is preferably made of tubular stainless steel” [0023]), aluminum alloy, or sintered steel. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the beauty brush of Caruso as modified with the adapter material as taught by Varga for the purpose of having a material which is cost effective and suitable for absorbing the forces/ stresses of routine usage. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER SOTO whose telephone number is (571)272-8172. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8a.m. - 5 p.m.. 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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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. CHRISTOPHER SOTO Examiner Art Unit 3723 /CHRISTOPHER SOTO/Examiner, Art Unit 3723 /MONICA S CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 18, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600009
GRINDING METHOD USING NANOLAYER-LUBRICATED DIAMOND GRINDING WHEEL BASED ON SHOCK WAVE CAVITATION EFFECT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12576498
MULTI-TOOL COMBINING FIREFIGHTING IMPLEMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12544874
APPARATUS FOR DOUBLE-SIDE POLISHING WORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12520975
CASTER LOCKING ARRANGEMENT AND SURFACE CLEANING DEVICE IMPLEMENTING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12491600
SUBSTRATE WARPAGE CORRECTION METHOD, COMPUTER STORAGE MEDIUM, AND SUBSTRATE WARPAGE CORRECTION APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
54%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+28.9%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 110 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month