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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-21 and 30-38 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 29 May 2026.
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.
Claim(s) 22, and 24-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Warner (US 5158900).
Regarding claim 22, Warner discloses a system comprising: a stationary holder (12); a nail polish remover container (74) positioned within the stationary holder, wherein the nail polish remover container is configured to contain a material (solvent, see col. 6, ll. 60-63 and/or abrasives, see col. 7, ll. 25-29) for assisting in the removal of nail polish; and a rotating container holder (48) rotatably positioned on the stationary holder for securing the nail polish remover container to the stationary holder and rotating the nail polish remover container during use.
Regarding claim 24, Warner discloses the system of claim 22, wherein the stationary holder is a base comprising a flared bottom (bottom 14 is flared from the top via 30, see Fig. 1) to provide better stability and prevent tipping over.
Regarding claim 25, Warner discloses the system of claim 22, wherein the rotating container holder comprises a cavity (in 48) designed to receive the nail polish remover container and providing secure placement of the nail polish remover container to prevent tipping or spilling.
Regarding claim 26, Warner discloses the system of claim 22, wherein the material for assisting in the removal of nail polish comprise a wiping material (80) that is soaked with a solvent (col. 6, ll. 60-63) such that, when the soaked wiping material comes into contact with nail polish, the solvent in the material dissolves the nail polish.
Regarding claim 27, Warner discloses the system of claim 22, wherein the material for assisting in the removal of nail polish comprises an abrasive material (grit, see col. 7, ll. 25-29) that includes particles such that, when the abrasive material comes into contact with nail polish, the abrasive material physically scrubs or wears away layers of the nail polish.
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) 23 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Warner as applied to claims 22 and 27 above, and further in view of Shashou (US 11058204).
Regarding claim 23, Warner teaches the system of claim 22, but does not teach an ejection mechanism for releasing the nail polish remover container from the stationary holder.
Shashou teaches an ejection mechanism for releasing a nail polish remover container (col. 149, ll. 9-12).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device of Warner with an ejection mechanism as taught by Shashou for the purpose of enabling easier disposal of the nail polish remover container (Shashou, col. 149, ll. 10-12).
Regarding claim 28, Warner teaches the system of claim 27, but does not teach that the abrasive material comprises any one of: emery board, pumice stone and silicon carbide abrasive paper.
Shashou teaches an abrasive that is an emery board (col. 65, ll. 63-65).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have chosen emery board for the abrasive material of Warner, wherein doing so would merely be a matter of selecting a known material that is known to be suitable for use on fingernails as taught by Shashou.
Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Warner as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Jackson (US 4319596).
Regarding claim 29, Warner teaches the system of claim 22, but does not teach a sensor adjacent the nail polish remover container for detecting a user's finger adjacent to the nail polish remover container and for activating rotation of the rotating container holder to rotate the nail polish remover container around the user's finger to remove the nail polish.
Jackson teaches a sensor (66) adjacent a nail polish remover (32) for detecting a user's finger adjacent to the nail polish remover and for activating rotation of the rotating holder to rotate the nail polish remover around the user's finger to remove the nail polish (col. 2, ll. 48-60).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device of Warner with a sensor adjacent the nail polish remover container for detecting a user's finger adjacent to the nail polish remover container and for activating rotation of the rotating container holder to rotate the nail polish remover container around the user's finger to remove the nail polish as taught by Jackson for the purpose of ensuring the device only runs when a user’s finger is present (Jackson, col. 2, ll. 56-60).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The Jacquin, Davis, and Tran references are cited as being directed to the state of the art of nail polish removing devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY S OLIVER whose telephone number is (571)270-3787. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7-3 ET.
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, David Angwin can be reached at (571)270-3735. 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.
/BRADLEY S OLIVER/Examiner, Art Unit 3754
/DAVID P ANGWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights