Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/510,343

HAIR STYLING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 15, 2023
Examiner
WEBB LYTTLE, ADRIENA JONIQUE
Art Unit
3772
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
25%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 25% of cases
25%
Career Allow Rate
2 granted / 8 resolved
-45.0% vs TC avg
Strong +100% interview lift
Without
With
+100.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
55
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
§103
42.2%
+2.2% vs TC avg
§102
24.3%
-15.7% vs TC avg
§112
16.6%
-23.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 8 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement filed 02/15/2024 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because a copy of the NPL reference for co-pending, corresponding patent application number 29916828 is not included. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits. Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a). Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraph [0047], "such as 10 second, 20 seconds, or 30 seconds", should be corrected to "such as 10 second[s], 20 seconds, or 30 seconds". Appropriate correction is required. The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: The "fixed period of time" is not described in the specification. The specification only discloses "a period of time, such as 10 second, 20 seconds, 30 seconds" (Paragraphs [0047], [0051]). Examiner recommends removing “fixed” from the claim language, as this term is not described in the specification. 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, 4-10, and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlucci (US 20060191888 A1), in view of Barradas (US 5046516 A), and further in view of Everett et al. (WO 2022251044 A1), herein referred to as Everett. Regarding claim 1, Carlucci discloses a hair styling device (Fig. 1) comprising: an elongate body having a working portion and a handle portion (refer to annotated Fig. 1 below); a heating element operable to selectively heat the working portion of the elongate body (refer to Paragraph [0023], Fig. 4, annotated Fig. 1 below; the unit’s temperature is controlled by an electronic circuit and hair curler iron heater); and a controller (refer to Paragraphs [0022]-[0023], Fig. 4; the controller of an electronic circuit diagram are the portions of the circuit that manage the behavior of the circuit; for the circuit shown in Fig. 4, the controller is represented by the on/off, increase, decrease, and curl timer symbols) associated with the handle portion (refer to Paragraph [0019], annotated Fig. 1 below; the circuit is shown as in communication with the LCD display of the control panel (2), which is in the handle portion), the controller operable to: receive, via a user input, a time setting representing a fixed period of time (refer to Paragraphs [0018]-[0019]; a curl timer button (3) is depressed to set the tightness of curl setting; the tightness of curl setting corresponds to the exposure time to set the curl; Examiner understands a fixed time period as a period of time predetermined by the controller; the exposure time is determined for each temperature setting by the electronic circuit); and output an alert when the period of time has lapsed (refer to Paragraph [0018]; an audible signal generator (9) emits an audible signal to indicate the time elapsed from start, where the time elapsed is the exposure time). PNG media_image1.png 455 1185 media_image1.png Greyscale Carlucci does not disclose the working portion of the elongate body having a tapered, triangular cross-section (refer to annotated Fig. 1 below). Barradas discloses a curling iron in the same field of endeavor (refer to col. 1, lines 4-5), wherein the hair styling device (refer to annotated Fig. 13 below) comprises an elongate body (12+10), a working portion (12), a handle portion (10), wherein the working portion (12) has a triangular cross-section (refer to annotated Fig. 13 below), that tapers toward a distal end of the elongate body (refer to annotated Fig. 13 below). The tapered triangular shape (28+30) allows the user to form correspondingly shaped curls while also changing the curl diameter (refer to col. 3, lines 27-32, 42-51). PNG media_image2.png 367 834 media_image2.png Greyscale 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 working portion of Carlucci (refer to annotated Fig. 1 above) with the tapered triangular shape (28+30) as taught by Barradas in order to allow the user to form triangle shaped curls while also changing the curl diameter (refer to col. 3, lines 27-32, 42-51). Carlucci and Barradas do not disclose wherein the tightness of curl settings represent a fixed period of time selected from 10 seconds, 20 seconds, and 30 seconds. Everett discloses a heated curling device (900) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [00125]), wherein a user can select a desired curl time in the range of 1-90 seconds, teaching that a fixed period of time in the range of 1-90 seconds is considered a known time range for producing a desired curl (refer to Paragraph [00170]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have assigned the exposure times associated with the tightness of curl settings as taught by Carlucci and Barradas (refer to Paragraph [0018] of Carlucci) with a range of values between 1-90 seconds as taught by Everett in order to produce the desired curl (refer to Paragraph [00170]). Further, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include 10, 20 and 30 seconds, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges or optimum value involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. MPEP 2144.05-II-A. Furthermore, since applicants have not disclosed that these modifications solve any stated problem or are for any particular purpose and it appears that the device would perform equally well with either designs, these modifications are a matter of design choice. Absent a teaching as to criticality of the fixed period of time, this particular arrangement is deemed to have been known by those skilled in the art since the instant specification and evidence of record fail to attribute any significance (novel or unexpected results) to a particular arrangement. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553,555,188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975). MPEP 2144.05. Regarding claim 4, Carlucci, Barradas, and Everett disclose the hair styling device of Claim 1, with Carlucci further disclosing: a display (2) located on the handle portion of the elongate body, the display (2) linked to the controller (refer to Fig. 4; the controller is represented by the on/off, increase, decrease, and curl timer symbols, which are connected to the LCD (2) via the electric circuit). Regarding claim 5, Carlucci, Barradas, and Everett disclose the hair styling device of Claim 4, with Carlucci further disclosing wherein: the display (2) is configured to display the selected time setting (refer to Paragraph [0019], Figs. 2-3; the LCD display shows the tightness of curl setting). Regarding claim 6, Carlucci, Barradas, and Everett disclose the hair styling device of Claim 1, with Carlucci further disclosing wherein: the working portion of the elongate body (refer to annotated Fig. 1 above) is fixed relative to the handle portion of the elongate body (refer to Paragraph [0018], annotated Fig. 1 above; the barrel is connected and in electronic communication with the handle portion). Regarding claim 7, Carlucci, Barradas, and Everett disclose the hair styling device of Claim 1, with Carlucci further disclosing the hair styling device comprising: a speaker (9) associated with the controller (refer to Fig. 4; the controller is represented by the on/off, increase, decrease, and curl timer symbols), the speaker (9) configured to generate an audible sound (refer to Paragraph [0018]; an audible signal generator (9) emits an audible signal to indicate the time elapsed from start); and wherein the alert includes the audible sound generated by the speaker (refer to Paragraph [0018]; an audible signal generator (9) emits an audible signal to indicate the time elapsed from start). Regarding claim 8, Carlucci discloses a method of styling hair, the method comprising: providing a hair styling device (Fig. 1) including an elongate body having a working portion and a handle portion (refer to annotated Fig. 1 below), a heating element operable to selectively heat the working portion of the body (refer to Paragraph [0023], Fig. 4, annotated Fig. 1 below; the unit’s temperature is controlled by an electronic circuit and hair curler iron heater), and a controller (refer to Paragraphs [0022]-[0023], Fig. 4; the controller of an electronic circuit diagram are the portions of the circuit that manage the behavior of the circuit; for the circuit shown in Fig. 4, the controller is represented by the on/off, increase, decrease, and curl timer symbols); via interface tools associated with the handle portion, selecting a time setting representing a fixed period of time (refer to Paragraphs [0018]-[0019]; a curl timer button (3) is depressed with plus (4) or minus (5) buttons are depressed to set the tightness of curl setting; the tightness of curl setting corresponds to the exposure time to set the curl; Examiner understands a fixed time period as a period of time predetermined by the controller; the exposure time is determined for each temperature setting by the electronic circuit); via the hair styling device, outputting an alert when the length of time has elapsed (refer to Paragraph [0018]; an audible signal generator (9) emits an audible signal to indicate the time elapsed from start, where the time elapsed is the exposure time); and PNG media_image1.png 455 1185 media_image1.png Greyscale Carlucci does not disclose the working portion of the elongate body having a tapered, triangular cross-section (refer to annotated Fig. 1 below). Barradas discloses a curling iron in the same field of endeavor (refer to col. 1, lines 4-5), wherein the hair styling device (refer to annotated Fig. 13 below) comprises an elongate body (12+10), a working portion (12), a handle portion (10), wherein the working portion (12) has a triangular cross-section (refer to annotated Fig. 13 below), that tapers toward a distal end of the elongate body (refer to annotated Fig. 13 below). The tapered triangular shape (28+30) allows the user to form correspondingly shaped curls while also changing the curl diameter (refer to col. 3, lines 27-32, 42-51). PNG media_image2.png 367 834 media_image2.png Greyscale 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 working portion of Carlucci (refer to annotated Fig. 1 above) with the tapered triangular shape (28+30) as taught by Barradas in order to allow the user to form triangle shaped curls while also changing the curl diameter (refer to col. 3, lines 27-32, 42-51). Carlucci and Barradas do not disclose wherein the tightness of curl settings represent a fixed period of time selected from 10 seconds, 20 seconds, and 30 seconds. Everett discloses a heated curling device (900) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [00125]), wherein a user can select a desired curl time in the range of 1-90 seconds, teaching that a fixed period of time in the range of 1-90 seconds is considered a known time range for producing a desired curl (refer to Paragraph [00170]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have assigned the exposure times associated with the tightness of curl settings as taught by Carlucci (refer to Paragraph [0018]) with a range of values between 1-90 seconds as taught by Everett in order to produce the desired curl (refer to Paragraph [00170]). Further, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include 10, 20 and 30 seconds, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges or optimum value involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. MPEP 2144.05-II-A. Furthermore, since applicants have not disclosed that these modifications solve any stated problem or are for any particular purpose and it appears that the device would perform equally well with either designs, these modifications are a matter of design choice. Absent a teaching as to criticality of the fixed period of time, this particular arrangement is deemed to have been known by those skilled in the art since the instant specification and evidence of record fail to attribute any significance (novel or unexpected results) to a particular arrangement. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553,555,188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975). MPEP 2144.05. Carlucci and Barradas do not disclose the steps of placing hair in contact with the working portion of the elongate body for a selected period of time and moving the portion of hair such that it does not contact the working portion. Everett further discloses placing a portion of hair (942) in contact with a working portion (904) of an elongate body (900) for a selected period of time (refer to Paragraphs [00169], [00170], annotated Fig. 30 below; the hair curler (900) is configured for the hair (942) to be wrapped around the body (904) for a curl time, where the desired curl time is determined based on user selection); and moving the portion of hair (942) such that it does not contact the working portion (904) of the elongate body (900) (refer to Paragraph [00175]; after completion of the styling operation, the hair (942) may be unwrapped from the body (904)). 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 method of hair styling as taught by Carlucci and Barradas (refer to Paragraph [0018] of Carlucci) with the method steps of hair styling as taught Everett to curl the hair (refer to Paragraph [00174]). PNG media_image3.png 486 765 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding claim 9, Carlucci, Barradas, and Everett disclose the method of Claim 8, with Carlucci further disclosing: via the heating element (refer to Fig. 4; Hair Curler Iron Heater), heating the working portion of the elongate body (refer to annotated Fig. 1 above) to a desired temperature (refer to Paragraph [0020]; the desired temperature setting can be increased or decreased by depressing the "plus" or "minus" buttons). Regarding claim 10, Carlucci, Barradas, and Everett disclose the method of Claim 8, with Carlucci further disclosing: displaying the selected time setting via a display (2) located on the handle portion of the elongate body (refer to Paragraph [0019], Figs. 2-3, annotated Fig. 1 above; the LCD display (2) shows the tightness of curl setting). Regarding claim 13, Carlucci, Barradas, and Everett the method of Claim 8, with Carlucci further discloses wherein: the working portion of the elongate body (refer to annotated Fig. 1 above) is fixed relative to the handle portion of the elongate body (refer to Paragraph [0018], annotated Fig. 1 above; the barrel is connected and in electronic communication with the handle portion). Regarding claim 14, Carlucci, Barradas, and Everett the method of Claim 8; Carlucci and Barradas are silent to wrapping a portion of hair around the working portion (refer to annotated Fig. 1 above of Carlucci). Based on the modification from claim 8, Everett discloses placing a portion of hair (942) in contact with the working portion (904) of the elongate body (900) includes wrapping the portion of hair (942) around the working portion (904) of the elongate body (900) (refer to Paragraphs [00169], [00170], annotated Fig. 30 below; the hair curler (900) is configured for the hair (942) to be wrapped around the body (904) for a curl time, where the desired curl time is determined based on user selection). Response to Arguments The outstanding written description rejection of claims 1 and 8 is withdrawn in view of the newly submitted claims. Applicant's arguments filed 12/04/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the argument that Everett does not disclose a time setting representing a period of time selected from 10 seconds, 20 seconds and 30 seconds, Examiner points to the above rejection which relies on a prima facie obviousness rejection. Everett discloses a heated curling device (900) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [00125]), wherein a user can select a desired curl time in the range of 1-90 seconds (refer to Paragraph [00170]). It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges or optimum value involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. MPEP 2144.05-II-A. Furthermore, since applicants have not disclosed that these modifications solve any stated problem or are for any particular purpose and it appears that the device would perform equally well with either designs, these modifications are a matter of design choice. Regarding the remainder of Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claim(s) 1 and 8, these arguments 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 (Lam in view of Barradas, Everett in view of Nicolo). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Gonzalez et al. (US 20180000216 A1) discloses a curling iron with user selected time settings (refer to Paragraph [0059], Fig. 1). 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 8:00-5:00 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, 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. /ADRIENA J WEBB LYTTLE/Examiner, Art Unit 3772 /THOMAS C BARRETT/SPE, Art Unit 3799
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 15, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 24, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 27, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 04, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582506
REMOVABLE DENTAL APPLIANCE WITH INTERPROXIMAL REINFORCEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12465460
MOUTHPIECE TYPE REMOVABLE ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 11, 2025
Patent 12336873
Dental Flossing Pick with Attached Dental Floss Bands
2y 5m to grant Granted Jun 24, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 3 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
25%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+100.0%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 8 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month