DETAILED ACTION The communication dated 11 / 06 /202 5 has been entered and fully considered. Claims 1- 14 are currently pending. Claims 1-14 are amended. Claims 13-14 are withdrawn. 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 Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I: claims 1-12 in the reply filed on 11/06/2025 is acknowledged. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claim s 7 , 8, and 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 7 refers to an inner contour, but it is unclear where the inner contour is located. For the purpose of examination, Examiner is determining that an inner cont ou r to mean within the edges of the counter-form. Claim 8 states that the ultrasonic frequency “preferably” ranges from 16kHz to 60kHz. It is unclear if the range is required or not. Claim 10 refers to a surfactant that is “preferably” anionic. It is unclear if an anionic surfactant is required or not. Claim 7 recites the limitation "the first comb or the first brush and the second comb or the second brush" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, examiner is determining that claim 7 should depend from claim 6. Claim 10 recites the limitation " the concentrated cleansing solution " in line 2 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, examiner is determining that claim 10 should depend from claim 9. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: FILLIN "Identify each claim limitation." \d "[ 1 ]" a unit for treating a recycling a spent cleansing composition in claim 12 . Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. For the purpose of examination, Examiner is determining that the unit as claimed is the spent hair composition evacuation duct 44, cup 48, and motor system 40 (paragraphs [0089] and [0090]). If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness . Claim s 1-4 and 10 -11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nunomura JP2002282788 (henceforth referred to as Nunomura -788 ) in view of Leung U.S. Patent 9,095,196 (henceforth referred to as Leung) . As to c laim 1 , (Currently Amended) Nunomura -788 teaches a cosmetic device for cleansing the hair, comprising: - an ultrasonic transmitter, having an ultrasonic transducer powered by a current generator and configured to generate ultrasonic vibrations (paragraph [0032] ultrasonic generator 1 which consists of a drive unit 11 and a horn unit 12) , - a handpiece comprising a probe coupled to the ultrasonic transmitter so as to transmit the ultrasonic vibrations generated by the transducer to a lock of hair to be treated (FIG. 12 paragraph [0052] hair styling device 20 consists of housing 21 in which the ultrasonic generator is fixed ) , the probe extending along a longitudinal axis between a proximal outer surface and a distal outer surface (FIG. 12 the ultrasonic generator 1 extends along a longitudinal axis) , wherein the handpiece also comprises a counter-form provided with a bearing surface (FIG. 12 paragraph [0052] hair pressing member 22a reads on a bearing surface of the counter-form) , so as to at least partially receive the lock of hair to be treated, the probe cooperating with the counter-form so as to pinch the lock of hair between the bearing surface of the counter-form and the distal outer surface of the probe ( paragraph [0052] hair is sandwiched between the radiating surface 122 and the pressing plate 22a ) . Nunomura -788 differs from the claim in failing to teach the counter-form delimits a receptacle of which the bottom defines the bearing surface. Leung teaches a similar cosmetic device (FIG. 1 column 2 line 55 hair styling apparatus 100). Leung teaches the counter-form delimits a receptacle of which the bottom defines the bearing surface (FIG. 6 column 3 line 16 centrally disposed channel 112 reads on the claimed receptacle). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cosmetic device as taught by Nun o mura -788 with a receptacle as taught by Leung as the receptacle would be capable of conveying treatment agents (column 3 lines 21-22) . As to claim 2 , (Currently Amended) Leung further teaches the probe has an axial guiding channel passing through it (FIG. 9 column 5 lines 15-17 the transducer 140 further includes one or more micro-openings or channels 150 extending therethrough ) . As to claim 3 , (Currently Amended) Nunomura -788 further teaches the probe has a shape that flares in the direction of its distal end (FIGS. 12 and 14 horn portion 12d flares in the direction of the distal end) . As to claim 4 , (Currently Amend e d) Nunomura -788 and Leung further teach the bearing surface of the counter-form (Leung column 3 lines 16-17 channel 112 extends longitudinally) and the distal outer surface of the probe (Nunomura -788 FIG. 12 the ultrasonic generator 1 extends along a longitudinal axis) are parallel (Nunomura -788 ’s ultrasonic generator and Leung’s channel are parallel to each other) . As to claim 1 0 , (Currently Amended) Leung further teaches the concentrated cleansing solution comprises at least one surfactant, which is preferably anionic (column 4 line 56 additives can be anionic mixed derivatives). As to claim 11 , (Currently Amended) Leung teaches wherein it comprises a spent cleansing composition evacuation duct connected to the counter-form (FIG. 1 recess 114 reads on the claimed evacuation duct) . Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nunomura JP2002282788 (henceforth referred to as Nunomura -788 ) and Leung U.S. Patent 9,095,196 (henceforth referred to as Leung) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Nunomura U.S. Publication 2009/0266378 (henceforth referred to as Nunomura-378) . As to claim 5 , (Currently Amended) Nunomura-788 and Leung differ from the instant claim in failing to teach the handpiece comprises a first comb or a first brush disposed next to the probe and oriented towards the counter-form. Nunomura-378 teaches a similar cosmetic device (FIG. 1 paragraph [0017] ultrasonic wave hair set apparatus 1). Nunomura-378 teaches the handpiece comprises a first comb or a first brush disposed next to the probe and oriented towards the counter-form ( FIG. 6B paragraph [0019] comb shaped protection members 9 enclose the vibration face 5 along both sides of the vibration face 5 of the ultrasonic horn 4. Figure 1 shows that the comb shaped member 9 are oriented towards the counter-form ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cosmetic device as taught by Nun o mura-788 and Leung with combs as taught by Nunomura-378 as the combs can serve as a burn injury prevention means to prevent accidental touching of the vibration face (paragraph [0019]). Claim s 6 -7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nunomura JP2002282788 (henceforth referred to as Nunomura -788 ) and Leung U.S. Patent 9,095,196 (henceforth referred to as Leung) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Smal U.S. Publication 20 1 9/ 0380465 (henceforth referred to as Smal ) . As to claim 6 , (Currently Amended) Nunomura-788 and Leung differ from the instant claim in failing to teach the counter-form comprises a second comb or a second brush disposed on the outside of the bearing surface and oriented towards the probe. Smal teaches a similar cosmetic device (FIG. 1 paragraph [0054] hair straightening iron 1). Smal teaches the counter-form comprises a second comb or a second brush disposed on the outside of the bearing surface and oriented towards the probe (FIGS. 2 and 9 paragraph [0076] combs 20 are oriented towards the probe). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cosmetic device as taught by Nun o mura-788 and Leung with combs as taught by Smal. It would have been obvious to have combs on the cosmetic device in order to aid with the detangling of hair for more efficient treatment. As to claim 7 , (Curr ently Amended) Leung further teaches the counter-form is equipped with a groove formed in its inner contour (See following annotated figure 1) and disposed, in the position of use of the device, between the first comb or the first brush and the second comb or the second brush (when the hair styling device is being used, as depicted in Figures 11-12, the grooves would be between the first comb of Nunomura-788 and the second comb of Smal) . 1108379 806229 0 0 1259453 803082 0 0 970060 861888 0 0 1366051 734667 0 0 4015409 1910660 0 0 269736 455709 Grooves formed at the inner cont ou r 0 0 Grooves formed at the inner cont ou r Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nunomura JP2002282788 (henceforth referred to as Nunomura-788) and Leung U.S. Patent 9,095,196 (henceforth referred to as Leung) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Nunomura JP2005334256 (henceforth referred to as Nunomura-256) . As to claim 8 , (Currently Am ended) Nunomura-788 and Leung differ from the instant claim in failing to teach the ultrasonic frequency used by the transducer ranges from 16 kHz to 10 MHz and preferably from 16 kH z to 60 kHz. Nunomura-25 6 teaches a similar cosmetic device ( paragraph [0048] ultrasonic hair treatment device 20 ). Nunomura-256 teaches the ultrasonic frequency used by the transducer ranges from 16 kHz to 10 MHz and preferably from 16 kH z to 60 kHz (paragraph [0025] ultrasonic vibrations of approximately 20kHz to 60 kHz). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cosmetic device as taught by Nun o mura-788 and Leung with a transducer range between 16 to 60 kHz as taught by Nunomura-256 as low frequencies generate fewer large vibration amplitudes and hair styling works better using low frequencies (paragraph [0060]). Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nunomura JP2002282788 (henceforth referred to as Nunomura-788) and Leung U.S. Patent 9,095,196 (henceforth referred to as Leung) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Grez U.S. Publication 2018/0116363 (henceforth referred to as Grez ) . As to claim 9 , (Currently Amended) Nunomura-788 and Leung differ from the instant claim in failing to teach a supply duct connected to a mixer connected to a reservoir for a concentrated cleansing solution. Grez teaches a cosmetic device (FIG. 1 paragraph s [0006] and [0037] a cosmetic composition delivery appliance that is capable of delivering cleansing treatments). Grez teaches a supply duct connected to a mixer connected to a reservoir for a concentrated cleansing solution (F igure 1 shows r eservoirs 12 and 14 connected to a mixer 14, which is connected to a nozzle array 56 ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cosmetic device as taught by Nun o mura-788 and Leung with a supply duct, a mixer, and a reservoir as taught by Grez . It is known in the art to use ducts, a mixer, and a reservoir to store treatment fluids and subsequently supply the treatment fluid to the cosmetic device in order to enhance the cleaning effect of the cosmetic device. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nunomura JP2002282788 (henceforth referred to as Nunomura-788) and Leung U.S. Patent 9,095,196 (henceforth referred to as Leung) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Hori et al. JP H09253193 (henceforth referred to as Hori ) . As to claim 12 , (Currently Amended) Nunomura-788 and Leung differ from the instant claim in failing to teach a unit for treating and recycling a spent cleansing composition. Hori teaches a cosmetic device ( FIG. 4 paragraph [0039] apocrine oil removal device ). Hori teaches a unit for treating and recycling a spent cleansing composition (FIGS. 4 and 8 paragraphs [0019]-[0020] vacuum pump 15 is activated to and collects dirtied fluids through connecting hose 13 and deposits the dirtied fluid into the storage container 26) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cosmetic device as taught by Nunomura-788 and Leung with a treating and recycling unit as taught by Hori because Hori’s recovery system would prevent moisture from entering the vacuum pump and maintain the pump’s performance (paragraph [0012]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT LAUREN G ORTA whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (703)756-5455 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday - Friday 7:30-5:00 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Michael Barr can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-1414 . 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. /L.G.O./ Examiner, Art Unit 1711 /MICHAEL E BARR/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1711