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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/16/2024, 4/16/2024, and 7/16/2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 1, 7, 8, and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moore (US10716381B2) in view of Jeong (KR20200090280A) with citations made to attached machine translations.
Regarding claim 1, Moore teaches a hair styling appliance comprising:
electrodes (25a, b); and
a drive unit (23, 24, 26)
in response to determining that hair (10) is present, apply an alternating voltage to the electrodes (25) to heat the hair dielectrically (Col. 7 lines 1-5 dielectric heating of hair).
Moore is silent on operable to determine a presence of hair between the electrodes.
Jeong teaches operable to determine a presence of hair between the electrodes ([0061] work detection unit 280 checks whether the hair 10 is located between the first heating plate of the first heating member 121 and the first heating plate of the second heating member 122).
Moore and Jeong are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of hair styling appliances. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified Moore to incorporate the teachings of Jeong to determine a presence of hair so that heating does not occur unintentionally when there is no hair in the appliance (Jeong [0060]).
Regarding claim 7, Moore and Jeong teach the hair styling appliance as claimed in claim 1, but Moore is silent on wherein the drive unit is operable in a low-power mode and a high-power mode, the drive unit applies a first alternating voltage to the electrodes in the low-power mode and a second higher alternating voltage to the electrodes in the high-power mode, and the drive unit operates in the low-power mode in response to determining that hair is not present and in the high-power mode in response to determining that hair is present.
Jeong teaches wherein the drive unit (240) is operable in a low-power mode ([0070] standby mode when the hair 10 is not present) and a high-power mode ([0071] operation mode), the drive unit (240) applies a first alternating voltage to the electrodes in the low-power mode and a second higher alternating voltage to the electrodes in the high-power mode,
wherein the drive unit (240) is operable in a low-power mode ([0070] standby mode) and a high-power mode ([0071] operation mode), the drive unit (240) applies a first alternating voltage to the electrodes in the low-power mode ([0067-0070] control unit 240 turns on the hair styling device 100; When the standby mode is set, the control unit 240 does not operate the drive motor even when the rotational movement; taken to be a low voltage being supplied given that the hair styling appliance is on but not heating) and a second higher alternating voltage to the electrodes in the high-power mode ([0039, 0071-0076] control unit 240 is designed to output the driving control signal of the square wave pulse corresponding to the moving direction and the moving number of the handle unit).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified Moore to incorporate the teachings of Jeong to have a lower power and high power mode so that the presence or absence of hair may be detected, so that heating does not occur unintentionally when there is no hair in the appliance, and so that heating intentionally occurs when hair is positioned between the heating device (Jeong [0060-0065]).
Regarding claim 8, Moore and Jeong teach the hair styling appliance as claimed in claim 1, and Moore teaches wherein the drive unit (23, 24, 26) comprises a voltage source power inverter (23) coupled to the electrodes (25), the power inverter (23) operable to apply the alternating voltage to the electrodes (25).
Regarding claim 10, Moore and Jeong teach the hair styling appliance as claimed in claim 1, and Moore teaches wherein the drive unit is operable to apply an alternating voltage having a fixed frequency to the electrodes to heat the hair (Col. 8 lines 40-55 maximum energy coupling occurs when the frequency of the alternating electric field matches the peak absorption frequency of the hair, and when there is impedance matching between the drive circuitry (i.e. the circuitry that supplies electrical energy to the electrodes 25 a, 25 b) and the electrodes/hair).
Regarding claim 11, Moore and Jeong teach the hair styling appliance as claimed in claim 1, but Moore is silent on wherein the drive unit is operable to determine the presence of hair when the electrodes have a predefined spacing.
PNG
media_image1.png
360
360
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2A of Jeong
Jeong teaches wherein the drive unit is operable to determine the presence of hair when the electrodes have a predefined spacing ([0060-0061] Fig. 2A, where 121, 122 are in a closed position).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified Moore to incorporate the teachings of Jeong to determine the presence of hair when the heating elements are spaced a predefined amount so that heating intentionally occurs when hair is positioned between the heating device (Jeong [0065]).
Regarding claim 12, Moore and Jeong teach the hair styling appliance as claimed in claim 1, and Moore teaches wherein the appliance has an open position and a closed position (Col. 8 lines 15-20 opening and closing of the heating plates 6a , 6b),
the drive unit (23, 24, 26) is operable to apply no voltage to the electrodes when the appliance is in the open position (Col. 4 lines 15-25, Col. 8 lines 15-20 first and second arms 4 a, 4 b into the open configuration; cutting off the supply of electrical energy to the electrodes if the first and second arms are not detected as being closed together)
and to apply the alternating voltage to the electrodes to heat the hair when the appliance is in the closed position and hair is determined to be present (Col. 11 lines 40-55 drive circuitry 24 is configured to only apply energy to the electrodes 25 when the plates 6 a, 6 b are closed and the switch has been activated, thus providing a safety feature to the styler 1).
Regarding claim 13, Moore and Jeong teach the hair styling appliance as claimed in claim 12, and Moore teaches wherein the drive unit is operable in a power-off mode (Col. 4 lines 15-25, Col. 8 lines 15-20 cutting off the supply of electrical energy),
the drive unit applies no voltage to the electrodes in the power-off mode (Col. 4 lines 15-25, Col. 8 lines 15-20 cutting off the supply of electrical energy to the electrodes if the first and second arms are not detected as being closed together),
and the drive unit (23, 24, 26) operates in the power-off mode when the appliance is in the open position (Col. 4 lines 15-25, Col. 8 lines 15-20 cutting off the supply of electrical energy to the electrodes if the first and second arms are not detected as being closed together).
Moore is silent on a low-power mode and a high-power mode, the drive unit applies a first alternating voltage to the electrodes in the low-power mode and a second higher alternating voltage to the electrodes in the high-power mode, the low-power mode when the appliance is in the closed position and hair is determined to be not present and the high-power mode when the appliance is in the closed position and hair is determined to be present.
Jeong teaches wherein the drive unit is operable in a low-power mode ([0070] standby mode) and a high-power mode ([0071] operation mode),
the drive unit applies a first alternating voltage to the electrodes in the low-power mode ([0067-0070] control unit 240 turns on the hair styling device 100; When the standby mode is set, the control unit 240 does not operate the drive motor even when the rotational movement; taken to be a low voltage being supplied given that the hair styling appliance is on but not heating) and a second higher alternating voltage to the electrodes in the high-power mode ([0039, 0071-0076] control unit 240 is designed to output the driving control signal of the square wave pulse corresponding to the moving direction and the moving number of the handle unit);
the low-power mode ([0070] standby mode) when the appliance is in the closed position and hair is determined to be not present ([0070] standby mode when the hair 10 is not present), and the high-power mode ([0071] operation mode) when the appliance is in the closed position and hair is determined to be present ([0071] when the hair 10 is present through the hair presence/absence signal received from the work sensing unit 280, the control unit 240 sets the operation mode (s806)).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified Moore to incorporate the teachings of Jeong to have a lower power and high power mode so that the presence or absence of hair may be detected, so that heating does not occur unintentionally when there is no hair in the appliance, and so that heating intentionally occurs when hair is positioned between the heating device (Jeong [0060-0065]).
Claims 2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moore (US10716381B2) in view of Jeong (KR20200090280A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lulofs (US5857379A).
Regarding claim 2, Moore and Jeong teach the hair styling appliance as claimed in claim 1, but are silent on wherein the drive unit is operable to determine the presence of hair based on an impedance of the electrodes.
Lulofs teaches wherein the drive unit is operable to determine the presence of hair based on an impedance of the electrodes (Col. 4 lines 20-25 measuring the resistance of the hairs which are in contact with the electrodes 14A/14B; where resistance is the equivalent of impedance).
Moore, Jeong, and Lulofs are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of hair styling appliances. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified Moore and Jeong to incorporate the teachings of Lulofs to have the drive unit determine presence of hair based on impedance in order to facilitate accurate heating of hair without risking overheating (Lulofs Col. 2 lines 10-30).
Regarding claim 3, Moore and Jeong teach the hair styling appliance as claimed in claim 1, but are silent on wherein the drive unit is operable to sense an electrical or electromagnetic parameter indicative of an impedance of the electrodes and to determine the presence of hair based on the sensed electrical or electromagnetic parameter.
Lulofs teaches wherein the drive unit is operable to sense an electrical or electromagnetic parameter indicative of an impedance of the electrodes (Col. 4 lines 20-25 measuring the resistance of the hairs which are in contact with the electrodes 14A/14B; where resistance is taken to be an electrical or electromagnetic parameter),
and to determine the presence of hair based on the sensed electrical or electromagnetic parameter (Col. 4 lines 20-25 measuring the resistance of the hairs which are in contact with the electrodes 14A/14B).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified Moore and Jeong to incorporate the teachings of Lulofs to have the drive unit determine presence of hair based on impedance in order to facilitate accurate heating of hair without risking overheating (Lulofs Col. 2 lines 10-30).
Regarding claim 4, Moore, Jeong, and Lulofs teach the hair styling appliance as claimed in claim 2, but Moore and Lulofs are silent on wherein the drive unit is operable to determine that hair is present when the sensed electrical or electromagnetic parameter is greater than a lower threshold and less than an upper threshold.
Jeong teaches wherein the drive unit (240, 280) is operable to determine that hair (10) is present when the sensed electrical or electromagnetic parameter is greater than a lower threshold and less than an upper threshold ([0065] when the hair 10 is positioned between the first heating plates, some of the light irradiated from the light emitting element 281 is received by the light receiving element 282; which is greater than the lower threshold of all the light is received and less than the upper threshold of no light received).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified Moore and Lulofs to incorporate the teachings of Jeong to determine a presence of hair based on an electrical parameter in comparison to a threshold so that heating does not occur unintentionally when there is no hair in the appliance (Jeong [0060]).
Regarding claim 5, Moore and Jeong teach the hair styling appliance as claimed in claim 1, but Moore is silent on wherein the drive unit is operable to: apply a first alternating voltage to the electrodes, determine the presence of hair based on an impedance of the electrodes when applying the first alternating voltage, and apply a second higher alternating voltage to the electrodes to heat the hair in response to determining that hair is present.
Jeong teaches wherein the drive unit is operable to: apply a second higher alternating voltage to the electrodes to heat the hair in response to determining that hair is present ([0010] square wave pulse; [0039, 0071-0076] control unit 240 is designed to output the driving control signal of the square wave pulse corresponding to the moving direction and the moving number of the handle unit, being higher than a voltage in standby mode, which is understood to apply a first voltage).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified Moore to incorporate the teachings of Jeong to apply a voltage in response to hair being present so that heating intentionally occurs when hair is positioned between the heating device (Jeong [0065]).
Moore and Jeong are silent on apply a first alternating voltage to the electrodes, determine the presence of hair based on an impedance of the electrodes when applying the first alternating voltage.
Lulofs teaches wherein the drive unit is operable to apply a first alternating voltage to the electrodes, determine the presence of hair based on an impedance of the electrodes when applying the first alternating voltage (Col. 4 lines 20-25 measuring the resistance of the hairs which are in contact with the electrodes 14A/14B; where voltage must be applied in order to measure the resistance).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified Moore and Jeong to incorporate the teachings of Lulofs to have apply voltage to determine a presence of hair based on impedance in order to facilitate accurate heating of hair without risking overheating (Lulofs Col. 2 lines 10-30).
Regarding claim 6, Moore, Jeong, and Lulofs teach the hair styling appliance as claimed in claim 1, but Moore is silent on wherein the drive unit is operable to: determine the presence of hair based on an impedance of the electrodes when applying the second alternating voltage, and apply the first alternating voltage to the electrodes in response to determining that hair is not present.
Jeong teaches wherein the drive unit is operable to: apply the first alternating voltage to the electrodes in response to determining that hair is not present ([0067-0070] control unit 240 turns on the hair styling device 100; When the standby mode is set, the control unit 240 does not operate the drive motor even when the rotational movement; taken to be a low voltage being supplied given that the hair styling appliance is on but not heating).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified Moore to incorporate the teachings of Jeong to apply a first voltage when hair is not present so that the presence or absence of hair may be detected and so that heating does not occur unintentionally when there is no hair in the appliance (Jeong [0060]).
Moore and Jeong are silent on determine the presence of hair based on an impedance of the electrodes when applying the second alternating voltage.
Lulofs teaches determine the presence of hair based on an impedance of the electrodes when applying the second alternating voltage (Col. 4 lines 20-25 measuring the resistance of the hairs which are in contact with the electrodes 14A/14B; where voltage must be applied in order to measure the resistance).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified Moore and Jeong to incorporate the teachings of Lulofs to have apply voltage to determine a presence of hair based on impedance in order to facilitate accurate heating of hair without risking overheating (Lulofs Col. 2 lines 10-30).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moore (US10716381B2) in view of Jeong (KR20200090280A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lulofs (US5857379A) and Bursey (US20160295985).
Regarding claim 9, Moore and Jeong teach the hair styling appliance as claimed in claim 1, and Moore teaches wherein the drive unit (23, 24, 26) comprises a DC power supply (26)
coupled to the power inverter (23), the DC power supply (26) is operable to supply a first DC voltage (DC) to the power inverter (23) which in response applies a first alternating voltage to the electrodes (25),
and, in response to determining that hair is present, the converter is operable to supply a second higher DC voltage to the power inverter which in response applies a second higher alternating voltage to the electrodes to heat the hair (Col. 11 lines 40-55 drive circuitry 24 is configured to only apply energy to the electrodes 25 when the plates 6 a, 6 b are closed, being the equivalent of hair being present).
Moore does not teach a DC-to-DC converter and the drive unit determines the presence of hair based on an impedance of the electrodes when the first alternating voltage is applied to the electrodes.
Bursey teaches a DC-to-DC converter ([0045] DC-to-DC converter).
Moore, Jeong, and Bursey are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of hair styling appliances. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the DC power supply of Moore and Jeong to incorporate the teachings of Bursey to include a DC-to-DC converter in order to be able to convert the input DC voltage or current to another level that is able to supply power to the heating elements (Bursey [0045]).
Moore, Jeong, and Bursey are silent on the drive unit determines the presence of hair based on an impedance of the electrodes when the first alternating voltage is applied to the electrodes.
Lulofs teaches the drive unit determines the presence of hair based on an impedance of the electrodes when the first alternating voltage is applied to the electrodes (Col. 4 lines 20-25 measuring the resistance of the hairs which are in contact with the electrodes 14A/14B; where voltage must be applied in order to measure the resistance).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified Moore and Jeong to incorporate the teachings of Lulofs to have apply voltage to determine a presence of hair based on impedance in order to facilitate accurate heating of hair without risking overheating (Lulofs Col. 2 lines 10-30).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABIGAIL RHUE whose telephone number is (571)272-4615. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10-6.
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, Steven Crabb can be reached at (571) 270-5095. 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.
/ABIGAIL H RHUE/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 7/29/2026
Prosecution Insights