En 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 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. Claim s 1-6, 8-15, 18-19, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kader (US Publication No. 2012/0065575, hereinafter, Kader) in view of Ivey (US Publication No. 2020/0046967, hereinafter, Ivey) and further in view of Planard-Luong (US Publication No. 2019/0255321, hereinafter, Planard-Luong). Regarding claim 1, Kader discloses a c osmetic and non-therapeutic electroporation process for delivering a composition through human keratin materials (Kader; para [0016], sequence for aesthetic treatment of skin) , the composition comprising at least one hydroxy acid compound (Kader; para [0027], active ingredient may be salicylic acid, which is a beta hydroxy acid) , the electroporation process comprising the exposure of the composition in contact with said keratin materials to pulse trains of a pulsed electric current (Kader; para [0016], electroporation sequence comprises pulsed current to the skin) , the pulsed electric current being provided by an electroporation device (1) having at least one electrode (2) and at least one counterelectrode (3) (Kader; para [0028], predefined polarity brought to the skin between one electrode 9 and an opposing reference electrode 21, which is a hand-held treatment head 7 in figs. 1-3; para [0060-0061]) , and the pulsed electric current ranging from 0.1mA to 10mA (Kader; para [0062], current delivered to treatment electrode up to a maximum of 10mA) . Kader discloses voltage s and pulsed currents , but does not, however, disclose the pulse trains of the pulsed electric current repeating at a frequency (f train ) of between 0.1Hz and 1kHz, the pulse trains each having a duration (T on ) of between 0.001s and 2s, and the pulsed electric current having a voltage amplitude ranging from 20V to 250V. Ivey teaches the pulse trains of the pulsed electric current repeating at a frequency (f train ) of between 0.1Hz and 1kHz (Ivey; para [0068], pulse trains can be repeating at a rate of 1-5, 1-2, or 1 burst per second, which is in the range of 0.1Hz to 1kHz) , the pulse trains each having a duration (T on ) of between 0.001s and 2s (Ivey; para [0067], T on range bursts can range from 1-100 or more and include any value therein; para [0068],1-10 bursts or more can be delivered every 1-59 seconds. These combinations include the claimed range of 0.001s to 2s (e.g., 100 bursts every 1 second to 10 bursts every 20s) , and Planard-Luong teaches the pulsed electric current having a voltage amplitude ranging from 20V to 250V (Planard-Luong; para [0099], 50V – 340V peak voltage obtained as the output from a pulse modulator in fig. 8) . 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 electroporation treatment device and method of Kader to apply high-frequency electroporation pulse trains with a non-zero interpulse delay and pulse-train repetition frequency within the claimed range, as taught by Ivey, in order to achieve controlled, non-thermal electroporation of keratinous materials and avoid significant temperature rise while still delivering enough pulses for the intended effect . Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the device of modified Kader to have the voltage amplitude between the electrode (2) and counterelectrode (3) in open circuit in the claimed range, as it involves only adjusting the voltage of a component disclosed to require adjustment. 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 device of modified device of Kader to limit the open circuit range of voltage amplitude between the electrode and counterelectrode to range from 20V to 250V, as taught by Planard-Luong, as a matter of routine optimization, in order to safely and effectively treat localized areas of keratinous materials using non-painful current densities on the skin of the patient. Regarding claim 2 , modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, the maximum voltage between the electrode (2) and the counterelectrode (3) (Kader; electrode 9 and opposing reference electrode 21 in figs. 1-3) , but modified Kader fails to disclose the open circuit ranging from 20V to 250V . Planard-Luong teaches open circuit voltages between the electrode and counterelectrode ranging from 20V to 250V (Planard-Luong; para [0099], 50V – 340V peak voltage obtained as the output from a pulse modulator in fig. 8) . One of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the device of modified Kader to have the maximum voltage between the electrode (2) and counterelectrode (3) in open circuit in the claimed range, as it involves only adjusting the voltage of a component disclosed to require adjustment. 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 device of modified Kader to limit the open circuit range of maximum voltage between the electrode and counterelectrode to range from 20V to 250V , as taught by Planard-Luong, as a matter of routine optimization , in order to safely and effectively treat localized areas of keratinous materials using non-painful current densities on the skin of the patient. Regarding claim 3 , modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, but fails to disclose the pulsed electric current having a duty cycle (T on /( T on + T off )) ranging from 20% to 90%,where T on denotes the duration of a pulse train and T off denotes the interval between two successive pulse trains . Planard-Luong teaches pulsed electric current having a duty cycle (T on /( T on + T off )) ranging from 20% to 90%,where T on denotes the duration of a pulse train and T off denotes the interval between two successive pulse trains (Planard-Luong; para [0080], pulse modulator defines duty cycle of between 1% and 75%) . One of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the device of modified Kader to have a pulsed electric current duty cycle in the claimed range, as it involves only adjusting the time (T on and T off ) of pulse train duration and intervals therebetween as components disclosed to require adjustment. 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 device of modified Kader to limit the relationship of pulse train duration and intervals between two successive pulse trains (T on /( T on + T off )) to a range of 20% to 90% , as taught by Planard-Luong, as a matter of routine optimization , in order to maximize effective treatment T on time with balanced T o ff time to avoid patient discomfort and equipment overheating. Regarding claim 4 , modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, the pulse trains repeating at a frequency f train ranging from 0.1Hz to 1kHz (Ivey; para [0068], pulse trains can be repeating at a rate of 1-5, 1-2, or 1 burst per second, which is in the range of 0.1Hz to 1kHz) , but modified Kader does not disclose the frequency (f pulse ) of the pulses within the pulse train being between 5kHz and 100kHz. Ivey teaches the frequency (f pulse ) of the pulses within the pulse train being between 5kHz and 100kHz (Ivey; para [0007], H-FIRE pulse train can have a carrier frequency of about 1 kHz to about 1 MHz; para [0067], in some aspects, the carrier frequency is about 20kHz) . One of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the device of modified Kader to have a frequency of pulses within the pulse train in the claimed range, as it involves only adjusting the frequency components disclosed to require adjustment. Therefore, i t would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the frequency of pulses within the pulse trains of modified Kader to be between 5kHz and 100kHz, as taught by Ivey, as a matter of routine optimization, in order to advantageously utilize the high-frequency bursts to suppress muscle stimulation/ contractions compared with conventional low-frequency, longer pulses, while still causing electroporation. Regarding claim 5 , modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, the pulse trains each having a duration (T on ) ranging from 0.01s to 3s (Ivey; para [0067], T on range bursts can range from 1-100 or more and include any value therein; para [0068],1 - 10 bursts or more can be delivered every 1-59 seconds. These combinations include the claimed range of 0.01s to 3s . Regarding claim 6 , modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, the pulse trains being separated by a pulse-free interval (T off ) ranging from 0.01s to 3s (Ivey; para [0067], by the same logic as in claim 5, T off range bursts can range from 1 - 100 or more and include any value therein; para [0068],1 - 10 bursts or more can be delivered every 1 - 59 seconds. These combinations include the claimed range of 0.01s to 3s . Regarding claim 8 , modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, the counterelectrode being static and having a surface area in contact with the human keratin materials that is greater than that of the electrode, which is moved in contact with the keratin materials (Kader; para [0060], electrode 9 and opposing reference electrode 21 both in contact with skin, particularly reference electrode 21 which is held by the patient and in electrical contact with the hand, thus in contact with a greater surface area that than of the electrode as shown in fig. 1) . Regarding claim 9 , modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, consisting in manually moving the electrode(s) (2) of the electroporation device over the keratin materials (Kader; para [0060], treatment head 7 has end part electrode 9 axially located and is brought into contact with the skin of the patient and move d o ver the surface to be treated) while subjecting said keratin materials to said pulse trains of pulsed electric current (Kader; para [0061- 0062], during skin treatment, unit 3 supplies necessary power to current generator and to a pulse generator. The current produced is applied between electrode 9 and reference electrode 21, via cables 10 and 20) . Regarding claim 1 0 , modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, the pulsed electric current having a general square or rectangular waveform (Ivey; para [0069], each electric waveform pulse can be a square wave) . Regarding claim 1 1 , modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, the electroporation device (1) being hand-held (Kader; para [0060], treatment head 7 shaped to be held in the practitioner’s hand) . Regarding claim 1 2 , modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, comprising topical application of the composition to the zone to be treated before applying the pulsed electric current and/or during said application (Kader; para [0070], skin is advantageously coated with active substance (gel or cream) comprising specific molecules, the cosmetic effect of which is optimized by the effects of the electrical currents; para [0027], lists appropriate topical compositions for treatment) . Regarding claim 1 3 , modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, the electrode(s) (2) having a rounded surface for contact with the keratin materials (Kader; para [0083], electrode 9 rounded end for contact with skin and movement over treatment area as shown is fig. 1; para [0060], reference electrode 21 which is held by the patient and is in electrical contact with the hand) . Regarding claim 1 4 , modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, the composition comprising one or more hydroxy acids chosen from a-hydroxy acid compounds (AHA), β -hydroxy acid compounds (BHA), lipohydroxy acid compounds (LHA), polyhydroxy acid compounds (PHA), and mixtures thereof, which may notably be linear, branched or cyclic, and saturated or unsaturated application (Kader; para [0027], lists appropriate topical compositions for treatment, of which at least mandelic and salicylic acids are a hydroxy acids) . Regarding claim 1 5 , modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, the composition comprising at least one β-hydroxy acid compound application (Kader; para [0027], lists appropriate topical compositions for treatment, of which at least salicylic acid is a β-hydroxy acid) . Regarding claim 1 8 , modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, the composition comprising at least one alcohol (Kader; para [0027], active ingredient may include glycerol or sorbitol, which are both alcohols) . Regarding claim 1 9 , modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, the composition comprising glycerol (Kader; para [0027], active ingredient may include glycerol) . Regarding claim 23 , modified Kader discloses a k it for performing the process according to Claim 1, including: an electroporation device containing at least one electrode (2) and at least one counterelectrode (3) ) (Kader; para [0028], predefined polarity brought to the skin between one electrode 9 and an opposing reference electrode 21, which is a hand-held treatment head 7 in figs. 1-3; para [0060-0061]) and arranged to subject keratin materials to pulse trains of a pulsed electric current, the pulse trains of the pulsed electric current repeating at a frequency (f train ) of between 0.1Hz and 1kHz (Ivey; para [0068], pulse trains can be repeating at a rate of 1-5, 1-2, or 1 burst per second, which is in the range of 0.1Hz to 1kHz) , the pulse trains each having a duration (T on ) of between 0.001s and 2s (Ivey; para [0067], T on range bursts can range from 1-100 or more and include any value therein; para [0068],1-10 bursts or more can be delivered every 1-59 seconds. These combinations include the claimed range of 0.001s to 2s (e.g., 100 bursts every 1 second to 10 bursts every 20s) , and the pulsed electric current having a voltage amplitude ranging from 20V to 250V (Planard-Luong; para [0099], 50V – 340V peak voltage obtained as the output from a pulse modulator in fig. 8) and a current ranging from 0.1mA to 10mA (Kader; para [0062], current delivered to treatment electrode up to a maximum of 10mA) , and a composition comprising at least one hydroxy acid compound (Kader; para [0027], active ingredient may be salicylic acid, which is a beta hydroxy acid) . Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kader in view of Ivey , further in view of Planard-Luong , and further in view of Atanasoska (US Patent No. 5,871,461, hereinafter, Atanasoska) . Regarding claim 7, modified Kader discloses an electroporation process according to Claim 1, but fails to disclose that the surface area of the electrode(s) (2) in contact with the keratin materials ranging from 2 to 20cm 2 . Atanasoska teaches that the surface area of the electrode(s) (2) in contact with the keratin materials ranging from 2 to 20cm 2 . (Atanasoska; col. 26, lines 43-48, at a current density of 4 mA, the skin contact surface area of the electrode should be greater than about 8cm 2 , such as about 10cm 2 , allowing patients to tolerate treatment) . 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 size of the electrodes of modified Kader to provide a surface area of the electrodes in contact with the keratin materials ranging from 2 to 20 cm 2 , as taught by Atanasoska , in order to obtain electrode-to-skin contact areas that yield safe and comfortable current densities at the 0.1 mA to 10mA cosmetic treatment currents disclosed by modified Kader while covering a practical treatment spot size for localize d cosmetic procedures on the skin . Claim s 16-17 and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kader in view of Ivey, further in view of Planard-Luong, and further in view of Bissett (US Patent No. 5,821,237, hereinafter, Bissett). Regarding claim 16, modified Kader discloses electroporation process according to Claim 1, the composition comprising at least one β-hydroxy acid compound (Kader; para [0027], lists appropriate topical compositions for treatment, of which at least salicylic acid is a β-hydroxy acid) , but Kader fails to disclose it in a content of between 0.1% and 15%, relative to the total weight of the composition. Bissett teaches the composition comprising at least one β-hydroxy acid compound in a content of between 0.1% and 15%, relative to the total weight of the composition (Bissett; col. 21, lines 59-64; compositions preferably comprise from about 0.1% to about 10% of organic hydroxy acid such as salicylic acid, which is a β-hydroxy acid) . 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 composition used in the electroporation process of modified Kader, to (i) provide at least one β-hydroxy acid compound in a content of between 0.1% and 15% by weight relative to the total weight of the composition, (ii) provide a water content of between 20% and 100% by weight, and (iii) adjust the pH of the composition to between 2 and 7.5, as taught by Bissett, in order to obtain a composition that delivers sufficient keratolytic and exfoliating activity on keratin materials while remaining stable, cosmetically acceptable, and safe for topical, non-therapeutic use on human skin. Regarding claim 1 7 , modified Kader discloses electroporation process according to Claim 1, composition having a water content of between 20% and 100% by weight, relative to the total weight of the composition (Bissett; col. 13, lines 40-51; a cream typically comprises from about 45% to about 85%, preferably from about 50% to about 75% water) . Regarding claim 20 , modified Kader discloses electroporation process according to Claim 1, but fails to disclose the composition comprising a thickener/gelling agent. Bissett teaches the composition comprising a thickener/gelling agent (Bissett; col. 13, lines 60-64; an ointment may comprise a thickening agent) . 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 composition used in the electroporation process of modified Kader to additionally comprise a thickener or gelling agent, as taught by Bissett, in order to obtain a suitable consistency for controlled placement on keratin materials, reduced run-off and dripping during treatment, and improved consumer aesthetics and skin feel. Regarding claim 21 , modified Kader discloses electroporation process according to Claim1, the composition having a pH ranging from 2 to 7.5 (Bissett; col. 14, lines 36-39; pH values of these compositions preferably range from about 2 to 8.5, more preferably from about 3 to 7, most preferably from about 4.5 to about 5.5) . Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kader in view of Ivey, further in view of Planard-Luong, and further in view of Garruto (US Publication No. 2019/0038539, hereinafter, Garruto). Regarding claim 22, modified Kader discloses electroporation process according to Claim 1, but fails to disclose the composition being free of preserving agents . Garruto teaches the composition being free of preserving agents (Garruto; the last sentence of para [0124]; compositions may be formulated such that preservatives need not be employed (e.g., a preservative-free formulation) . 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 composition used in the electroporation process of modified Kader to be free of preserving agents, as taught by Garruto, in order to meet consumer demand for “preservative-free” products, reduce the risk of preservative-related irritation or sensitization on already exfoliated keratin materials, and still maintain acceptable product stability under controlled packaging and use conditions. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT ZACHARIAH K WHITROCK whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-3534 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm . 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 Tsai can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 270-5246 . 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. /ZACHARIAH K WHITROCK/ Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783 /MICHAEL J TSAI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783