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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/29/2026 has been entered.
Specification
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:
Claim 11, lines 2-5, and claim 14, lines 5-8, “all the sub teeth, except for the sub teeth located at both ends with respect the longitudinal direction, have a shape of which a cross-section area, which is viewed in the height direction, is consistent from the tip toward the base”, is not supported by the specification. The specification does not include language that explicitly describes the sub teeth as having a consistent cross-section, and Figs. 1-4, 7, show the sub teeth has having rounded/tapered tips. For examination purposes, Examiner understands “consistent cross-section area” as being consistent across most of the height.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 6-7, 10-12, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1:
Paragraph 9, line 2, “penetrating the base part”, should be, “penetrates the base part”.
Paragraph 11, line 1, “all of the comb teeth”, should be, “the main teeth and sub teeth”, for clarity.
Claim 6, line 3, “larger than the length of the corresponding first or second row of the sub teeth”, should be corrected to, “greater than the length of the corresponding first or second row of the sub teeth”, for consistency.
Claim 7, line 3, “larger than the lengths of the first row of the sub teeth and the second row of sub teeth,” should be corrected to, “greater than the lengths of the first row of the sub teeth and the second row of sub teeth”, for consistency.
Claim 10 should be corrected to the following language for clarity:
The comb according to claim 7, wherein the base part has only
Claim 11, line 3, “with respect the longitudinal direction”, should be corrected to, “with respect to the longitudinal direction”.
Claim 12:
Paragraph 4, line 1 “the base part is mainly constituted”, should be corrected to, “the base part is constituted”, for clarity.
Paragraph 5, line 2 recites, “the lateral ribs”, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner understands “the lateral ribs” as “the lateral members”, consistent with paragraph 4 of the claim.
Paragraph 5, lines 2-3, “two outer ones of the longitudinal ribs are sub ribs”, is unclear. Examiner understands this limitation as, “the two outer longitudinal ribs are sub ribs”.
Paragraph 5, line 6, and paragraph 7, lines 1-2,“a height direction”, should be, “the height direction”, as this limitation is defined earlier in the claim.
Claim 20, line 2, “the base part and are”, should be corrected to, “the base part .
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 12, 20-21 and dependent claims 3-7, 10-14, 16-19, and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1, last paragraph states, “the grip part, the base part, and all of the comb teeth are integrally plated, and surfaces thereof are continuously covered with a single plating layer without seams.” The plating of the grip part, base part and comb teeth is supported by Paragraphs [0008], [0019], and [0020] of the specification; however, the limitations of “integrally plating”, and “continuously covered with a single plating layer without seams” are not supported by the specification.
Claim 12, paragraph 6, states, “inner side edges of the sub ribs and both side edges of the main rib, defining the first and second through holes, are straight, and parallel to each other such that widths of the first and second through holes in the lateral direction are constant along the longitudinal direction”. This limitation is not supported by the specification and Figs. 5-6. The inner side edges of the sub ribs and main ribs are shown as having straight sections, which are parallel to each other; however, the width is not consistent across the entire length of the first and second through hole in the longitudinal direction, with curved surfaces at each end, leading to a tapered width.
Claim 12, paragraph 10 states, “the grip part and the base part are integrally plated, and their surfaces are covered with a single plating layer”. The plating of the grip part and base part is supported by Paragraphs [0008], [0019], and [0020] of the specification; however, the limitations of “integrally plating”, and “a single plating layer” are not supported by the specification.
Claim 20 states, “the main teeth are further integrally plated with the grip part and the base part and are covered with the single plating layer”. The plating of the grip part, base part and comb teeth is supported by Paragraphs [0008], [0019], and [0020] of the specification; however, the limitations of “integrally plating”, and “a single plating layer” are not supported by the specification.
Claim 21 states, “the sub teeth formed in each of the first row and the second row are further integrally plated with the grip part, the base part, and the main teeth, and are covered with the single plating layer.” The plating of the grip part, base part and comb teeth is supported by Paragraphs [0008], [0019], and [0020] of the specification; however, the limitations of “integrally plating”, and “a single plating layer” are not supported by 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, and 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hein (US 20190150583 A1), in view of Kaizuka (US 20140102471 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hein discloses a comb (12) comprising a comb body, in which a plating treatment is applied to a surface of the comb body, the comb body having
a grip part (16) that extends in a longitudinal direction of the comb (refer to annotated Figs. 2, 4 below) and is configured to be gripped by a user (refer to Paragraph [0022]; the first member (12) includes a first handle (16); by definition a handle is capable of being gripped),
a base part (44) that is continuously connected to the grip part (16) in the longitudinal direction (refer to annotated Figs. 2, 4 below) wherein the base part (44) is composed with a front face (front surface of 44) and a back face (back surface of 44) facing opposite to each other (refer to annotated Figs. 2, 4 below), both expanding in the longitudinal direction and a lateral direction of the comb (12) the longitudinal direction (refer to annotated Fig. 2 below),
a plurality of comb teeth (52+54+56) that protrude from the front face of the base part (refer to annotated Figs. 2, 4 below) in a height direction perpendicular to both the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction (refer to annotated Fig. 2 below), the comb teeth (52+56) having
one row of main teeth (52) that is arranged along a central axis line of the base part (k) in the longitudinal direction of the comb the main teeth (52) are aligned at predetermined intervals on the central axis line (k) (refer to Paragraph [0024], annotated Fig. 4 below; the tooth support (50) includes an inner row of centrally disposed primary teeth 52, spaced along central axis “k”);
first and second rows of sub teeth (54+56) that are arranged on both sides of the main teeth (52) with respect to the lateral direction (refer to annotated Fig. 2 below) such that the first row of the sub teeth (54+56) is on a right side of the main teeth (52) (refer to annotated Fig. 2 below), and the second row of the sub teeth (54+56) is on a left side of the main teeth (refer to annotated Fig. 2 below), wherein the sub teeth on the first row (54+56) and the sub teeth on the second row (54+56) are aligned in the longitudinal direction (refer to annotated Fig. 2 below), being parallel to the main teeth (52) (refer to Paragraphs [0025], [0026]; a row of bristles 56 are defined along longitudinal axis “k” along each side of the centrally disposed primary teeth 52; a row of supplemental teeth 54 longitudinal axis “k” on each side of the centrally disposed primary teeth 52), wherein
a height of the main teeth (52) is higher greater than a height of the sub teeth (54+56)
the number of the main teeth (52) is less than the number of the sub teeth (54+56) formed in each of the first row and the second row (refer to annotated Fig. 2 below; there are 20 sub teeth in each first and second row, and 12 main teeth),
the base part (44) has two through holes (48) that are first (48) and second through holes (48), each of which penetrating the base part (refer to annotated Fig. 4 below) in the height direction (refer to annotated Fig. 2 below), wherein the first through hole (48) is placed between the one row of the main teeth (52) and the first row of the sub teeth on the right side (54+56), and the second through hole (48) is placed between the one row of the main teeth (52) and the second row of the sub teeth on the left side (54+56) (refer to Paragraph [0024], annotated Fig. 6 below; the first head frame 44 includes a plurality of vent openings 48 extending through the inner and outer surface of the first head frame 44),
each of the first (48) and second through holes (48) expands in the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction (refer to annotated Fig. 3 below), a length of the first through hole (48) determined in the longitudinal direction is greater than a length of the first through hole (48) determined in the lateral direction, and a length of the second through hole (48) determined in the longitudinal direction is greater than a length of the second through hole (48) determined in the lateral direction (refer to annotated Fig. 3 below; ), and
the base part (refer to annotated Fig. 4 below), and all of the comb teeth (52+54+56) are integrally plated, and surfaces thereof are continuously covered with a single plating layer without seams (refer to Paragraph [0034]; Examiner understands “covered with a single plating layer without seams” as equivalent to the surface being plated consistent with Paragraph [0019] of the specification; the first and second brush heads may be plated, coated, deposited or otherwise treated).
Hein does not disclose the grip portion (refer to annotated Figs. 2, 4 below) as being plated.
PNG
media_image1.png
850
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
862
754
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
586
761
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
598
1080
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Kaizuka discloses a hair iron brush (10) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [0016]). A plating layer is formed on the surface of the brush bristles (31) the heating plate (4) and other portions of the hair brush (10) (refer to Paragraph [0035]), where the hair brush (10) is disclosed as including both a brush base (2) and handle (1) (refer to Paragraph [0019]). As the hair brush (10) is disclosed as including the handle (1), one would have had a reasonable expectation of success in including the handle in the “other portions of the hair brush (10)” that are plated to provide the protective benefits of the plating layer along the entire hair brush.
Thus, 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 grip part (refer to annotated Figs. 2, 4 above) of Hein to be integrally plated with the base and bristles as taught by Kaizuka in order to provide the protective benefits of the plating layer along the entire hair brush.
2. (Canceled)
Regarding claim 3, Hein and Kaizuka disclose the comb according to claim 1; Hein further discloses wherein each of the main teeth (52) has a tip and a base in the height direction (refer to annotated Fig. 6 below), and the main teeth (52) have a shape of which a cross-section area, which is viewed in the height direction, gradually increases from the tip toward the base (refer to Paragraph [0024], annotated Fig. 6 below; the primary teeth 52 may be substantially triangular shaped when viewed in plan).
PNG
media_image5.png
535
680
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Hein and Kaizuka disclose the comb according to claim 1; Hein further discloses wherein the base part (44) has a rectangular shape in a view in the height direction with top and bottom peripheral edges parallelly separated in the longitudinal direction and right and left peripheral edges parallelly separated in the longitudinal direction (refer to annotated Fig. 2 below),
the base part (44) is formed wider than the grip part (16) in the lateral direction (refer to annotated Figs. 4-5 below), and
the first row of the sub teeth (54+56) is formed on the front face of the base part (front surface of 44) at the right peripheral edge
the second row of the sub teeth is formed along on the front face of the base part (front surface of 44) at the left peripheral edge .
PNG
media_image6.png
825
661
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
769
454
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
341
554
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hein (US 20190150583 A1), in view of Kaizuka (US 20140102471 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of York (US 20220378187 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Hein and Kaizuka disclose the comb according to claim 1; neither reference discloses wherein the main teeth and the sub teeth form a curved shape with a concave center when an entire row is viewed from a side of the comb in the lateral direction.
York discloses a hair comb (2) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [0015]). The hair comb (2) comprises multiple combing teeth (23) that form a curved shape with a concave center when an entire row is viewed from a side of the comb in the lateral direction (refer to Paragraph [0018], Fig. 7; a plurality of combing teeth is affixed along the first c-shaped curve). The c-curve shape improves ergonomics for a user (refer to Paragraph [0022]).
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 comb teeth of Hein and Kaizuka with a curved shape and concave center as taught by York for improved ergonomics (refer to Paragraph [0022]).
Claim(s) 6-7, 10 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hein (US 20190150583 A1), in view of Kaizuka (US 20140102471 A1), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Saute (US D253322 S).
Regarding claims 6-7, and 10, Hein and Kaizuka disclose the comb according to claim 1; neither reference discloses wherein both of the first and second through holes have the lengths in the longitudinal direction that are larger than the lengths of the first row of the sub teeth and the second row of the sub teeth, respectively, and further, wherein the base part has no through hole other than the first through hole between the one row of the main teeth and the first row of the sub teeth in the lateral direction, and no through hole other than the second through hole between the one row of the main teeth and the second row of the sub teeth in the lateral direction.
Saute discloses a hair brush head in the same field of endeavor (refer to Description), with a main row of teeth central to the hair brush head, and two rows of sub teeth on the right and left of the main teeth, wherein both of the first and second through holes have the lengths in the longitudinal direction that are larger than the lengths of the first row of the sub teeth and the second row of the sub teeth, respectively, and further, wherein the base part has no through hole other than the first through hole between the one row of the main teeth and the first row of the sub teeth in the lateral direction, and no through hole other than the second through hole between the one row of the main teeth and the second row of the sub teeth in the lateral direction (refer to annotated Fig. 6 below). Saute demonstrates this configuration for a hair tool with multiple rows of teeth and through holes formed therein is known in the art.
Thus, 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 comb of Hein and Kaizuka with the through hole configuration as taught by Saute, as this configuration is known in the art.
Regarding claim 19, Hein, Kaizuka and Saute disclose the comb according to claim 10; Hein discloses the comb (12)body being a one-piece component (refer to Paragraph [0024]; the first brush head 18 includes a first head frame 44, e.g., monolithically formed with the first handle 16), but does not disclose wherein the base part (44) and the grip part (16) are integrally formed from Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene resin.
Kaizuka further discloses integrally forming the back plate member (21) or base part of the hair iron brush (10) with the handle (1) using Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) resin, which are heat resistant (refer to Paragraphs [0019], [0021]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the comb material of Hein, Kaizuka and Saute to be ABS, as taught by Kaizuka, for heat resistance (refer to Paragraph [0019]).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hein (US 20190150583 A1), in view of Kaizuka (US 20140102471 A1). as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Bachrach et al (US 20100300469 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Hein and Kaizuka disclose the comb according to claim 3; Hein further discloses wherein each of the sub teeth (54+56) has a tip and a base in the height direction (refer to annotated Fig. 6 from claim 3 above), the sub teeth (56+54) located at both ends with respect the longitudinal direction, have a shape of which a cross-section area, which is viewed in the height direction, is not consistent from the tip toward the base and is smaller than the cross-section area of the shape of the main teeth (52) (refer to Paragraphs [0025], annotated Fig. 6 from claim 3 above; the supplemental teeth 54 may be substantially triangular-shaped, but are smaller in dimension than the primary teeth 52; Fig. 6 demonstrates the rounded head bristles (56) as varying in cross-section from the wide angled base to the rounded tip, while also being smaller than the main teeth (52)).
Neither Hein or Kaizuka disclose the remaining sub teeth being consistent in a cross section area from the tip toward the base (of note, Applicant’s specification does not describe the sub teeth as being consistent in cross-section area; thus Examiner understands “consistent cross-section area” in context of the drawings (Figs.1-4, 7) as being consistent across most of the height, as Applicant’s the sub teeth shown have rounded tips, and are thus not consistent in cross-section across the entire height).
Claim(s) 12-13, and 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saute (US D253322 S) in view of Kaizuka (US 20140102471 A1), and further in view of Bishop et al. (US 20190125066 A1), herein referred to as Bishop.
Regarding claim 12, Saute discloses a comb (Figs. 1-5) comprising:
a base part that is composed with a front face and a back face facing opposite to each other, both expanding in in a longitudinal direction and a lateral direction of the comb that is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction, wherein
the base part is mainly constituted by three longitudinal ribs extending in the longitudinal direction and arranged parallel to each other, and two lateral members extending in the lateral direction, and arranged parallel to each other (refer to annotated Figs. 1, 3, 6 below),
a middle one of the three longitudinal ribs is a main rib, and front and rear ends of the main rib (Examiner understands “front ends” as the ends of the front face in the longitudinal direction and “rear ends” as the ends of the back face in the longitudinal direction) are connected to central portions of the lateral ribs, and two outer ones of the longitudinal ribs are sub ribs, and front and rear ends of the sub ribs are connected to both ends of the lateral members, thereby forming a first through hole and a second through hole which are surrounded by the longitudinal ribs and the lateral members such that the first through hole and the second through hole penetrate the base part in a height direction perpendicular to both of the longitudinal and lateral directions (refer to annotated Figs. 1, 3, 4, 6 below; the dashed lines in annotated Fig. 4 demonstrate the parallelism of the lateral ribs and longitudinal ribs),
inner side edges of the main rib, defining the first and second through holes, are straight (refer to annotated Figs. 4, 6 below)
a plurality of comb teeth are formed protruding from the front face of the base part in a height direction perpendicular to both the longitudinal direction and the lateral direction (Examiner understands this height direction as the same height direction as claimed earlier), the comb teeth having one row of main teeth that is formed on the main rib wherein the main teeth are aligned at predetermined intervals on the central axis line (refer to annotated Figs. 1, 6 below),
first and second rows of sub teeth that are arranged on the sub ribs,
one of the first and second through holes has a length in the longitudinal direction that is larger than a length of the corresponding first or second row of the sub teeth (refer to annotated Fig. 6 below).
PNG
media_image9.png
352
826
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
379
812
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
356
872
media_image11.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image12.png
379
818
media_image12.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image13.png
246
556
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Saute shows a broken line brush handle (grip part) extending in a longitudinal direction in Fig. 1; however, Saute does not explicitly teach this handle as part of the design. Saute is further silent to:
inner side edges of the sub ribs and both side edges of the main rib, defining the first and second through holes, are straight, and parallel to each other such that widths of the first and second through holes in the lateral direction are constant along the longitudinal direction (of note - the specification does not define “constant width” in the context of the through holes; thus, Examiner understands “constant width” as the first and second through holes having constant width along a length of the through holes in the longitudinal direction, as Fig. 6 demonstrates the through holes have a constant width along only a portion of the full length),
the grip part and the base part are integrally plated, and their surfaces are covered with a single plating layer.
Saute can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
Including a grip part (1) that extends in a longitudinal direction of the comb, is configured to be gripped by a user, and is connected to a base part (2) in the longitudinal direction (refer to Paragraph [0019], annotated Fig 2 below; the hair iron brush 10 can include a brush base or base portion 2 connected to an end portion of a handle or handle portion 1; a handle by definition is capable of being gripped) in the same fashion as Kaizuka, who discloses a hair iron brush (10) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [0016]).
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
Addition of a grip part allows a user to easily comb their hair by gripping the handle.
PNG
media_image14.png
255
617
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Forming a plating layer is on the entirety of the comb surface, in the same fashion as Kaizuka, which discloses plating the brush bristles (31) the heating plate (4) and other portions of the hair brush (10) (refer to Paragraph [0035]), where the hair brush (10) is disclosed as including both a brush base (2) and handle (1) (refer to Paragraph [0019]). As the hair brush (10) is disclosed as including the handle (1), one would have had a reasonable expectation of success in including the handle in the “other portions of the hair brush (10)” that are plated to provide the protective benefits of the plating layer along the entire hair brush.
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
Plating the entire hair brush ensures the protective plating benefits extend over the entirety of the hair brush surface that touches the hair, scalp and user’s hands.
Modifying the inner side edges of the first and second through holes to be straight and parallel to each other such that widths of the first and second through holes (32)in the lateral direction are constant along the longitudinal direction (k)(refer to Paragraph [0019], annotated Fig. 3 below; first and second outer arms 28 disposed in general parallel relation with the longitudinal axis “k”, and a central longitudinal primary arm 30 which may be parallel to, and/or coincident with, the longitudinal axis “k”), in the same fashion as Bishop, who discloses a hair brush (10) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [0018]).
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
The straight, parallel relation through holes (32) permit circulation of air through the brush head, while also distributing hair product effectively (refer to Paragraph [0019]).
PNG
media_image15.png
534
912
media_image15.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Saute, Kaizuka , and Bishop disclose the comb according to claim 12; Saute further discloses wherein both of the first and second through holes have the lengths in the longitudinal direction that are larger than the lengths of the first row of the sub teeth and the second row of the sub teeth, respectively (refer to annotated Fig. 6 above).
Regarding claims 20-21, Saute, Kaizuka , and Bishop disclose the comb according to claim 12; Saute is silent to wherein the main teeth (refer to annotated Fig. 6 above)are further integrally plated with the grip part and the base part and are covered with the single plating layer.
As disclosed in the rejection for claim 12 above, Kaizuka discloses plating the brush bristles (31) the heating plate (4) and other portions of the hair brush (10) (refer to Paragraph [0035]), where the hair brush (10) is disclosed as including both a brush base (2) and handle (1) (refer to Paragraph [0019]).
Therefore, 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 comb of Saute and Bishop by also plating the comb teeth, as taught by Kaizuka, in order to provide the protective benefits of the plating layer along the hair brush surfaces that touch the hair and scalp.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hein (US 20190150583 A1), in view of Kaizuka (US 20140102471 A1), as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Bachrach et al (US 20100300469 A1), and Saute (US D253322 S).
Regarding claim 14, Hein and Kaizuka disclose the comb according to claim 4; Hein further discloses wherein
each of the main teeth (52) has a tip and a base in the height direction (refer to annotated Fig. 6 from claim 3 above), and the main teeth (52) have a shape of which a cross-section area, which is viewed in the height direction, gradually increases from the tip toward the base (refer to Paragraph [0024], annotated Fig. 6 from claim 3 above; the primary teeth 52 may be substantially triangular shaped when viewed in plan),
wherein each of the sub teeth (54+56) has a tip and a base in the height direction (refer to annotated Fig. 6 from claim 3 above), ), the sub teeth (56+54) located at both ends with respect the longitudinal direction, have a shape of which a cross-section area, which is viewed in the height direction, is not consistent from the tip toward the base (refer to Paragraphs [0025], annotated Fig. 6 from claim 3 above; the supplemental teeth 54 may be substantially triangular-shaped; Fig. 6 demonstrates the rounded head bristles (56) as varying in cross-section from the wide angled base to the rounded tip).
Neither Hein or Kaizuka disclose the remaining sub teeth being consistent in a cross section area from the tip toward the base (of note, Applicant’s specification does not describe the sub teeth as being consistent in cross-section area; thus Examiner understands “consistent cross-section area” in context of the drawings (Figs.1-4, 7) as being consistent across most of the height, as Applicant’s the sub teeth shown have rounded tips, and are thus not consistent in cross-section across the entire height), and further, wherein both of the first and second through holes have the lengths in the longitudinal direction that are larger than the lengths of the first row of the sub teeth and the second row of the sub teeth, respectively.
Hein and Kaizuka can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
Modifying the remaining sub teeth of Hein and Kaizuka in the fashion of Bachrach, which discloses a comb (2) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [0022]), to be consistent in a cross section area from the tip toward the base (refer to Paragraph [0026]; the teeth 12 have a square cross-section for almost their entire lengths).
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
Bachrach teaches the consistent square cross-section provides the greatest rigidity and strength to the teeth (12) to avoid bending during use (refer to Paragraph [0026]).
Modifying the first and second through holes of Hein and Kaizuka in the fashion of Saute, which discloses a hair brush head in the same field of endeavor (refer to Description), with a main row of teeth central to the hair brush head, and two rows of sub teeth on the right and left of the main teeth, wherein both of the first and second through holes have the lengths in the longitudinal direction that are larger than the lengths of the first row of the sub teeth and the second row of the sub teeth, respectively (refer to annotated Fig. 6 from claims 6-7, 10 above).
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
Saute demonstrates this configuration of through holes and comb teeth is known in the art of hair tools.
Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hein (US 20190150583 A1), in view of Kaizuka (US 20140102471 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sommer et al. (US 20180344020 A1), herein referred to as Sommer.
Regarding claims 16-17, Hein and Kaizuka disclose the comb according to claim 1; neither reference discloses wherein the number of the main teeth is less than a half one half of the number of the sub teeth formed in either or each of the first row or the second row.
Sommer discloses a hair brush(100) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [0053]), comprising a central row of main teeth (187) and two rows of sub teeth (141) wherein the number of the main teeth is less than one half of the number of the sub teeth formed in either or each of the first row or the second row (refer to annotated Fig. 1X below; there are 6 main teeth and 32 sub teeth on each side of the main teeth). This configuration of fewer, spaced apart main teeth (187) allows the main teeth (187) to engage and pass through a user’s hair while also engaging the sub teeth (141) (refer to Paragraphs [0063], [0075]).
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 number of main teeth and sub teeth with the quantities of brush teeth as taught by Sommer in order to effectively engage the user’s hair with both sets of teeth (141, 187) (refer to Paragraphs [0063], [0075]).
PNG
media_image16.png
332
772
media_image16.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hein (US 20190150583 A1), in view of Kaizuka (US 20140102471 A1) and Saute (US D253322 S), as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Shimojima (US 20240415260 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Hein, Kaizuka and Saute disclose the comb according to claim 10; the prior art references do not disclose wherein the comb a pair of insertion holes that penetrate the comb the height direction to be inserted with electrodes for executing the plating treatment,
the insertion holes are both placed on the central axis line,
one of the insertion holes is placed closer to a tip of the comb body in the longitudinal direction than the one row of the main teeth, and
the other of the insertion holes is placed in the grip part.
Shimojima discloses a comb (1) with a plating treatment in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [0027]), with an insertion hole (4) placed on a central axis line in the grip part (refer to Paragraph [0036], annotated Fig. 3 below, Fig. 1; the through hole 4 is formed in the center of the comb body 2; the user grips the central region C), penetrating the comb (1) in the height direction to be inserted with electrodes for executing the plating treatment (refer to Paragraph [0027], annotated Fig. 3 below; a through hole 4 for the plating treatment is formed in the comb body 2).
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 comb of Hein, Kaizuka and Saute with an insertion hole in the grip part as taught by Shimojima in order to execute plating treatment.
Shimojima does not explicitly disclose a second insertion hole located closer to a tip of the comb body in the longitudinal direction than the main teeth. Although this is not disclosed, Kaizuka teaches forming a plating layer over multiple portions of the hair brush (10) (refer to Paragraph [0035]), thus, in order to form this plating layer over a large area, one would have a reasonable expectation of success in placing additional insertion holes on other portions of the hair brush (10). Shimojima already teaches placing the insertion hole on the grip part, leaving only the base portion for placing an insertion hole, as the bristles or teeth do not have sufficient surface area for an insertion hole. Further, it would be obvious to place this additional insertion hole as far as possible from the insertion hole on the grip part, central to the comb to ensure the entire surface is covered with the plating treatment.
Additionally, “the courts have held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960): (Claims at issue were directed to a water-tight masonry structure wherein a water seal of flexible material fills the joints which form between adjacent pours of concrete. The claimed water seal has a "web" which lies in the joint, and a plurality of "ribs" projecting outwardly from each side of the web into one of the adjacent concrete slabs. The prior art disclosed a flexible water stop for preventing passage of water between masses of concrete in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.)” MPEP § 2144.04-VI-B.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the comb of Hein, Kaizuka, Saute and Shimojima with a duplicate insertion hole on the top of the base part in order to ensure the entire surface is covered with the plating treatment.
Claim(s) 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saute (US D253322 S) in view of Kaizuka (US 20140102471 A1), and further in view of Bishop et al. (US 20190125066 A1), herein referred to as Bishop, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Russo (US 20230068038 A1).
Regarding claims 22-23, Saute, Kaizuka , and Bishop disclose the comb according to claim 12; the prior art references are silent to wherein protrusions are provided on the back face of the base part, the protrusions projecting in a direction opposite to the height direction and being positioned to correspond to the main row and the first row and the second row of the sub teeth.
Russo discloses a hairbrush (10) in the same field of endeavor (refer to Paragraph [0030], Fig. 4), including a plurality of ribs (200E) with teeth (260S1) formed on the front face of the base part, and a set of protrusions (260S2) formed on the back face of the base part projecting in a direction opposite to the height direction, corresponding to the row of teeth (260S1) (refer to Paragraph [0099], annotated Fig. 13 below). The dual-sided hairbrush configuration allows the user to effectively use the tool as two separate hairbrushes without purchasing and storing two separate tools (refer to Paragraph [0101]).
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 back face of the comb of Saute, Kaizuka , and Bishop with protrusions aligned with the comb teeth as taught by Russo in order to effectively use the tool as two separate hairbrushes without purchasing and storing two separate tools (refer to Paragraph [0101]).
PNG
media_image17.png
506
753
media_image17.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s assertion for amended claim 12 that the side edges of the sub ribs are straight, Examiner points to the above 112(a) new matter rejection. These new limitations are not supported by the specification.
In response to Applicant’s arguments that plating irregular surfaces is difficult, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use (being plated), then it meets the claim, whether performing the intended use is more or less difficult.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 12 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. The rejection of claim 1 now relies upon a combination of Hein (US 20190150583 A1) and Kaizuka (US 20140102471 A1), and does not rely on Chao. The rejection of claim 12 now relies on a combination of Saute (US D253322 S), Kaizuka (US 20140102471 A1), and Bishop et al. (US 20190125066 A1),
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Monson (US D964751 S) discloses a volumizing and diffusing hairbrush similar to Applicant’s device.
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 10:00-7:00 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, Edelmira Bosques can be reached at (571) 270-5614. 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
/EDELMIRA BOSQUES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772
Prosecution Insights