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 Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 11, line 3, please change “at least on fluid” to - -at least one fluid- -. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
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: “closure mechanism” in claim 10.
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.
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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-9, 15, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Francis (US 2,694,401).
Francis discloses a solution dispensing haircare system comprising: a comb body (27); a comb tool (28) having a comb tool width, the comb tool coupled to and extending from the comb body; a fluid reservoir (44) configured to contain and dispense fluid or haircare solution, the fluid reservoir coupled to the comb body; at least one fluid distribution channel (46) fluidly coupled to the fluid reservoir; and a compressible protrusion (36) coupled to the fluid reservoir, the compressible protrusion configured to compress the fluid reservoir discharging the fluid or haircare solution from the fluid reservoir through the at least one fluid distribution channel (see Figures 6-9; col. 2, lines 41-55). Claim 2, the comb tool comprises at least one of a plurality of comb teeth, a brush, a clip, or a haircare styling tool (see Figure 6). Claim 3, the comb tool (28) is removably coupled to the comb body (see Figure 9). Claim 6, the fluid reservoir (44) is removably coupled to the comb body (see Figures 6 and 9; col. 1, lines 70-75). Claim 7, the fluid reservoir (44) is disposed within the comb body or is formed as part of the comb body (see Figures 6-9). Claim 8, at least one fluid distribution channel (24) is disposed on a first lateral side of the comb body (see Figure 4; channel 24 dispensing outside lateral side). Claim 9, the at least one fluid distribution channel (24) extends laterally outside the comb tool width (see Figure 4). Claim 15, the fluid reservoir or comb body further comprises a lid (11) to open or seal the fluid reservoir (col. 2, lines 40-42). Claim 17, a side wall of the fluid reservoir is configured as the compressible protrusion (col. 2, lines 1-5). Claim 18, Francis further discloses a method for treating hair using the solution dispensing haircare system comprising the steps of: filling the fluid reservoir with a fluid or a haircare solution; opening the closure mechanism unsealing the at least one distribution channel; optionally applying the comb tool to the hair; compressing the compressible protrusion and dispensing the fluid or haircare solution through the distribution channel to the hair; applying the haircare solution to the hair with the comb tool; and closing the closure mechanism to seal the at least one distribution channel (col. 2, lines 1-45).
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) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Francis (US 2,694,401) in view of Lattuca (US 2,585,561).
Francis discloses the claimed invention except for the comb tool having a handle, the handle is removably coupled to the body. Lattuca teaches a comb with a removable handle (see Figure 10; col. 1, lines 25-30). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the comb of Francis be made with a removable handle as taught by Lattuca to allow for additional grip support.
Claim(s) 10 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Francis (US 2,694,401) in view of McKay (US 5,337,764)
Francis discloses a removable cartridge but does not disclose a closure mechanism such as a removably cover coupled to the fluid reservoir configured to seal the at least one distribution channel. McKay teaches a cartridge wherein a closure mechanism such as a removable cover (seal 28) coupled to the fluid reservoir configured to seal the at least one distribution channel prior to use (see Figure 1; col. 4, lines 20-28). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the cartridge of Francis be made with a closure mechanism as taught by McKay to seal the fluid contained within the reservoir prior to use.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-13 and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL RUNNING STEITZ whose telephone number is (571)272-1917. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:30pm 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, Thomas Barrett can be reached at 571-272-4746. 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.
/RACHEL R STEITZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772
11/4/2025