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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 3/18/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the Groups do make a contribution over Paris. This is not found persuasive because the common matter linking the groups is a generic hair styling device, Paris discloses a generic hair styling device. The common matter does not comprise a single general inventive concept or corresponding technical features because a generic hair styling device is known in the art. Furthermore, Applicant fails to identify a specific technical feature common to all groups that provides a contribution of the prior art, as required under unity of invention standards. The election of Group I with traverse is acknowledged; however, the traverse is not persuasive for the reasons above, and the restriction requirement is maintained.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 3-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 3/18/2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: reference character 37. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 19, states “A method of styling hair using the device of claim 1.” However, no method steps are set forth, therefore, it is unclear what the “steps of using are”.
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, 2, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mourad (US 9,012,813).
Mourad discloses a hair styling device comprising an elongate first arm (32) having a distal end with at least one plate (36) and a proximal end (near cable 33); and an elongate second arm (34) having a distal end with at least one plate (38) and a proximal end; wherein the proximal end of the second arm is coupled to the first arm by a hinge (Fig. 1) so that the first and second arms are moveable between an open position in which hair can be introduced between the distal end of the first arm and the distal end of the second arm (Fig. 1) and a closed position in which hair is clamped between the distal end of the first arm and the distal end of the second arm (Fig. 2); wherein the hinge is coupled to the first arm at a position that is offset from the proximal end of the first arm (Fig. 1).
Mourad does not disclose a ratio of a distance between the hinge and the at least one plate at the distal end of the first arm and a distance between a centre of gravity of the hair styling device and the at least one plate at the distal end of the first arm lies within the range 0.25 and 0.4 (claim 1) or more specifically in claim 2 the range 0.28 and 0.35. However, one having ordinary skill in the art would find the parameters of the ratio of a distance between the hinge and the at least one plate at the distal end of the first hair and a distance between a centre of gravity of the hair styling device and the at least one plate at the distal end to be deemed matters of design choice, will within the skill of the ordinary artisan, obtained through routine experimentation in determining optimum results. The purpose of the ratio would be to improve the ergonomic function of the device allowing for repeated one handed use.
Regarding claim 19, Mourad discloses a method of using the hair styling device (col. 4, lines 35-50).
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, Eric Rosen can be reached at 571-270-7855. 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
4/17/2026
Prosecution Insights