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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because figures 1-6 and 8-9 are in grayscale.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 Objections
Claims 2-8 are objected to because of the following informalities: after each preamble of the claim there should be a “,” following what claim it depends from. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: “at at least” in line 2 should read “[[at]] at least”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: “two flexible arches” in line 1 should read “two flexible arches of the at least one flexible arch”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: “at at least” in line 2 should read “[[at]] at least”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Crapet (US 20230172341).
Regarding Claim 1, Crapet discloses an applicator device (figures 1-6) for applying a fluid and/or paste product to keratin fibers (paragraph [0057]), including a core (2; figures 1-6) and a plurality of protuberances (7.1 and 7.2; figure 6) connected directly or indirectly to the core (figure 6 via either direct connection on 2 or through 9 which connects to the core via 5a; paragraph [0064] and [0091]), these protuberances (figures 1-6) being arranged along a surface (figures 1-6) the shape of which corresponds to the surface defined by the keratin fibers intended to receive said product (paragraph [0097]; figure 3 depicts that the shape of the device is similar to the shape of the eye; further the cross section and shape of the surface in figures 1-6 is the same as applicants).
Regarding Claim 2, Crapet discloses the applicator as claimed in Claim 1. Crapet discloses at least one flexible arch (9 which is connected to 5; figures 1-6) connected at least one of its ends to the core (via 5a; figures 1-6; paragraph [0064]), the flexible arch (figures 1-6) supporting a plurality said the protuberances (figures 1-6 depict 7.1 on 9; figures 1-6; paragraph [0092]).
Regarding Claim 3, Crapet discloses the applicator as claimed in Claim 2. Crapet discloses two flexible arches (9; figure 4) disposed on respective opposite sides of the core (figure 4; two arches on a top side and one arch on a bottom side).
Claims 1 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Befve et al. (US 20140246043, hereinafter Befve).
Regarding Claim 1, Befve discloses an applicator device (figures 1-4) for applying a fluid and/or paste product to keratin fibers (paragraph [0001]), including a core (figure 3) and a plurality of protuberances (38; figure 3) connected directly or indirectly to the core (via 18a, 18b, 18c, 18d; figure 3), these protuberances (figures 1-4) being arranged along a surface (figures 1-4) the shape of which corresponds to the surface defined by the keratin fibers intended to receive said product (paragraph [0056]; figure 1 depicts that the shape of the device is similar to the shape of the eye; further the cross section and shape of the surface in figures 1-4 is the same as applicants).
Regarding Claim 4, Befve discloses the applicator as claimed in Claim 1. Befve discloses at least one groove (20; figure 3) formed in the core (figure 3) and extending along a length (figure 3) of the core.
Regarding Claim 5, Befve as modified discloses the applicator as claimed in Claim 1. Befve discloses at least some of the protuberances (figure 3) are disposed at the edge of the groove (figure 3).
Claims 1 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by De Bardonneche (US 20190014895).
Regarding Claim 1, De Bardonneche discloses an applicator device (figure 3) for applying a fluid and/or paste product to keratin fibers (paragraph [0001]), including a core (1; figure 3) and a plurality of protuberances (23; figure 1) connected directly or indirectly to the core (via 2; figure 3), these protuberances (figure 2) being arranged along a surface (figure 3) the shape of which corresponds to the surface defined by the keratin fibers intended to receive said product (paragraph [0002]; figure 3 depicts that the shape of the device is similar to the shape of the eye; further the cross section and shape of the surface in figure 3 is the same as applicants).
Regarding Claim 6, De Bardonneche discloses the applicator as claimed in Claim 1. De Bardonneche discloses made in one piece by injection molding a plastic material (paragraph [0016]).
Regarding Claim 7, De Bardonneche discloses the applicator as claimed in Claim 6. De Bardonneche discloses said plastic material includes portions of different hardness (paragraph [0019], [0025], [0049]).
Regarding Claim 8, Crapet discloses the applicator as claimed in Claim 6. Crapet discloses wherein the applicator device includes at least one flexible arch (5 and 9; figures 1-6) connected at least one of its ends to the core (via 5a; figures 1-6; paragraph [0064]), the flexible arch (figures 1-6) supporting a plurality said the protuberances (figures 1-6 depict 7.1 on 9; figures 1-6; paragraph [0092]), the least one flexible arch (2; paragraph [0046]) and said the protuberances (23 (which is part of 2); paragraph [0046]) have a hardness lower than that of said the core (figure 1a-1b; paragraph [0025] and claim 1 discloses the difference between the first material (the core) and the second plastic material (the arch and the protuberances) is at least 5 Shore A or 5 shore D, this the arch and protuberances may be harder than the core).
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.
Claims 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crapet (US 20230172341) in view of De Bardonneche (US 20190014895).
Regarding Claim 6, Crapet discloses the applicator as claimed in Claim 1. Crapet discloses made in one piece by injection molding (paragraph [0122]), but does not disclose it is a plastic material.
De Bardonneche discloses an applicator (figure 3) made in one piece by injection molding a plastic material (paragraph [0016]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the injection molding as taught by Crapet to specify it is a plastic material as taught by De Bardonneche in order to have to have a material that is best suited to the needs and which displays good behavior during the injection molded process (paragraph [0016]).
Regarding Claim 7, Crapet discloses the applicator as claimed in Claim 6. Crapet does not disclose said plastic material includes portions of different hardness.
De Bardonneche discloses said plastic material includes portions of different hardness (paragraph [0019], [0025], [0049]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the applicator of Crapet to have plastic material includes portions of different hardness in order to allow the bristles/protuberances able to deflect more to when force is applied by the user when applying it to the eyelash.
Regarding Claim 8, Crapet discloses the applicator as claimed in Claim 6. Crapet discloses wherein the applicator device includes at least one flexible arch (5 and 9; figures 1-6) connected at least one of its ends to the core (via 5a; figures 1-6; paragraph [0064]), the flexible arch (figures 1-6) supporting a plurality said the protuberances (figures 1-6 depict 7.1 on 9; figures 1-6; paragraph [0092]).
Crapet does not discloses wherein the least one flexible arch (5a, 5b) and said the protuberances (3a, 3b, 3c) have a hardness lower than that of said the core (1).
De Bardonneche discloses the least one flexible arch (2; paragraph [0046]) and said the protuberances (23 (which is part of 2); paragraph [0046]) have a hardness lower than that of said the core (figure 1a-1b; paragraph [0025] and claim 1 discloses the difference between the first material (the core) and the second plastic material (the arch and the protuberances) is at least 5 Shore A or 5 shore D, this the arch and protuberances may be harder than the core).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the applicator of Crapet to have plastic material includes portions of different hardness in order to allow the bristles/protuberances able to deflect more to when force is applied by the user when applying it to the eyelash.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sydney J Pulvidente whose telephone number is (571)272-8066. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 7:30 a.m. - 3:30 p.m..
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.
/SYDNEY J PULVIDENTE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3772 /ERIC J ROSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772