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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/11/2026 has been entered.
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, 4-5, 11-17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seidler (US 3516423 A) in view of Chipman (US 20220338585 A1), Ahn (US 10159292 B2), and Lotti (US 20180242672 A1).
Re. Claim 1, Siedler discloses an applicator (Fig. 4) for applying a plurality of artificial eyelash cluster’s to a user’s natural eyelashes (60; Col. 4, lines 51-61), the applicator comprising:
A tip portion (Annotated Figure A of Fig. 4) including:
A lash alignment part (Annotated Figure A of Fig. 4) having a edge line (Annotated Figure C of Fig. 4) and an adhesive line (28) extending substantially parallel to the edge line at a predetermined distance from the edge line (Annotated Figure C of Fig. 4); and
A bent part extending from the lash alignment part and being inclined, when viewed in cross section, at an angle of 90 degrees (Annotated Figure A of Fig. 4 where the bent part is made by a section near the lash alignment and a portion of element 27 to make a 90 degree angle);
A second adhesive (32) disposed along the adhesive line (Fig. 4, Col. 3, lines 42-53); and
A tab portion coupled to the tip portion and configured to be gripped by a user (Annotated Figure A of Fig. 4 which shows a handle that is configured to be gripped by a user).
Siedler also discloses various tip portions having various curvatures/concavities with curved edge lines (Fig. 1-4; Col. 4, lines 1-2). As such, it would have been obvious to modify the tip portion of Fig. 4 to have a curved edge line as taught by the embodiment shown Fig. 2-3 to provide the user with a tip matching the curvature of the user’s eyelid.
However, Siedler is silent to each artificial eyelash cluster including a support strip, a plurality of eyelash filaments extending from the support strip and the first adhesive formed on the first surface of the support strip and/or plurality of eyelash filaments. Further, Siedler is silent to the bent part being inclined, when viewed in cross section, at an angle greater than about 90 degrees and less than abut 120 degrees from the lash alignment part. Siedler is also silent to the plurality of artificial eyelash clusters are disposed on the second adhesive at substantially regular intervals along the adhesive line and outer edges of the support strips of the plurality of artificial eyelash clusters substantially match the curved edge line of the alignment part.
Siedler does disclose of a first adhesive disposed on a first surface to be attached to a user’s natural eyelashes (Col. 3, lines 19-24 discloses a first adhesive disposed on a first surface of the eyelash being attached to the user’s natural eyelashes).
Chipman teaches an artificial eyelash system (Fig. 5) in the same field of endeavor and further discloses a plurality of artificial clusters (22) wherein each cluster includes a support strip (16), eyelash filaments (14) extending from the support strip and a first adhesive (disclosed to be tape or mascara for example) formed on the first surface of the eyelash filaments (Par. 151-153).
It would have been obvious to someone skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have the plurality of artificial clusters of Seidler to include a support strip, eyelash filaments extending from the support strip, and the first adhesive formed on the first surface of the eyelash filaments as taught by Chipman as it is well known in the art to apply the artificial lash extensions to the user’s eyelashes and also arrangement provides easy manufacturing of the clusters.
Ahn teaches an applicator in the same field of endeavor and further discloses a tip portion (1802/1804) having a bent part (1814) extending from the lash alignment part (Fig. 18) that is inclined and extends at an angle greater than about 90 degrees from the eyelash alignment part (see Fig. 18 and 15D. Though Fig. 15D presents a different embodiment, it is found to present a similar bent part which is being used as a reference. It is found from the eyelash alignment part to the bent part, it is found that there presents to angles, one that is acute and the other being obtuse. This can be viewed in Annotated Figure E of Fig. 15D. These two types of angles will be present when a bend is present and as such presents that the bent part of a tip portion extends at an inclination angle greater than about 90 degrees from the eyelash alignment part). Ahn teaches the angle of the bent part is greater than about 90 degrees and less than about 120 degrees (Fig. 15D discloses that the angle would be between 30 to 60 degrees for the acute angle. As such, the obtuse angle which is the inclination angle of 120 degrees. This is found to be within the claimed ranged as it is within +/-5% tolerance of the upper range 120).
As such, it would have been obvious to someone skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have the inclination angel of Siedler and Chipman to have the angle of the bent part greater than about 90 degrees and less than about 120 degrees as taught by Fig. 15D of Ahn to alter the angle best suited for the user.
Lotti teaches an artificial eyelash clusters in the same field of endeavor and further teaches being arranged in regular intervals to be simultaneously grasped by the applicator in a single motion (Fig. 5; Par. 53).
It would have been obvious to someone skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have the plurality of artificial eyelash clusters of Seidler, Chipman and Ahn to be arranged in regular intervals be simultaneously grasped by the applicator as taught by Lotti to apply the clusters in a single motion. As such, the combination of Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti would teach that the plurality of artificial eyelash clusters are disposed on the second adhesive at substantially regular intervals along the adhesive line and outer edges of the support strips of the plurality of artificial eyelash clusters substantially match the curved edge line of the alignment part. Thus, the combination of the references teaches the limitation of claim 1.
PNG
media_image1.png
906
1230
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure A
PNG
media_image2.png
378
704
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure C
PNG
media_image3.png
501
277
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure E
Re. Claim 2, Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti discloses the applicator according to claim 1, wherein Seidler further discloses the tip portion further includes a coupling projection (Annotated Figure B of Fig. 4; coupling projection is element 27) located on an upper surface of the bent part to be coupled to the tab portion (Annotated Figure B of Fig. 4), and the tab portion further includes a coupling groove (Annotated Figure B of Fig. 4; coupling groove is element 24) located on a lower surface thereof to be inserted by the coupling projection (Annotated Figure B of Fig. 4; Col. 3, lines 40-43).
PNG
media_image4.png
884
616
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure B
Re. Claim 4, Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti discloses the applicator according to claim 1, Siedler further discloses that the tip portion can be removed and can be replaced (Col. 3, lines 49-53).
As such, it would have been obvious to someone skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have the tip portion of Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti to comprise a plurality of interchangeable tip portions configured to be selectively coupled to the tab portion as taught by Siedler to replace the tip portion accordingly.
Re. Claim 5, Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti discloses the applicator according to claim 4, wherein Siedler further teaches different tip portions with different concavities (Fig. 1-4; Col. 4, lines 1-2). Further, Siedler teaches that the tip portion can be removed and can be replaced thus teaching that there is a plurality of tip portions (Col. 3, lines 49-53).
As such, it would have been obvious to someone skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have the plurality of interchangeable tip portions of Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti to have curved edge lines with different curvatures from each other as taught by the other embodiments of Seidler to provide the user options as to the tip best suited for the user.
Re. Claim 11, Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti discloses the applicator according to claim 1, wherein Seidler further discloses the tip portion is implemented with a transparent material (Col. 2, lines 59-61).
Re. Claim 12, Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti discloses the applicator according to claim 1, wherein each of the artificial eyelash extension cluster is a ready-to-use artificial eyelash cluster having the first adhesive which is a pre-applied adhesive element before being packaged for sale to a user (Abstract; Par. 39 and 97).
It would have been obvious to someone skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have the artificial eyelash clusters of Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti comprise a ready-to-use artificial eyelash cluster having the first adhesive which is a pre-applied adhesive element before being packaged for sale to a user as taught by Chipman to simplify the application process of the eyelashes for the user.
Re. Claim 13, Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti discloses the applicator according to claim 12, wherein Chipman teaches the ready-to-use artificial eyelash cluster comprises: the plurality of filaments, each having a base (Annotated Figure D of Fig. 2/3) and a tip (Annotated Figure D of Fig. 2/3); a support strip attached to the bases of the filaments (Annotated Figure D of Fig. 2/3; element 16); and the first adhesive (18) disposed on at least one of the support strip and the plurality of filaments (Par. 98; Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image5.png
521
736
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure D
Re. Claim 14, Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti discloses the applicator according to claim 13, wherein Chipman further teaches the first adhesive is applied at a position between the support strip and one-half the filaments' average length away from the support strip (Par. 151-153).
It would have been obvious to someone skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have the first adhesive of Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti to be applied at a position between the support strip and one-half the filaments' average length away from the support strip as taught by Chipman to ensure a secure attachment of the entire cluster to the user’s eyelashes.
Re. Claim 15, Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti discloses the applicator according to claim 13, wherein the first adhesive comprises an adhesive that retains its stickiness during storage of the artificial eyelash cluster (Par. 36).
It would have been obvious to someone skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have the first adhesive of Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti to be an adhesive that retains its stickiness during storage of the artificial eyelash cluster as taught by Chipman to allow for long term wear before replacement or cleaning is needed.
Re. Claim 16, Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti discloses the applicator according to claim 13, Chipman further teaches the first adhesive is applied continuously from a position between the support strip and a one-half of the filaments' average length to a distance that is equal to or less than one-half of the filament's average length (Par. 151-153).
It would have been obvious to someone skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have the first adhesive of Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti to be applied continuously from a position between the support strip and a one-half of the filaments' average length to a distance that is equal to or less than one-half of the filament's average length as taught by Chipman to ensure a secure attachment of the entire cluster to the user’s eyelashes.
Re. Claim 17, Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti discloses the applicator according to claim 13, wherein Chipman teaches the first adhesive is a double-sided tape (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to someone skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have the first adhesive of Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti to be double-sided tape as taught by Chipman since alternative adhesives are well known in the art to apply the artificial lash extension to the user’s eyelashes.
Re. Claim 19, Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti discloses the applicator to claim 5, wherein Siedler discloses each curved edge line has a curvature corresponding to a distance from a base reference plate to a center point of the curved edge line (Annotated Figure F of Fig. 2 and 3).
PNG
media_image6.png
351
872
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Re. Claim 20, Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti discloses the applicator according to claim 19, wherein Siedler discloses the plurality of interchangeable tip portions comprise first, second, and third tip portions having first, second and third curved edge lines with different curvatures (see Fig. 1-4 which shows three tip portions with different curvatures). However, they are silent to a third tip portion having a third curved edge line with different curvature from the first and second tip portions.
It would have been obvious to someone skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have the plurality of interchangeable tip portions of Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti to comprise a third tip portion having a third curved edge line with different curvature from the first and second tip portions through trial and error and provide an alternative options for the user that may be best suited for their particular needs.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seidler (US 3516423 A) in view of Chipman (US 20220338585 A1), Ahn (US 10159292 B2), Lotti (US 20180242672 A1), and Mallardi (US 20080019758 A1).
Re. Claim 18, Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti discloses the applicator according to claim 2, but are silent to the coupling projection and the coupling groove are detachably coupled by a snap-fit connection.
Mallardi discloses an applicator in the analogous art of cosmetic applicator and further discloses the tip portion (14) detachably coupled to the stem (16) through various means including a snap-fit arrangement (Par. 37) to allow the tip portion to be replaceable and apply various sized tip portions based on the user’s needs (Par. 35 and 37).
It would have been obvious to someone skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have the coupling projection and the coupling groove of Seidler, Chipman, Ahn and Lotti to be detachably coupled by a snap-fit connection as taught by Mallardi to allow the tip portion to be replaceable and apply various sized tip portions based on the user’s needs.
Response to Arguments
Argument #1: Applicant argues that element 28 is a rubber component to which adhesive is applied and as such would not teach an adhesive line and that the adhesive applied corresponds to the claimed second adhesive.
Response #1: Applicant’s argument is found to not be persuasive as it is disclosed that the adhesive is part of the rubber component where it can be applied directly OR to a tape to be secured. It would result in a tacky surface which can read upon the second adhesive as currently claimed (Col. 2, lines 62-72 and Col. 3, lines 1-7 where it should be noted that the limitation regarding the adhesive material is the same for Fig. 4 as disclosed in Col. 3, lines 42-47).
Argument #2: Applicant argues that Siedler does not disclose a curved edge line, an adhesive edge line extending substantially parallel to the curved edge line at a predetermined distance or the arrangement in which a plurality of artificial eyelash clusters are disposed at substantially regular intervals along the adhesive line and the outer edges of the support strips substantially match the curved edge line.
Response #2: Applicant’s argument is found to not be persuasive as Siedler does disclose a curved edge as shown in Fig. 3 and 4 where the curved edge line would match curve made by the edge of the band which presents a concave or convex shape. As it follows the particular pathing, it would be parallel to one another as well. Because the clusters would be disposed upon the tip portion, it would follow the bands curvature as such.
Argument #3: Applicant argues that Ahn does not establish the lash alignment part begins or ends and the bent part begins or ends where it cannot be used to teach the angling of the bent part extending from the lash alignment part.
Response #3: Applicant’s argument is found to not be persuasive as Ahn does disclose the particular limitation as the bent part is found to be 1814 and the lash alignment part is shown in Fig. 18 where the lashes are attached to the applicator. The two reference lines were used to clarify the two angles present when following the pathing of the bent part and the lash alignment part. The bent can be visualized in Fig. 15 which can be adjusted by the user as desired to apply the eyelashes onto the user. The limitation as claimed relates to a bent part presented in the applicator where the limitation regarding the lash alignment part is not being taught by Ahn but rather Siedler. Because the bent part of Ahn extends from the lash alignment part of the tip portion, it can be used as teaching for the limitation regarding the angle.
Argument #4: Applicant argues that Lotti does not disclose the limitation regarding the last alignment part.
Response #4: Applicant’s argument is found to not be persuasive as the teaching regarding the lash alignment part is taught by Siedler and the combination of Siedler with Lotti would disclose the particular teaching regarding the clusters and lash alignment part together.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOLLY T TO whose telephone number is (571)272-0719. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 6:30 - 4:30.
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.
/HOLLY T. TO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/EDELMIRA BOSQUES/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772
