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 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.
Claims 1-15 are 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 1 recites two jaws, then refers to “one of the jaws” and “the other of the jaws” and “a first jaw of the two jaws” and “a second jaw of the two jaws”. It is unclear if the one of the jaws and the other of the jaws refers to two jaws or different jaws. It is also unclear if the one of the two jaws is the same or different from the first jaw or the second jaw and if the other of the two jaws is the same or different from the first or the second jaw. It is suggested Applicant amend the claim to recite a first jaw and a second jaw and then refer to the appropriate first or second jaw as needed through the claims.
Claim 1 requires the guiding portion extend outside the first jaw while also requiring the guiding zone have stop surfaces at the proximal and/or distal part of the first jaw and be formed by a lateral recess of the first jaw, where these limitations appear to contradict one another. Per Applicant’s disclosure the guiding zone is part of the jaw. Perhaps it was Applicant’s intention to require the guiding zone be provided on an exterior surface of the jaw or outside of the internal heat treatment zone defined between the two jaws.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the stop" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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, 4-6 and 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Altamore (US 6070596).
Regarding claim 1, Altamore discloses a process for treating at least one lock of hair, involving the movement of a device along the lock of hair from the root to the tip of the hair in order to perform, during a passage of the device over the lock of hair, the following steps: a heat treatment of a portion of the lock of hair by gripping between two jaws (12,14, alternatively, one jaw is defined as the portion of 12 disposed between opposing 28 including exterior surface 18 in this region, the other jaw is defined as the corresponding portion of 14) of the device that are hinged together (hinged at 42, 43) and passing through an internal heat treatment zone (internal treatment zone defined by portions of 22, 16 excluding teeth 24a,25,27) extending between the two jaws, a heat treatment of the portion of the lock of hair by passage over an external heat treatment zone (external heat treatment zone defined by surface 18 including 58) extending on the outer surface of one of the two jaws of the device, an additional treatment of the portion of the lock of hair by passage through an additional treatment zone (treatment zone defined by 24a) by the treatment device as it moves over the lock of hair, the additional treatment being performed by an additional treatment member extending from one of the jaws to the other of the jaws during the movement of the device along the lock of hair (Refer to Figures 3 and 5), guiding the portion of the lock of hair by passing it through a guiding zone (zone defined between 28,30 and 28,29, Refer to Figures 1 and 2) extending outside a first jaw (portion of 12 disposed between opposing 28 including exterior surface 18 in this region) of the two jaws of the device bearing the external heat treatment zone, the guiding zone having stop surfaces (surfaces of 28 or 28,29,30) at the proximal and distal part of the first jaw, forming laterally to the guiding zone an obstacle to the hair that is sufficient to contain the hair in said guiding zone, in which the guiding zone is formed by a lateral recess (recess disposed between stop surfaces of 28, including 52) of the first jaw laterally bordered by the stop surfaces, a part of the additional treatment member extending from a second jaw of the two jaws into the lateral recess (Refer to Figures 1-7 and col. 6 lines 6-67, col. 7 lines 1-67 and col. 8 lines 1-10).
Regarding claim 4, Altamore discloses the stop surfaces form an obstacle to the portion of the lock of hair of at least two millimeters (Refer to col. 3 lines 37-39, stop surfaces protrude 0.145 to 0.185 inches).
Regarding claim 5, Altamore discloses the or each of the stop surface has a variable height (Refer to Figures 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 6, Altamore discloses the heat treatment in the internal heat treatment zone is performed before the heat treatment in the external heat treatment zone on the portion of the lock of hair when the device is moved over the lock of hair (Refer to Figure 7, col. 6 lines 55-67 and col. 7 lines 17-29 where 58 is part of 18),
Regarding claim 9, Altamore discloses the heat treatment by passing over the external heat treatment zone takes place by contact of the portion of the lock of hair with an external heating surface extending over at least part of the outer surface of one of the jaws (Refer to Figure 7, col. 6 lines 55-67 and col. 7 lines 17-29 where 58 is part of 18).
Regarding claim 10, Altamore discloses heat treatment by passing through an additional external heat treatment zone extending over the outer surface of the other of the two jaws of the device (treatment zone defined by outer surface of 14 including teeth 24, 26 and col. 5 lines 10-29)
Regarding claim 11, Altamore discloses gripping of the device by an outer surface (surface of 30,32) of a distal portion of the jaws not having an external heating surface during the movement of the device along the lock of hair (Refer to col. 4 lines 9-13).
Regarding claim 12, Altamore discloses a second additional treatment of the portion of the lock of hair by passage through an additional treatment zone (zone defined by upper/exterior surface of 15 having 24,26) by the treatment device as it moves over the lock of hair, the additional treatment notably being upstream of the abovementioned heat treatments and of the stop of the hair (Refer to col. 5 lines 10-29).
Regarding claim 13, Altamore discloses the second additional treatment includes combing of the portion of the lock of hair (teeth 24 and 26 comb the hair).
Regarding claim 14, Altamore discloses the steps of the process are performed in succession along the lock of hair, in the following order: heat treatment in the internal heat treatment zone, hair guiding, and heat treatment in the external heat treatment zone (Refer to Figure 7, col. 6 lines 55-67 and col. 7 lines 17-29 where 58 is part of 18).
Regarding claim 15, Altamore discloses the lateral recess is delimited by shoulders (28) on the outer surface of the jaw bearing the lateral recess, the shoulders forming the stop surfaces (surfaces of 28 form stop surfaces).
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ngo et al. (US 20170135457) and Altamore (US 6070596).
Regarding claims 1 and 15, Ngo et al. disclose a process for treating at least one lock of hair, involving the movement of a device (1) along the lock of hair from the root to the tip of the hair in order to perform, during a passage of the device (1) over the lock of hair, the following steps:- a heat treatment of a portion of the lock of hair by gripping between two jaws (portions of 6,6’, 7,7’ with 4,5) of the device that are hinged together and passing through an internal heat treatment zone (zone defined between 4 and 5) extending between the two jaws, an additional treatment of the portion of the lock of hair by passage through an additional treatment zone (zone defined by 31 and/or 32) by the treatment device as it moves over the lock of hair, the additional treatment being performed by an additional treatment member (31 and/or 32) extending from one of the jaws to the other of the jaws during the movement of the device along the lock of hair, and guiding the portion of the lock of hair by passing it through a guiding zone (zone defined by 21,22 and portion of 6 protruding beyond 4) extending outside a first jaw of the two jaws (the guiding zone is adjacent and outside the first jaw which is defined as the portion of 6 having 4), the guiding zone having stop surfaces (proximal and distal surfaces which form the ends of the groove 22) at the proximal and/or distal part of the first jaw, forming laterally to the guiding zone an obstacle to the hair that is sufficient to contain the hair in said guiding zone, in which the guiding zone is formed at least partially by a lateral recess (22) of the first jaw laterally bordered by the stop surfaces, a part of the additional treatment member extending from the other jaw into the lateral recess (the comb teeth 32 extend into the lateral recess and the steam outlets 31 dispense into the lateral recess, where the guiding zone keeps the steam moving toward the hair instead of the scalp) (Refer to paragraphs 0028, 0031-0033, 0035, 0065, 0066 and 0082-0086) and the lateral recess is delimited by shoulders (portion of jaw extending beyond the recess forming distal and proximal ends of the guiding surface) on the outer surface of the jaw bearing the lateral recess, the shoulders forming the stop surfaces (the shoulders form the stop surfaces as they define the surfaces which provide the terminal ends of the recess and thereby block/stop and confine).
However, Ngo et al. do not disclose heat treatment of the portion of the lock of hair by passage over an external heat treatment zone extending on the outer surface of the jaw bearing the guiding zone. Altamore discloses a similar process for treating locks of hair, where a lock of hair is placed between two pivoting jaws of a device and subjected to heating via an internal heat treatment zone. Altamore further explains the device provides heated external surfaces on the jaws as well, so that the hair is heat treated by passing the hair over the external heat treatment zone on the outer surfaces of the jaws (Refer to Figure 3, heating elements 44 heat the inner and outer surfaces of the jaws and Figure 7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of Ngo et al. such that the outer surface of the jaws include an external heat treatment zone heated via the same heating means as the internal heat treatment zone, and heat treating the lock of hair by passing it over and contacting the external heating zone as taught by Altamonte in order to facilitate and expedite imparting the desired shape onto the hair by heating it while contacting the exterior surface.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Ngo et al. and Altamore disclose the process of treating hair of claim 1 above, Ngo et al. further disclose the heat treatment by the internal heat treatment zone takes place at a temperature above 50°C (Refer to paragraph 0048).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Ngo et al. and Altamore disclose the process of treating hair of claim 1 above, where the combination further discloses the heat treatment by passing over an external heat treatment zone is at a temperature above 50°C when the device is in use. Altamore is relied upon for the teaching of providing an external heat treatment zone, where such is achieved via the configuration of the heating element in the jaw, which serves to heat both the inner heat treatment zone and the outer heat treatment zone. Modifying Ngo et al. per the teachings of Altamore to have such an arrangement results in the internal and external heat treatment zones being heated via the same heating element and therefore reaching comparable temperatures, where Ngo et al. discloses temperature greater than 50°C (Refer to paragraph 0048).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Ngo et al. and Altamore disclose the process of treating hair of claim 1 above, wherein Ngo et al. disclose the stop surfaces form an obstacle to the portion of the lock of hair (Refer to Figures 2, 3 and 4). Ngo et al. disclose the upper jaw has an overall width of 45 mm (l1) and the inner treatment surface has a width of 25 mm (l), where the difference between these measurements accounts for a small portion of the jaw opposite the guiding surface and the guiding surface (Refer to Figure 4), meaning the guiding surface and therefore the stop surfaces are more than 2 mm. Ngo et al. also disclose the radius of the curve forming the lateral recess of the guiding surface is 14 mm (Refer to Figure 4), meaning the stop surface defining termination of the recess meets the claimed requirement of being at least 2 mm.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Ngo et al. and Altamore disclose the process of treating hair of claim 1 above, Ngo et al. further disclose the or each stop surface has a variable height (Refer to Figures 2 and 4 which depict the height of the guiding surfaces decreases toward a lateral edge of the jaw, where the stop surfaces also have a variable height as they follow the recess).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Ngo et al. and Altamore disclose the process of treating hair of claim 1 above, where the heat treatment in the internal heat treatment zone is performed before the heat treatment in the external heat treatment zone on the portion of the lock of hair when the device is moved over the lock of hair (Refer to paragraph 0085 of Ngo et al., where the modification provides the external heat treatment zone on the jaw(s) thereby heating the hair with the external hair treatment zone after heat has been applied via the internal heat treatment zone).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Ngo et al. and Altamore disclose the process of treating hair of claim 1 above, Ngo et al. further disclose the internal heat treatment surface is a hair contact surface (surface of 4,5) of an internal heat treatment member (4,5), the process including passing the portion of the lock of hair, placed under mechanical tension between a lateral edge (right of left most side of 4,5) of the internal treatment member (4,5) and an outer surface (outer surface(s) of 6,7) of the jaw (6,6’, 7,7’) bearing the internal treatment member (4,5) adjacent to the lateral edge against the lateral edge, the portion of the lock of hair under tension presenting an angle with a median plane of the device, extending between the jaws in the moved-together configuration of the jaws. Ngo et al. explain the hair is wrapped around the portion of the first jaw (6) or a portion of both of the jaws (6,7) while part of the hair is clamped between both of the jaws. Figure 4 has been annotated below to depict the path a lock of hair occupies when wrapped about the device, where the angle is greater than 90 degrees and appears to be less than 120 degrees. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of the combination of Ngo et al. and Altamore such that the angle of the hair under tension between a lateral edge of the internal hair treatment member and the outer surface of the jaw be greater than 90 degrees and less than 120 degrees as Ngo et al. disclose the general conditions of the claim and it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
PNG
media_image1.png
780
888
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Ngo et al. and Altamore disclose the process of treating hair of claim 1 above, Ngo et al. further disclose the internal heat treatment zone is laterally offset upstream or downstream (Refer to Figures 2-4) the hair being moved from upstream to downstream during the heat treatment.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Ngo et al. and Altamore disclose the process of treating hair of claim 1 above, wherein the heat treatment by passing over the external heat treatment zone takes place by contact of the portion of the lock of hair with an external heating surface extending over at least part of the outer surface of one of the jaws. As explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, Ngo et al. was modified to provide an external heat treatment zone per the teachings of Altamore, such that when the hair is passed over the external heat treatment zone, contact between the hair and this zone provides a heat treatment to the hair.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Ngo et al. and Altamore disclose the process of treating hair of claim 1 above, including heat treatment by passing through an additional external heat treatment zone extending over the outer surface of the other of the two jaws of the device. As explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, the device of Ngo et al. was modified such that each jaws provide an external heat treatment zone per the teachings of Altamore, and Ngo et al. teach passing the hair over the outer surfaces of the two jaws; thus, the combination provides heating of the hair by these external heat treatment zones on the outer surfaces of the jaws.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Ngo et al. and Altamore disclose the process of treating hair of claim 1 above, Ngo et al. disclose gripping of the device by an outer surface of a distal portion of the jaws not having an external heating surface during the movement of the device along the lock of hair (Refer to paragraphs 0014, 0034 and 0046, the device is gripped at the handle portions 6’,7’ of each jaw).
Regarding claims 12 and 13, the combination of Ngo et al. and Altamore disclose the process of treating hair of claim 1 above, an additional treatment (other of steam treatment via 31 or combing via 32) of the portion of the lock of hair by passage through an additional treatment zone (31 or 32) by the treatment device as it moves over the lock of hair, the additional treatment notably being upstream of the abovementioned heat treatments and of the stop of the hair (Refer to Figures 2-5), where the additional treatment includes the application of steam (via 31) and/or combing (via 32) of the portion of the lock of hair.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Ngo et al. and Altamore disclose the process of treating hair of claim 1 above, the steps of the process are performed in succession along the lock of hair, in the following order: heat treatment in the internal heat treatment zone, hair guiding, and heat treatment in the external heat treatment zone or heat treatment in the internal heat treatment zone, heat treatment in the external heat treatment zone, guiding by the guiding zone (Refer to paragraph 0085 of Ngo et al., where the winding step allows for guiding the hair then place it on the external hair treatment, or vice versa depending on the direction in which the hair is wound about the device).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 2, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Argument: Claim 1 has been amended to require a guiding zone ffomed by a lateral recess of one of the jkaws laterally bordered by stop surfaces where neither ngo nor Altamore provide this feature. Additionally, it would go against the teachings of Ngo to provide the feature because Ngo discloses the external surfaces of the casings are essentially smooth.
Response: Ngo provides the claimed limitations because one jaw has a lateral recess 22 that is laterally bordered by stop surfaces (surfaces which define the terminal ends of the recess). With regard to Ngo describing the casings as having essentially smooth external surfaces, this point appears to be moot and have no bearing on the claimed feature. It is noted that the smoothness refers to the surface texture not being rough so the hair doesn’t catch on the surface (prevent damage to the hair, the hair from getting stuck, making it hard to drag/pull the hair through the device during use); this has nothing to do with stop surfaces being appropriate or not. Applicant appears to assert the claim requires the stop surfaces and recess be on the outer surface of the jaw; however, the claim does not recite such language.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TATIANA L NOBREGA whose telephone number is (571)270-7228. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4pm.
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.
/TATIANA L NOBREGA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights