Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/883,918

PRE-SEWN HAIR EXTENSION

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 12, 2024
Examiner
PULVIDENTE, SYDNEY J
Art Unit
3772
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Slice Stands LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
47%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
62%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 47% of resolved cases
47%
Career Allow Rate
51 granted / 108 resolved
-22.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
148
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.8%
-37.2% vs TC avg
§103
45.9%
+5.9% vs TC avg
§102
24.1%
-15.9% vs TC avg
§112
26.1%
-13.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 108 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 01/21/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the method claim of claim 9 contains many of the same features as the device and the search would not be unduly burdensome. This is found persuasive and the restriction requirement has been removed. Priority Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) as follows: The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994). The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application No. 63/582,362, fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application. Claims 1, and 4-9 receive the priority date of 63/582,362. Claims 2-3 receive the priority date of 18/883,918. Drawings Color photographs and color drawings are not accepted in utility applications unless a petition filed under 37 CFR 1.84(a)(2) is granted. Any such petition must be accompanied by the appropriate fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(h), one set of color drawings or color photographs, as appropriate, if submitted via the USPTO patent electronic filing system or three sets of color drawings or color photographs, as appropriate, if not submitted via the via USPTO patent electronic filing system, and, unless already present, an amendment to include the following language as the first paragraph of the brief description of the drawings section of the specification: The patent or application file contains at least one drawing executed in color. Copies of this patent or patent application publication with color drawing(s) will be provided by the Office upon request and payment of the necessary fee. Color photographs will be accepted if the conditions for accepting color drawings and black and white photographs have been satisfied. See 37 CFR 1.84(b)(2). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 (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 1-2 and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Walker (US 20140060566). Regarding Claim 1, Walker discloses a pre-sewn hair weft (paragraph [0023]; figures 1-4b), comprising: a plurality of layers of hair (12; figure 3 depicts two layers of 12; figures 2-3); a plurality of loops (formed by 14a and 14b creating gap 16; figures 2-4b; paragraph [0027]) that are fixed to the layers of hair (paragraph [0027]); and a plurality of beads (26 and 26a; figures 1-4b; paragraph [0027]) with one of the plurality of beads slidably fixed to each one of the loops (paragraph [0026]). Regarding Claim 2, Walker discloses the device of claim 1. Walker discloses the loops are comprised of a polymer (paragraph [0022] discloses that the loops 14a and 14b (within the reference recited as “weft band” can be a polyurethane material which is a polymer in paragraph [0022]). Regarding Claim 4, Walker discloses the device of claim 1. Walker discloses the weft is delimited at a first end and a second end (figure 1) and the weft is sealed at each of the first and the second end (paragraph [022 discloses that machine wefts (as disclosed by Walker) are glued at the ends to keep them from unraveling and are therefore sealed). Regarding Claim 5, Walker discloses the device of claim 1. Walker discloses the plurality of layers of hair are fixed to each other by one of stitching and sewing (paragraph [0022] discloses sewing and stitching the hair as is done for machine wefts). Regarding Claim 6, Walker discloses the device of claim 5. Walker discloses the loops are fixed to the weft between the stitching (18 affixes the loops to the weft through stitching as disclosed in paragraph [0025]). 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 3 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker (US 20140060566) in view of Rangel (US 20190357614). Regarding Claim 3, Walker discloses the device of claim 1. Walker does not disclose the beads are comprised of aluminum and lined internally with silicone. Rangel discloses a pre-sewn hair weft (Figures 1-3), comprising: a plurality of beads (37; figures 1-3), the beads are comprised of aluminum and lined internally with silicone (paragraph [0032]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have specified the beads of Walker to be beads so they are comprised of aluminum and lined internally with silicone as taught by Rangel in order to allow a professional the ability to install the links flatter to the head for maximum comfort to the client and to remain undetectable (Paragraph [0032]). Regarding Claim 7, Walker discloses the device of claim 1. Walker does not disclose the layers of hair are comprised of natural hair. Rangel discloses a pre-sewn hair weft (figures 1-3), comprising: layers of hair (figures 1-3) comprised of natural hair (paragraph [0003] discloses that hair extensions use either human or synthetic hair). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have specified the layers of hair of Walker to be composed of natural hair as taught by Rangel in order to look more natural when placed on the user’s head and add to the fullness of the hair. Regarding Claim 8, Walker discloses the device of claim 1. Walker does not disclose the layers of hair are comprised of synthetic material. Rangel discloses a pre-sewn hair weft (figures 1-3), comprising: layers of hair (figures 1-3) comprised of synthetic material (paragraph [0003] discloses that hair extensions use either human or synthetic hair). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have specified the layers of hair of Walker to be comprised of synthetic material as taught by Rangel in order to decrease the cost of manufacturing and add to the fullness of the hair. Regarding Claim 9, Walker discloses a method of assembling a pre-sewn weft hair extension on an individual (paragraph [0004]; figures 1-4b), comprising the following steps: providing a pre-sewn weft (paragraph [0023]; figures 1-4b) that includes a plurality of layers of hair (12; figure 3 depicts two layers of 12; figures 2-3), a plurality of beads(26 and 26a; figures 1-4b; paragraph [0027]) and a plurality of loops (formed by 14a and 14b creating gap 16; figures 2-4b; paragraph [0027]) with the loops moveably attached to the weft (via 18; figures 1-4b; paragraph [0025]) and one of the beads slidably fixed to each one of the loops (paragraph [0026]); placing a sectioned portion of hair in one of the loops (paragraph [0018] discloses separating out parts of the natural hair to be feed into the weft; figure 2); sliding a respective one of the beads toward an end of each sectioned portion of the hair closest to the head of an individual (paragraph [0027]); and crimping each one of the beads (paragraph [0026]). Walker does not disclose sectioning an individual’s hair along a back of a head of the individual. Rangel discloses a method of assembling a pre-sewn weft hair extensions on an individual (figures 1-3), including sectioning an individual’s hair along a back of a head of the individual (figure 1 along 22; figure 1; paragraphs [0038] and [0040]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the method of assembling the re-sewn weft hair extensions of Walker to have included sectioning an individual’s hair along a back of a head of the individual as taught by Rangel in order to ensure that when the beads are placed in the hair, individual strands that are not intended to be used are caught and improve the comfort of the patient. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 12, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12558194
ORTHODONTIC BRACKETS, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12527646
IMPLANTING SLEEVE WITH FUNCTION OF AXIAL DIRECTION CHECKING
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12521211
DENTAL IMPLANT
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12507779
HAIR STYLING APPLIANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12491033
SPLINT DEVICE FORMING A FIDUCIAL MARKER CO-OPERABLE WITH A GUIDANCE SYSTEM OF A ROBOT
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
47%
Grant Probability
62%
With Interview (+14.5%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 108 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month