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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities in paragraph 0030:
“bore 36” should be “bore 30”;
The paragraph states “in the example depicted in Fig. 6, the slot 26 is J-shaped” but Figure 6 is of the head of the first tool and therefore does not contain a slot, so the figure referenced needs to be corrected.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
In Figure 8, reference character 48 with a lead line to the radially extending leg on the left should be reference character 47;
In Figure 9, reference character 12 should be removed or changed to reference character 22;
In Figure 14, reference character 206 on the left side should be reference character 203.
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
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a loop” should be “the loop”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Beasley (US 20210145143).
Regarding Claim 1, Beasley discloses a hair tool apparatus (needle 110) for facilitating coupling a bead to hair of a person (¶ 0007; Figure 1; the device is fully capable of applying a variety of bead types to hair), the hair tool apparatus comprising:
a body (hand grip 132) with a first body end (left end of handle 132, near eye 120) and a second body end (right end of handle 132, near tip 130);
a first tool (hair extension tool including eye 120 on left of Figures 2, 4) coupled to the first body end (Figure 2), the first tool configured to hold the bead thereon (eye 120 is collapsible and therefore is fully capable of holding a bead slid onto the loop; device is described as being made of a viscoelastic material in µ 6)) and having a loop (eye 120) configured to receive the hair there through (¶ 21) such that the bead can be coupled to the hair (this is an intended use of the first tool, and the end of needle 110 including eye 120 is fully capable of coupling a bead slid onto the loop to a section of hair received through the loop); and
a second tool (tip 130) coupled to the second body end (coupled to right side of handle 132), the second tool configured to engage the hair and facilitate partitioning the hair from the person (this is an intended use of the second tool, and the tip 130 on the end of needle 110 is fully capable of engaging hair and partitioning it).
PNG
media_image1.png
437
609
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Beasley discloses the hair tool apparatus according to claim 1 (as presented above), wherein the body, the first tool, and the second tool extend along an axis (Figure 4).
Regarding Claim 3, Beasley discloses the hair tool apparatus according to claim 1 (as presented above), wherein the first tool includes a loop (eye 120) and a head (the widened part between eye 120 and hand grip 132) to which the loop is coupled (Figure 2), and wherein the head is coupled to the first body end (Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 15, Beasley discloses the hair tool apparatus according to claim 1 (as presented above), wherein the second tool includes a rod (length of tip 130) and a tip (second end 116).
Regarding Claim 16, Beasley discloses a hair tool apparatus (needle 110) for facilitating coupling a bead to hair of a person (¶ 0007; Figure 1; the device is fully capable of applying a variety of bead types to hair), the hair tool apparatus comprising:
a body (hand grip 132) with a first body end (left end of handle 132, near eye 120) and a second body end (right end of handle 132, near tip 130);
a first tool (hair extension tool including eye 120 on left of Figures 2, 4) coupled to the first body end (Figure 2), , the first tool having a loop (eye 120) and (the widened part between eye 120 and hand grip 132) to which the loop is coupled (Figure 2), the loop configured to hold the bead thereon (eye 120 is collapsible and therefore is fully capable of holding a bead slid onto the loop; device is described as being made of a viscoelastic material in µ 6)) and having a loop (eye 120) configured to receive the hair there through (¶ 21) such that the bead can be coupled to the hair (this is an intended use of the first tool, and the end of needle 110 including eye 120 is fully capable of coupling a bead slid onto the loop to a section of hair received through the loop); and
a second tool (tip 130) coupled to the second body end (coupled to right side of handle 132), the second tool configured to engage the hair and facilitate partitioning the hair from the person (this is an intended use of the second tool, and the tip 130 on the end of needle 110 is fully capable of engaging hair and partitioning it).
Regarding Claim 17, Beasley discloses the hair tool apparatus according to claim 16 (as presented above), wherein the body, the first tool, and the second tool extend along an axis (Figure 4).
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 1-4 and 13-17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Traintinger (EP 0760215) in view of Gardner (US 8,707,968) and Turley (US 11,419,376).
Regarding Claim 1, Traintinger teaches a hair tool apparatus (threader) for facilitating coupling a bead to hair of a person (explained in “Fastening operation” paragraph), the hair tool apparatus comprising:
a body (handle part 4) with a first body end (left side adjacent to screw connection 5 in figure) and a second body end (right end in figure, shown as free);
a first tool (metal wire 6 held by screw connection 5) coupled to the first body end (see figure), the first tool configured to hold the bead thereon and having a loop configured to receive the hair there through such that the bead can be coupled to the hair (explained in “Fastening operation” paragraph).
Traintinger does not explicitly teach a second tool coupled to the second body end.
However, Gardner, in the related field of endeavor of tools for removing hair extensions (abstract; col 1 lines 10-14; examiner notes the instant application is for a device for installing hair extensions, or could be utilized for other types of hair beads, therefore it would be obvious to look to the related field of removing hair extensions for obvious modifications to devices), teaches a body (shaft 50) with a first body end (first end of shaft 60) and a second body end (second end of shaft 70); a first tool (hook and razor peripheral 80) coupled to the first body end (Figure 3; col 3 lines 45-55); and a second tool (fork with razor peripheral 120 or scalp scratcher peripheral 160) coupled to the second body end (Figures 3 and Figure 4; col 3 line 56 – col 4 line 36).
Gardner teaches that it is beneficial to incorporate two tools used in the procedure for removing hair extensions or weaves into a single tool in order to improve efficiency of the procedures in which they are used.
Turley, in the same field of endeavor of installing hair extensions (abstract), teaches that the procedure for installing hair extensions (col 4 line 54 to col 5 line 10) includes using a tool (hair separator 118) to engage the hair and facilitate partitioning the hair from the person (Figure 1) and another tool (threader 132) to hold a bead and install the bead onto the hair utilizing a loop on the tool (Figure 4).
Therefore 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 hair tool apparatus as taught by Traintinger to also include a second tool in the form of a rod or hair separator as taught by Turley, because Gardner teaches that combining two tools used in the same hair procedure into one tool will increase efficiency.
Regarding Claim 2, Traintinger, Gardner, and Turley teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 1 (as presented above). Gardner, which teaches the combining of multiple tools into one, further teaches wherein the body (shaft 50), the first tool (peripheral 80), and the second tool (peripheral 120) extend along an axis (Figure 3).
Regarding Claim 3, Traintinger, Gardner, and Turley teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 1 (as presented above). Traintinger further teaches wherein the first tool includes a loop (metal wire 6) and a head (screw connection 5) to which the loop is coupled (see Figure), and wherein the head is coupled to the first body end (see Figure).
Regarding Claim 4, Traintinger, Gardner, and Turley teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 3 (as presented above). Traintinger further teaches wherein the loop is formed of a wire (metal wire 6).
Regarding Claims 13 and 14, Traintinger, Gardner, and Turley teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 1 (as presented above). Gardner further teaches wherein the first tool and the second tool are removably coupled to the body (col 3 lines 40-44; col 4 lines 4-9 and lines 31-36). Gardner teaches the tools being removable so it could potentially be switched for an additional useful tool for the procedure (col 2 lines 48-50; col 3 line 56 to col 4 line 36).
Regarding Claim 15, Traintinger, Gardner, and Turley teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 1 (as presented above). Turley further teaches wherein the second tool (hair separator 118) includes a rod and a tip (see Figure 3 where hair separator 118 is a rod that terminates in a tip away from where it is connected to the handle).
Regarding Claim 16, Traintinger teaches a hair tool apparatus (threader) for facilitating coupling a bead to hair of a person (explained in “Fastening operation” paragraph), the hair tool apparatus comprising:
a body (handle part 4) with a first body end (left side adjacent to screw connection 5 in figure) and a second body end (right end in figure, shown as free);
a first tool (metal wire 6 held by screw connection 5) coupled to the first body end (see figure), the first tool having a loop (metal wire 6) and a head (screw connection 5) to which the loop is coupled (see figure), the loop configured to hold the bead thereon and to receive the hair there through such that the bead can be coupled to the hair (explained in “Fastening operation” paragraph).
Traintinger does not explicitly teach the head being removably coupled to the first body end (though it does teach a screw connection, it is not necessarily taught that the screw connection is removable, though it is taught that the metal wire could be substituted for different wires of different lengths) or a second tool coupled to the second body end.
However, Gardner, in the related field of endeavor of tools for removing hair extensions (abstract; col 1 lines 10-14; examiner notes the instant application is for a device for installing hair extensions, or could be utilized for other types of hair beads, therefore it would be obvious to look to the related field of removing hair extensions for obvious modifications to devices), teaches a body (shaft 50) with a first body end (first end of shaft 60) and a second body end (second end of shaft 70); a first tool (hook and razor peripheral 80) removably coupled to the first body end (Figure 3; col 3 lines 45-55); and a second tool (fork with razor peripheral 120 or scalp scratcher peripheral 160) removably coupled to the second body end (Figures 3 and Figure 4; col 3 line 56 – col 4 line 36).
Gardner teaches that it is beneficial to incorporate two tools used in the procedure for removing hair extensions or weaves into a single tool in order to improve efficiency of the procedures in which they are used. Gardner also teaches that the tools are removable in order to swap with alternative tools (col 2 lines 48-50; col 3 line 56 to col 4 line 36).
Turley, in the same field of endeavor of installing hair extensions (abstract), teaches that the procedure for installing hair extensions (col 4 line 54 to col 5 line 10) includes using a tool (hair separator 118) to engage the hair and facilitate partitioning the hair from the person (Figure 1) and another tool (threader 132) to hold a bead and install the bead onto the hair utilizing a loop on the tool (Figure 4).
Therefore 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 hair tool apparatus as taught by Traintinger to also include a second tool in the form of a rod or hair separator as taught by Turley, because Gardner teaches that combining two tools used in the same hair procedure into one tool will increase efficiency and the tools being removable so they can be changed for different tools, which could include different length wires as taught by Traintinger.
Regarding Claim 17, Traintinger, Gardner, and Turley teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 16 (as presented above). Gardner, which teaches the combining of multiple tools into one, further teaches wherein the body (shaft 50), the first tool (peripheral 80), and the second tool (peripheral 120) extend along an axis (Figure 3).
Claims 5-12 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Traintinger (EP 0760215), Gardner (US 8,707,968), and Turley (US 11,419,376) as applied to claims 1 and 16 above, and in further view of Hudson (US 2,083,380).
Regarding Claim 5, Traintinger, Gardner, and Turley teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 1 (as presented above). Gardner does teach the tools being removable from the body in order to be swapped with alternative tools (col 2 lines 48-50; col 3 line 56 to col 4 line 36) and that the removable connection can be “detent connections, threaded screw attachment, friction fitting, or any other means commonly used in the art” (col 3 line 40-44). Neither Traintinger, Gardner, nor Turley teach the connection specifically including a slot in the body and a pin on the first tool.
However, Hudson, in the related field of endeavor of devices for treating hair (col 1 lines 7-9) with removable tools (Figure 4), teaches a first tool (hair pulling implement comprising casing 20) removably connected to a body (flexibly connector 13 that terminates in head or sleeve 15), wherein the body defines a slot (notched slot 17), and wherein the first tool (casing 20) includes a pin (pin 54) that is received into the slot (Figure 2; col 4 lines 19-30) to thereby removably couple the first tool to the body(Figure 4).
Therefore 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 hair tool apparatus taught by Traintinger, Gardner, and Turley to make the removable connection between the first tool and the body be of the bayonet joint type taught by Hudson such that the body includes a slot and the first tool includes a pin. This is a simple substitution of one type of removable connection for another type of removable connection, which Gardner supports as being obvious since the removable connection can be of a type known in the art.
Regarding Claim 6, Traintinger, Gardner, Turley, and Hudson teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 5 (as presented above). Hudson further teaches wherein the slot is J-shaped (notched slot 17 is J-shaped).
Regarding Claim 7, Traintinger, Gardner, Turley, and Hudson teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 5 (as presented above). The combination further teaches wherein the first tool has a head from which the pin extends (where the metal wire of Traintinger is secured is the head, Gardner teaches it is removable, and Hudson teaches the first tool and therefore the head of the first tool being where the pin extends from). Hudson further teaches wherein the body defines a bore (interior portion of sleeve 15, as seen in Figure 4) in which the head is received (Figures 2 and 4).
Regarding Claim 8, Traintinger, Gardner, Turley, and Hudson teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 5 (as presented above). Hudson teaches the apparatus further comprising a locking device (spring-pressed plunger 56 in combination with the shape of notch 17, especially annular notch 55) that locks the pin in the slot to thereby couple the first tool to the body (col 4 lines 19-35).
Regarding Claim 9, Traintinger, Gardner, Turley, and Hudson teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 8 (as presented above). Hudson further teaches wherein the locking device is a spring (spring-pressed plunger 56; col 4 lines 19-35; spring-pressed plunger contains a spring and it is the action of the spring that causes the locking).
Regarding Claim 10, Traintinger, Gardner, Turley, and Hudson teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 8 (as presented above). Hudson further teaches wherein the locking device is a spring plunger (spring-pressed plunger 56; col 4 lines 19-35).
Regarding Claim 11, Traintinger, Gardner, Turley, and Hudson teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 5 (as presented above). Hudson further teaches wherein the slot includes a first slot end through which the pin passes and a second slot end in which the pin is located when the first tool is coupled to the body (Figure 2; col 4 lines 19-35).
Regarding Claim 12, Traintinger, Gardner, Turley, and Hudson teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 11 (as presented above). Hudson further teaches wherein further comprising a locking device that biases the pin a first axial direction out through the first slot end such that the first tool is decoupled from the body or to the second slot end such that the first tool is coupled to the body (col 4 lines 19-35).
Regarding Claim 18, Traintinger, Gardner, and Turley teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 16 (as presented above). Gardner does teach the tools being removable from the body in order to be swapped with alternative tools (col 2 lines 48-50; col 3 line 56 to col 4 line 36) and that the removable connection can be “detent connections, threaded screw attachment, friction fitting, or any other means commonly used in the art” (col 3 line 40-44). Neither Traintinger, Gardner, nor Turley teach the connection specifically including a slot in the body and a pin on the head of the first tool.
However, Hudson, in the related field of endeavor of devices for treating hair (col 1 lines 7-9) with removable tools (Figure 4), teaches a first tool (hair pulling implement comprising casing 20) removably connected to a body (flexibly connector 13 that terminates in head or sleeve 15), wherein the first tool (casing 20) includes a pin (pin 54) that radially extends (Figure 4) from the head (sleeve 23 of casing 20), and wherein the body defines a slot (notched slot 17) in which the pin is received (Figure 2; col 4 lines 19-30) to thereby removably couple the first tool to the body (Figure 4 shows tool removed).
Therefore 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 hair tool apparatus taught by Traintinger, Gardner, and Turley to make the removable connection between the first tool and the body be of the bayonet joint type taught by Hudson such that the body includes a slot and the first tool includes a pin. This is a simple substitution of one type of removable connection for another type of removable connection, which Gardner supports as being obvious since the removable connection can be of a type known in the art.
Regarding Claim 19, Traintinger, Gardner, Turley, and Hudson teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 18 (as presented above). Hudson teaches the apparatus further comprising a locking device (spring-pressed plunger 56 in combination with the shape of notch 17, especially annular notch 55) that locks the pin in the slot to thereby couple the first tool to the body (col 4 lines 19-35).
Regarding Claim 20, Traintinger, Gardner, Turley, and Hudson teach the hair tool apparatus according to claim 19 (as presented above). Hudson further teaches wherein the slot includes a first slot end through which the pin passes and a second slot end in which the pin is located when the first tool is coupled to the body (Figure 2; col 4 lines 19-35); wherein the first tool is rotated about an axis to thereby move the pin into and between the first slot end and the second slot end (col 4 lines 19-35); and wherein the locking device biases the pin in a first axial direction out through the first slot end such that the first tool is decoupled from the body or to the second slot end such that the first tool is coupled to the body (col 4 lines 19-35).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wood (US 5,417,230) teaches a hair styling tool with a loop and the second end being either blunt/flat or pointed as a tool.
Spector (US 5,664,707) teaches a tool for installing beads on hair where the head and loop are removable from the body.
Kim (US 2006/0065281) teaches a tool for installing beads for hair extensions where there is a loop, in the form of a crotchet-style hook, on one end and the other end is pointed.
Royle (US 7,484,982) teaches a locking bayonet coupling for devices, including hair trimming devices.
McBride (US 2021/0037943) teaches a crotch hook for hair where the tool is removable from the handle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jennifer P. Connell whose telephone number is (703)756-1169. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 am - 3 pm ET.
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.
/JENNIFER P CONNELL/Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/EDELMIRA BOSQUES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772
Prosecution Insights