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 § 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 and 4 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oezman (DE 102020103040 B4).
Regarding claim 1, Oezman discloses an artificial nail, configured to be placed on a real nail of a user, wherein, the artificial nail has a top surface, a portion of the top surface is recessed inwardly to form a plurality of guiding grooves (3,4), and the plurality of guiding grooves are capable of being used for receiving a nail polish and for guiding a user to draw a pattern or mount a decorative piece on the top surface of the artificial nail; the artificial nail comprises: a first edge (curved lower edge) configured to be disposed near a natural cuticle of the real nail; a second edge (straight upper edge) opposite to the first edge; a third edge (one of two side edges) and a fourth edge (other of two side edges) that are connected between the first edge and the second edge and are spaced apart from each other; the plurality of guiding grooves comprise a first curved groove (a proximal one of the grooves 4, e.g. groove closest to first edge) and a second curved groove (a distal one of the grooves 4, e.g. 7th or 8th groove from first edge), and a third groove (3a); each of the first curved groove and the second curved groove has one end disposed near the third edge and the other end disposed near the fourth edge; each of the first curved groove and the second curved groove is symmetrical about a centerline of the artificial nail; and the first curved groove has no intersection with the second curved groove; the third groove extends from the first curved groove, passing through the second curved groove to reach a center point of the second edge (Refer to Figures 1a-3).
Regarding claim 4, Oezman discloses each of the first curved groove and the second curved groove is curved protruding towards the second edge (Refer to Figures 1a-2).
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 2, 3 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oezman and Ma (US 20210315360).
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Oezman discloses the artificial nail of claim 1 above, where the first curved groove has a first apex, the second curved groove has a second apex; an apex distance is formed between the first apex and the second apex; an end distance is formed between the one end of the first curved groove and the one end of the second curved groove (Refer to Figures 1a and 1b); however, Oezman does not disclose the apex distance is greater than the end distance such that a spacing between the first curved groove and the second curved groove gradually decreases from the centerline of the artificial nail towards the third edge of the artificial nail.
Ma discloses a similar artificial nail (Refer to Figures 15 and 18-20) having a plurality of curved guidelines/grooves similar to the curved grooves of Oezman, where the first curved groove (one of guidelines/grooves) has a first apex (apex of corresponding guideline/grooves), the second curved groove (another of guidelines/grooves) has a second apex (apex of corresponding guideline/groove); an apex distance is formed between the first apex and the second apex; an end distance is formed between the one end of the first curved groove and the one end of the second curved groove; the apex distance is greater than the end distance. Ma teaches that the space between groove guidelines is greater at the center where the apex is located and the space tapers towards the ends; thus, the apex distance is larger than the end distance. This allows the nail tip to have a more tapered/almond shape and permits the creation of a French manicure where the lower edge of the French tip has a greater radius of curvature. 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 artificial nail or Oezman such that the apex distance be greater than the end distance such that the spacing between the first and second grooves decrease from the centerline toward the third edge as taught by Ma in order to create a nail tip with a more tapered/almond shape and/or create a French manicure where the lower edge of the tip has a greater radius of curvature.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Oezman and Ma disclose the artificial nail of claim 2, Oezman further discloses the first apex, the second apex, and a center point of the second edge are located on one straight line coinciding with the centerline of the artificial nail (Refer to Figure 1a).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Oezman and Ma disclose the artificial nail of claim 2, Oezman further discloses the third groove extends starting from the first apex, passing through the second apex, to reach a center point of the second edge (Refer to Figure 1a and 1b).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Oezman and Ma disclose the artificial nail of claim 6, Oezman further discloses the third groove is extending coinciding with the centerline of the artificial nail (Refer to Figure 1a and 1b).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oezman and Hokama (US 4554935).
Regarding claim 8, Oezman discloses the artificial nail of claim 1 above, where the plurality of guiding grooves have a depth and width; however, Oezman does not disclose the depth and width are between 0.05 mm and 0.2 mm. Hokama discloses a similar artificial nail having a plurality of grooves (30,36,37) where grooves have a size (depth and width) of less than #180 grit size which is about 0.076 mm. Thus, Hokama teaches providing grooves are less than 0.076 mm in depth and width. 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 grooves of the Ma to have a width a depth within the claimed range as Hokama demonstrates it is well-known and conventional for such grooves to have the claimed dimensions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 35 USC 102 rejection under Ma and the 35 USC 103 rejection under Kim have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant's arguments filed 9/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Argument: The grooves in Oezman are for cutting and once cut the guide line would disappear.
Response: A plurality of guidelines are provided by Oezman and although intended to be used for cutting, the lines can be used for other purposes such as guiding nail polish application. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Additionally, even if the nail of Oezman is cut along one of the distal guidelines, other guidelines still remain.
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, Thomas Barrett can be reached at 571-272-4746. 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