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
Claims 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 4/15/2026
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-14 in the reply filed on 4/15/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jin (US 2016/0045010 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jin teaches a nail polish removal system (1, abstract) comprising:
a base portion (1) comprising a heating element (3, 302) and a storage tray (4), the storage tray being operable to receive a fluid and receive thermal energy from the heating element ([0055]);
a lid portion (2+6) that is selectively detachable from the base portion ([0049]), the lid portion comprising at least one opening providing access to a treatment space at least partially defined by an internal volume between the storage tray and the lid portion (see Figures 1, 3, 5 and at least [0016-0017]).
Regarding claim 2, Jin teaches the nail polish removal system of claim 1 (see rejection above), wherein the lid portion comprises at least four spaced apart openings operable to receive a plurality of a user's fingers or toes (see Figures and at least [0016-0017]).
Regarding claim 3, Jin teaches the nail polish removal system of claim 1 (see rejection above), wherein the opening comprises at least one of a petal and a flap to provide a sealing function (6; [0016], [0050]; silicone rubber sealing ring having flap openings).
Regarding claim 4, Jin teaches the nail polish removal system of claim 1 (see rejection above), further comprising a second lid portion and wherein the second lid portion comprises a distinct arrangement of one or more openings relative to the lid portion (see Figures 8-9 and [0051]; such that there may be different rings (6) of the lid portion that have different opening configurations).
Regarding claim 5, Jin teaches the nail polish removal system of claim 1 (see rejection above), further comprising a user- interface portion in communication with the heating element to control power to the heating element (153, see Figure 15 and see at least [0067], [0069]).
Regarding claim 6, Jin teaches the nail polish removal system of claim 1 (see rejection above), wherein the lid portion comprises a convex structure (see Figures 2, 4, 6; the lid portion 2 has a dome shape and a convex underside).
Regarding claim 8, Jin teaches a nail polish removal system (abstract) comprising:
a base portion (1) comprising a heating element (3, 302) and a storage tray (4), the storage tray being operable to receive a fluid and receive thermal energy from the heating element ([0055]);
a lid portion (2+6) that is selectively detachable from the base portion ([0049]) and operable to communicate with a user (the user inserts his/her fingers through the lid openings), the lid portion comprising at least one opening (See Figures); an at least partially sealed treatment space extending between the storage tray and an inner portion of the lid portion (see Figures 1, 3, 5 and at least [0016-0017]).
Regarding claim 9, Jin teaches the nail polish removal system of claim 8 (see rejection above), wherein the lid portion comprises at least four spaced apart openings operable to receive a plurality of a user's fingers or toes (see Figures and at least [0016-0017]).
Regarding claim 10, Jin teaches the nail polish removal system of claim 8 (see rejection above), wherein the at least one opening comprises at least one of a petal and a flap to provide a sealing function for evaporated fluid (6; [0016], [0050], [0061]; silicone rubber sealing ring having flap openings).
Regarding claim 11, Jin teaches the nail polish removal system of claim 8 (see rejection above), further comprising a second lid portion and wherein the second lid portion comprises a distinct arrangement of one or more openings relative to the lid portion (see Figures 8-9 and [0051]; such that there may be different rings (6) of the lid portion that have different opening configurations).
Regarding claim 12, Jin teaches the nail polish removal system of claim 8 (see rejection above), further comprising a user- interface portion in communication with the heating element to control power to the heating element (153, see Figure 15 and see at least [0067], [0069]).
Regarding claim 13, Jin teaches the nail polish removal system of claim 8 (see rejection above), wherein the lid portion comprises a substantially rigid portion (2) and a flexible portion (6) (see figures and [0061]; the sealing portion of the lid is made of a silicone rubber while 2 is part of the housing).
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) 7, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin (US 2016/0045010 A1), in view of Walker (US 5,855,212).
Regarding claim 7, Jin teaches the nail polish removal system of claim 1 (see rejection above). Jin teaches that the system may have a rotating connection but is does not teach wherein at least one of the lid portion and the base portion comprises at least one of a ramp and a thread and the lid portion is rotatably securable to the base portion.
Walker teaches a nail polish remover device comprising a base (12) and a lid (18) and the lid being rotatably threaded to the base via threads 22 (Col. 4 lines 24-30 and Col. 5 lines 25-31).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify the connection between the lid and the base to be a threadable connection, as taught by Walker, because it would involve ordinary skill in the art as it is one well-known variation for a securing connection for attaching a cap/lid to a base.
Regarding claim 14, Jin teaches the nail polish removal system of claim 8 (see rejection above). Jin teaches that the system may have a rotating connection but is does not teach wherein at least one of the lid portion and the base portion comprises at least one of a ramp and a thread and the lid portion is rotatably securable to the base portion.
Walker teaches a nail polish remover device comprising a base (12) and a lid (18) and the lid being rotatably threaded to the base via threads 22 (Col. 4 lines 24-30 and Col. 5 lines 25-31).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify the connection between the lid and the base to be a threadable connection, as taught by Walker, because it would involve ordinary skill in the art as it is one well-known variation for a securing connection for attaching a cap/lid to a base.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 attached to this office action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINA FARAJ whose telephone number is (571)272-4580. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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.
/LINA FARAJ/ Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/EDELMIRA BOSQUES/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772
Prosecution Insights