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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 14, line 2 states “the a local average”; please delete the word “the” so that it reads - -a local average- -. Appropriate correction is required.
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- 20 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, states “and a bristle longitudinal axis thereof forming a straight line, and the bristle longitudinal axis”. It is unclear if each bristle has a longitudinal axis or if the bristles have a collective longitudinal axis. If each bristle has a longitudinal axis, then the claim should state “each bristle having a longitudinal axis thereof forming a straight line, and the bristles longitudinal axes predominately”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4, states “a bristle of the following bristle row is anchored to a bristle core at a level” it is unclear if applicant is intended to claim the bristles are anchored to “the bristle carrier” or do the bristles have separate and distinct cores that they are attached too. It is unclear how the bristles are anchored to “a bristle core”; appropriate correction is required. It will be examined as “the bristle carrier”.
Claims 10 and 20 state, “the longitudinal axis of the bristles are” it is unclear if applicant is referring to multiple longitudinal axes of each individual bristle. If each bristle has a longitudinal axis the claim should read - -the longitudinal axes of the bristles are”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 10 and 11, “the applicator core” lacks a prior antecedent. It will be examined as “the bristle carrier”.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 6-14, 17, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Berhault (WO 2019/115243).
Berhault discloses a cosmetic applicator comprising a bristle carrier (12); and bristles (18) anchored to the bristle carrier in one piece or in a form-fitting manner (page 7, lines 20-25), each bristle of the bristles tapering towards a free bristle end (Fig. 2a), and a bristle longitudinal axis thereof forming a straight line (Fig. 2a), and the bristle longitudinal axis predominantly or completely being inclined towards a free end of the bristle carrier (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, the bristles (18) are organized in rows of individual bristles standing one behind the other along a line parallel to the central longitudinal axis of the bristle carrier (Fig. 2; page 4, lines 29-35).
Regarding claim 4, wherein the bristles (18) include directly adjacent bristles rows including a preceding bristle row and a following bristle row (Fig. 2), the bristles of the directly adjacent bristle rows in the circumferential direction are positioned in such a way that a bristle of the following bristle row is anchored to the bristle core at a level of a centre of two directly adjacent bristles of the preceding bristle row (page 5, lines 9-15).
Regarding claim 6, a local average diameter of the bristle carrier decreases from a proximal end to a distal end at least after a first proximal quarter of the bristle carrier (Fig. 2; page 3, lines 19-21).
Regarding claim 7, a central longitudinal axis of the bristle carrier is curved first in a first and then in a second opposite direction (Fig. 2; page 4, lines 5-15).
Regarding claim 8, an average diameter of the bristles decreases from a proximal end of the bristle carrier towards a free distal end of the bristle carrier (page 6; lines 5-15).
Regarding claim 9, wherein the bristles (18) include directly adjacent bristle rows, and the bristles longitudinal axis of the directly adjacent bristle rows in a circumferential direction of the bristle carrier is are inclined completely or at least substantially the same (page 6, lines 5-10).
Regarding claim 10, wherein the longitudinal axes of the bristles are inclined so as to increase from a proximal end of an applicator core towards a free distal end of the applicator core (Fig. 2; page 6, lines 25-30).
Regarding claim 11, a length of the bristles decreases from a proximal end of an applicator core to a free distal end of the applicator core (page 5, lines 19-25).
Regarding claim 12, a method comprising operating the applicator to apply mascara mass on a human eye (page 2, lines 8-12).
Regarding claim 13, a method for applying mascara mass to a human eye, comprising: operating the applicator such that regions closer to a distal end of the applicator are brought into contact with the eyelashes for to transfer more cosmetic mass to the eyelashes, and in that the regions closer to a proximal end of the applicator are brought into contact with the eyelashes to transfer less cosmetic mass to the eyelashes (page 2, lines 22-30).
Regarding claim 14, wherein the bristle carrier includes a circular cross-section, a local average diameter of the bristle carrier decreases from a proximal end to a distal end at least after a first proximal quarter of the bristle carrier (page 3, lines 10-20).
Regarding claim 17, wherein a central longitudinal axis of the bristle carrier is curved first in a first and then in a second opposite direction (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 19, wherein an average diameter of the bristles decreases from a proximal end of the bristle carrier towards a free distal end of the bristle carrier (page 6, lines 5-15).
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) 2, 5, 15-16, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berhault (WO 2019/115243).
Berhault discloses the claimed invention except for the incline angle is between 25 and 35 degrees (claim 2) and the row of bristles directly adjacent in a circumferential direction have a different stiffness or shore hardness (claim 5). However, one having ordinary skill in the art would find the parameters of the incline to be deemed matters of design choice, will within the skill of the ordinary artisan, obtained through routine experimentation in determining optimum results. Further, Berhault discloses the bristle length or shape from one row to the next (page 6, lines 5-15) changing the shape or length of a bristle can change the stiffness. Therefore, one having ordinary skill in the art would find the parameters of the stiffness to be different in a circumferential direction by changing the length or shape of the bristles.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL RUNNING STEITZ whose telephone number is (571)272-1917. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:30pm EST.
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.
/RACHEL R STEITZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772
5/29/2026
Prosecution Insights