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 1 objected to because of the following informalities: In line 9 of claim 1, “the bristles” requires amending to “the plurality of bristles”. Appropriate correction is required.
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, 2 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hoet et al. (FR 2978332 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hoet et al. disclose a hair brush for attachment to an air outlet of a hair styling appliance (Refer to Figures 1-5), comprising: an elongated cylindrical body (20 is an elliptic cylinder) comprising an air inlet (inlet near 24 and portions of 20 through which air enters from 10) at an end of the body for receiving airflow from the hair styling appliance, a plurality of openings (openings in 20 through which 21, 11,11’,11’’ extend) through the side wall, and an airflow path between the air inlet and the plurality of openings, a plurality of bristles (21,11,11’,11’’) anchored inside of the cylindrical body and protruding outwards through the openings, wherein the cylindrical body has a diameter in the range of 50 millimetre to 60 millimetre (radius of 20 is 30 mm, meaning the diameter is 60 mm), and the bristles protrude outwards through the openings to an average distance in the range of 9 millimetre to 13 millimetre (bristles are 12 mm long) from an exterior surface of the cylindrical body.
Regarding claim 2, Hoet et al. disclose the bristles protrude outwards through the openings to an average distance in the range of 10 millimetre to 12 millimetre from the exterior surface (bristles are 12 mm long).
Regarding claim 9, Hoet et al. disclose a hair styling appliance (2) comprising a fan (207) for generating an airflow and an air outlets for discharging the airflow, and a hair brush (20) that is releasably attachable to the hair styling appliance such that when attached the air inlet of the hair brush is fluidically coupled to the air outlet of the hair styling appliance (Refer to Figures 1-5).
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 1-3 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Depoyian (US 6067724) and Okumura et al. (US 4417595).
Regarding claims 1-3, Depoyian discloses a hair brush for attachment to an air outlet of a hair styling appliance (Refer to Figures 1-16), comprising: an elongated cylindrical body (51) comprising an air inlet (open proximal end of 51 near 62) at an end of the body for receiving airflow from the hair styling appliance, a plurality of openings (openings in 51 through which bristles 55 extend) through the side wall, and an airflow path between the air inlet and the plurality of openings, a plurality of bristles (55) anchored inside of the cylindrical body and protruding outwards through the openings, wherein the cylindrical body has a diameter in the range of 50 millimetre to 60 millimetre (diameter of 2 inches, Refer to col. 3 lines 42-44); however, Depoyian is silent regarding the length of the bristles and as a result does not disclose the bristles protrude outwards from an exterior surface of the cylindrical body and through the openings to an average distance in the range of 9 to 13 millimetre or 10 to 12 millimetre or 10.5 millimetre.
Okumura et al. disclose a similar hair brush having a round body and a plurality of bristles 2 protruding therefrom. The bristles have an exposed length between 10 and 25 mm or 3 to 20 mm (Refer to col. 3 line 4 and claim 9); therefore, Okumura teaches the bristles can be 9 to 13 mm (9-13 is in the range of 3 to 20 mm), 10 to 12 mm (10-12 mm is both ranges) and 10.5 mm (10.5 falls within the disclosed ranges). 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 bristles of Depoyian to have a length between 9 and 13 mm and/or 10 and 12 mm and/or be 10.5 mm as Okumura et al. demonstrate the claimed lengths are well-known and conventional length values of bristles of hair brushes.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, the combination of Depoyian and Okumura et al. disclose the hair brush of claim 1 above; however, the combination does not disclose the cylinder body having a length in the range of 80 to 90 mm, and/or 83 to 87 mm. Depoyian teaches the cylindrical body has a bristle field from one end of the body to the other end thereof (Refer to Figures 1, 8, 9). Okumura et al. teach the length of the bristle field of a hair brush may be between 60 and 100 mm (Refer to col. 3 lines 10-11). 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 brush of the combination of Depoyian and Okumura et al. such that the cylindrical body, which is defined by the bristle field, have a length of 80 to 90 mm and/or 83 to 87 mm as Okumura et al. demonstrate the claimed ranges are well-known and conventional/standard dimensions for such hair brush cylindrical bodies.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Depoyian and Okumura et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hackl et al. (EP 1839520 A1).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Depoyian and Okumura et al. disclose the hair brush of claim 1 above; however, the combination does not disclose the plurality of bristles are arranged to have an average density along the length of the cylindrical body in the range of 360 to 400 bristle protrusions per 10 millimetre of length of the cylindrical body. Hackl et al. disclose a similar hair brush for use with a hair styling appliance where a plurality of bristles are provided (Refer to Figures 1-6). The bristles are arranged such that they provide a bristle density of 200 to 600 bristles per cm2 (Refer to second paragraph on page 3), meaning 200 to 600 bristles are provided in a 1cm (10mm) long segment by a 1 cm (10mm) wide segment; thus, 200 to 600 bristles are provided per 10 mm. 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 brush of the combination of Depoyian and Okumura et al. to have a bristle density of 360 to 400 bristles per 10 mm of length as Hackl et al. demonstrate the claimed bristle density is well-known and convention and is effective in styling hair.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Depoyian and Okumura et al. disclose the hair brush of claim 1 above; however, the combination does not disclose the plurality of bristles are arranged to have an average density along the length of the cylindrical body in the range of 370 to 390 bristle protrusions per 10 millimetre of length of the cylindrical body. Hackl et al. disclose a similar hair brush for use with a hair styling appliance where a plurality of bristles are provided (Refer to Figures 1-6). The bristles are arranged such that they provide a bristle density of 200 to 600 bristles per cm2 (Refer to second paragraph on page 3), meaning 200 to 600 bristles are provided in a 1cm (10mm) long segment by a 1 cm (10mm) wide segment; thus, 200 to 600 bristles are provided per 10 mm. 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 brush of the combination of Depoyian and Okumura et al. to have a bristle density of 370 to 390 bristles per 10 mm of length as Hackl et al. demonstrate the claimed bristle density is well-known and convention and is effective in styling hair.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Depoyian and Okumura et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Richardson (US 20100300470).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Depoyian and Okumura et al. disclose the hair brush of claim 1 above; however, the combination does not disclose the cylindrical body has a diameter in the range of 53 millimetre to 57 millimetre. Depoyian discloses the invention comprises various brush heads in a set, where the brush heads have different sizes and states typical sizes include diameters of 2 inches, 1.75 inches, etc. Richardson discloses a similar set of detachable hair brushes (Refer to Figures 1-22) where the diameters of the brush heads range from about 1 inch (25.4 mm) to about 2.5 inches (63.5 mm), thereby including values within the claimed range of 53 to 57 mm (~2.0866 in to ~2.24 inches). 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 brush of the combination of Depoyian and Okumura et al. such that the diameter of the cylindrical body be within the claimed range of 53 to 57 mm as Richardson demonstrates these values are well-known and conventional in the art.
Conclusion
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, 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.
/TATIANA L NOBREGA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
