Toilet – Hair device – Eyelash or eyebrow
Reexamination Certificate
2000-10-25
2003-01-21
Manahan, Todd E. (Department: 3732)
Toilet
Hair device
Eyelash or eyebrow
Reexamination Certificate
active
06508255
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention is a cosmetics applicator and its method of use. More specifically it is an applicator for eyeliner that enables quick, straight and even application of eyeliner.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Eyeliner cosmetics are applied above and below the eye to adorn the face through the use of highlighting, accenting and color. The most common methods of applying eyeliner include drawing it onto the eyelid with a pencil-type eyeliner and brushing it on with a specially designed brush. These methods have several disadvantages which are addressed by the present invention.
A conventional applicator requires the user to apply lateral pressure to draw the applicator across the surface of the eyelid, while also applying pressure downward to deposit product on the eyelid. In the process, the soft eyelid is prone to fold or bunch up in front of the applicator. This leads to a messy, inconsistent application of eyeliner.
With a conventional applicator, the hand of the user must remain unnaturally steady while applying the eyeliner across the irregular and contoured surface of the eyelid. If the hand is not steady the result will be a crooked application of eyeliner that is unevenly deposited. The hand of the consumer may be unsteady for several reasons. Firstly, there is a natural amount of tension in the hands and arms. This tension produces a shaking motion, particularly in the elderly, that makes it difficult to achieve the precision needed for an even and straight application of eyeliner. Secondly, some applicators, like the pencil-type, contact the eyelid at one point only. This means that the pencil is free to pivot in all directions leading to instability during application. The degree of unsteadiness in the hands of some consumers, the elderly for example, may be sufficient to prohibit them from using a conventional eyeliner applicator.
Another source of unsteadiness when using conventional eyeliner applicators is that they are not ergonomically designed for the task of eyeliner application. Here “ergonomic” includes any feature that relieves strain and promotes steadiness in the hand of the user. An ordinary writing pencil is optimally used with the writing hand and pencil resting on a flat, smooth and supported surface, out and away from the eye, with considerable pressure applied to the writing surface. In contrast, a pencil eyeliner is used without any support for the hand and arm which must be held in an elevated position. This causes muscular strain in the hand and arm of the user that is not normally present when using a pencil. This causes the user to be uncertain and the results to be inferior.
One way to correct this inferior application of the eyeliner is to go over the area again and again to fix it up. However, this has the disadvantage of depositing more eyeliner onto the eyelid than is necessary to create the desired effect. Repeated applications make it impossible to achieve a thin, fine line of product, when this is what is desired. Some parts of the application will inevitably be thicker than other parts. Product will be wasted and less value for the money received by the consumer. Repeated strokes will give an uneven appearance, especially if a brush-type applicator is used. A brush may splay causing an irregular line across the eyelid. Brush type applicators accumulate product on the bristles that is not easily removed. Hardened accumulation on the brush inhibits the functioning of the brush, resulting in an inferior application of eyeliner.
A pencil-type applicator must be sharpened periodically because the point becomes dull and this leads to an inferior application of eyeliner. Sharpening the eyeliner pencil has some drawbacks. Firstly, it is difficult to sharpen just the right amount, so that the point is sufficiently narrow, but not so narrow as to be weak and prone to fracture. Also, with a pencil-type eyeliner, the consumer is required to have a pencil sharpener. The applicator is really two parts rather than just one. If the sharpener is misplaced, the pencil may not be usable.
The cost associated with brush and pencil-type applicators makes them unsuitable for trial use at the cosmetics counter, where the applicator would be disposed after one use. Also, the amount of consumer waste associated with such a one-time trial program is very large. On the other hand, reusing a brush or pencil type applicator on different people is unsanitary. What is needed in this situation is an applicator that can be used on different people while being sanitary, with minimal consumer waste after each application.
Devices having a thread or wire supported between spaced apart arms are known. See for example U.S. Pat. No. 3,908,678, which describes, “ . . . a fork-like implement having two tines on teeth between which dental floss is held in a taut condition.” Many variations of the basic design of the '678 patent are available in the prior art. These variations include, but are not limited to a container for holding replacement portions of thread, especially where the thread is capable of being continuously fed into position for use (U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,908,678; 4,691,719; 4,790,336; 5,060,681; 5,560,378; 5,573,021; 5,823,207; 5,858,759). Other variations include manipulating the angle and/or offset between the tines and the handle (U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,908,678; 4,790,336; 5,060,681; 5,246,021; 5,560,378; 5,573,021; 5,823,207; 5,878,759). All of the just named patents, which describe some means for securing the floss thread to or over a pair of tines, is herein incorporated by reference, in its entirety.
In all of these prior art devices, the thread is in a taut condition just prior to use. This gives the floss its scraping or scrubbing ability for which it is intended. However, as explained in U.S. Pat. No. 4,006,750, a taut, inflexible floss minimizes the floss' degree of contact with the curved surface of the tooth. This is because the floss cannot contour to a curved tooth, being inflexible. It stands to reason then, that the inability of these prior art devices to conform to a contoured surface makes them unsuitable for applying makeup to a contoured surface, such as the eyelid. Furthermore, the tautness of the thread of these devices is suitable for contacting hard surfaces such as tooth enamel, but is wholly unsuited for contacting soft, sensitive surfaces such as an eyelid.
On the other hand, in the floss device of U.S. Pat. No. 4,006,750 the floss thread is not taut just prior to use. For at least two reasons a device of this kind is also unsuitable for applying a cosmetic to the eyelid. Firstly, if the thread is slack it cannot efficiently take up product when the thread is brought into contact with the product. Secondly, a slack thread cannot be brought into contact with the eyelid with any significant degree of precision.
Finally, the handle of the prior art devices is generally arranged to be suitable for flossing teeth, but is not necessarily conveniently or ergonomically arranged for applying cosmetic to a contoured surface.
OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION
Based on the foregoing, one object of the present invention is to provide an eyeliner applicator that is easier to use than existing eyeliner applicators.
Another object of the present invention is to provide an eyeliner applicator that gives a better application of eyeliner above and below the eye.
Another object of the present invention is to provide an eyeliner applicator that deposits a straight line of eyeliner of uniform thickness above and below the eye.
Another object of the present invention is to provide a device having a thread supported between spaced apart arms, that is suitable for applying eyeliner above and below the eye.
Another object of the present invention is to provide an eyeliner applicator that requires minimal effort for a complete application.
Another object of the present invention is to provide an eyeliner applicator that is ergonomically designed for the task of eyeliner application.
Another object of the present invention is to provide an eyel
Glover Angela
Thayer Jonathan
Color Access Inc.
Giancana Peter M.
Haerter, Esq. Martin W.
Lowney, Esq. Karen A.
Manahan Todd #E.
LandOfFree
Eyeliner applicator does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Eyeliner applicator, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Eyeliner applicator will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3057529