United States Patent Ofifice 207,146
Patented Mar. 7, 1967 HAIR STRAIGHTENING CLAMP Franco Bulbarelli, Via Bullona 22, and Onofrio Mastrorilli, 40 Via Principe Eugenio, both of Milan, Italy Filed Apr. 5, 1966, Ser. No. 1,789
Term of patent 14 years (Cl. D8610) Des. 207,146
PAGE 2 FIG. 1 is an end elevational view of a hair straightening clamp showing our new design;
FIG. 2 is a top plan view thereof;
FIG. 3 is a front elevational view;
FIG. 4 is a bottom plan view;
FIG, 5 is a rear elevational view;
FIG. 6 is an outside plan view thereof in an opened fiat position with the clamping elements removed; and
FIG. 7 is a plan view of the side opposite that shown in FIG. 6.
The ornamental design for a hair straightening clamp, as shown and described.
1 l I: l 1 Q, n i l l l i 1 z i i i i l] l l ll it ij' is i l] 1 l References Cited by the Examiner UNITED STATES PATENTS 1,539,898 6/1925 Franklin 132-38 1,727,218 9/1929 Rusak 132-38 2,344,097 3/1944 Leclabart 13238 2,955,604 10/1960 Beal et a1. 13238 EDWIN H. HUNTER, Primary Examiner LOIS LANIER, Assistant Examiner.
According to this, the patent EXPIRED already in 1981. My opinion on this is that she has significantly altered the original plan of the clamp and designed her own version of them also. Her version offers excellent ventilation while holding the hair smoother than the original design.
The original design had flaws because it was not vented and thereby would not allow the hair to dry.
The original design was in fact not functional as it did not allow the hair to dry within a reasonable time due to the solid plates.
Her vented model which is similar to the Conair Wave Clips above CHANGED the original
design and improved on it to allow better drying yet smoothing of tighter curl patterns
So, imo, even though the entity above had the original patent, her new version significantly IMPROVES upon
and thus antiquates the original design by providing a superior blend of venting while retaining tension which
the original designed lacked.
BETWEEN EACH MODEL IS OFTEN QUITE INSIGNIFICANT, YET EACH MODEL HOLDS ITS OWN PATENT.
I THEREFORE CLAIM THAT HER VERSION IS EQUALLY WORTHY OF ITS OWN PATENT JUST AS THE MANY WAVE CLAMPS EACH HAVE THEIR OWN PATENT. If necessary, she can simply change the final design
a bit more to bring this point home. There are many brilliant minds out there who would be more than
willing to assist her to make any subtle modifications to the design to insure its originality of concept in order
to see this project through.
She is TECHNICALLY NOT SELLING the clamps now. Her current actions are a kickstart campaign to attain funds for further research and development. If necessary, she may engage in similar subsequent campaigns until she arrives at a sufficiently novel design to warrant her own patent. If necessary, focus on the locking mechanism or by what ever means necessary to establish its originality. Thus I say to
this brilliant designer, Godspeed, best wishes and keep it going girl!
PS: The original design from 1966 featured clamps across the hair horizontally. Why not make this version clamp down vertically instead and with a different locking mechanism as well as the venting. This will also assist with maintaining tension on the ENDS as you close them. If you are clamping vertically down as you go as opposed to across you may hold on to the tips until the final instant when you clamp the device.