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 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, 3-10, 12, 14 and 18-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kraus (US Publication 2009/0000126) in view of Robinson et al (EP 3 513 925), herein referred to as Robinson, and further in view of Goldfarb (WO2016/094327). Regarding claim 1, Kraus discloses a method of operating a personal care device (i.e., an electrically operated shaver, para. 0010, lines 1-2) comprising: - detecting at least one user's behavior parameter characterizing at least one behavior of the user by at least one detector (e.g., force sensor 38) when handling the personal care device during a current personal care treatment session (para. 0018, lines 6-9), the at least one user's behavior parameter comprises at least one of skin contact pressure (para. 0020 and para. 0053), stroke frequency of the personal care device, stroke direction of the personal care device (para. 0028, lines 2-11) or twisting of the personal care device (para. 0028, lines 2-11, i.e., twisting from a horizontal area to a vertical area), - comparing real-time data of the detected at least one user's behavior parameter detected during the current personal care treatment session to historical data (para. 0018, lines 9-11; para. 0020, lines 8-13), wherein the historical data of the at least one corresponding behavioral parameter is representative of a natural behavior of the user, a non-natural behavior of the user or both the natural behavior and the non-natural behavior of the user (i.e., “a predetermined pattern,” para. 0018, lines 9-10), wherein the real-time data of the detected at least one user's behavior parameter comprises at least one of the skin contact pressure (e.g., para. 0018, lines8-9) , the stroke frequency of the personal care device, the stroke direction of the personal care device, or the twisting of the personal care device, and - determining a natural behavior or non-natural behavior depending on said comparison of the real-time data of the detected at least one user's behavior parameter and the historical data of the at least one corresponding behavioral parameter (Kraus, para. 0018, lines 9-10), the detected at least one user's behavior parameter is determined to be a non-natural behavior when the real-time data of the detected at least one user's behavior parameter is greater than the historical data of the at least one corresponding behavioral parameter by a predefined amount (para. 0018, lines 9-13; para. 0065, line 3); - wherein, upon detection of non-natural behavior during the personal care treatment session, at least one working parameter of the personal care device is modified by an electronic control unit (37) changing a mechanical or operational setting of the personal care device (para. 0018, lines 10-11), wherein upon modification of such at least one working parameter, at least one user's behavior parameter characterizing at least one behavior of the user after modification of said working parameter is detected by the at least one detector when handling the personal care device after modification of the working parameter (Kraus, para. 0018, lines 11-13), wherein the real-time data of the detected at least one user's behavior parameter after modification of the working parameter is compared to the historical data of the at least one corresponding behavioral parameter (Kraus, para. 0018, lines 9-10), and upon such comparison, a determination of natural or non-natural behavior is again made (para. 0065-0066). Kraus fails to specifically disclose the historical data of at least one corresponding behavioral parameter is detected during at least one previous personal care treatment session. However, the following references provide teaching pertinent to this limitation: A. Robinson teaches it is known in the art of personal care devices to include “a shaving appliance including a handle and a shaving head cartridge connected to the handle and motion, orientation, and/or pressure sensors associated with the handle and/or shaving head cartridge [and] a sensor circuit connected to receive sensor signals and generate shave event information from the sensor signals” (para. 0024, lines 2-7). Robinson teaches in para. 0045, lines 1-13, “[a]s the user shaves, data is collected from the acceleration sensor 110, the angular velocity sensor 112, and the cartridge displacement sensor 114. The data collected can be used to calculate the pitch and roll of the handle 102 as well as contact data. The data collected may also be used to calculate pressure exerted on the razor cartridge 106, speed of movement of razor cartridge 106, the number and length of each shaving stroke experienced by razor cartridge 106, and the total distance or mileage the razor cartridge 106 has experienced at any given point in time. When the user is finished shaving the shaver razor 103 is put down and data collection stops.”
Robinson teaches the personal care device includes a microprocessor that receives the data from the aforementioned sensors (para. 0046, lines 6-9), wherein the microprocessor utilizes an algorithm to make determinations related to the user’s behavior. For example, Robinson states in para. 0046, lines 34-47, “if a user starts shaving there would be activation of the cartridge displacement sensor 114 when shaving razor 103 touches the skin on the user’s face. With activation of the angular velocity sensor 112 or acceleration sensor 110 and no activation of the cartridge displacement sensor 114 the event could be rejected as a shave. The same logic can be used to determine if razor cartridge 106 has been ejected by looking for a signal on cartridge displacement sensor 114 (e.g., the displacement sensor 114 being returned to the baseline position as discussed above). Also, it can be understood that time between signals and events can be used to determine actions like re-application of shave cream.” Further, Robinson states in para. 0048, lines 4-8, “[a]n algorithm looking at activation of cartridge displacement sensor 114 in combination with a certain activity level of angular velocity sensor 112 or acceleration sensor 110 to indicate expected motion that represents a shaving stroke” (emphasis added). Critically, Robinson states in para. 0100, “notification to the user of optimal versus high/low pressure shaving sensed by the system may change over time based upon learning a user’s preferences and shaving behaviors. For example, over time, the logic may learn that the user experiences a better shave at higher shaving loads versus lower shaving loads (See Fig. 20 and associated discussion), the shaving load notifications …may be adjusted over time to account for this knowledge.” This suggests the control unit of the personal care device is capable of adjusting data thresholds user behavior parameters that are indicative of how the user prefers to use the personal care device based upon comparison to previous data collected from the user using the personal care device. B. Goldfarb teaches it is known in the art of personal care devices to compare real-time data of a detected at least one user's behavior parameter (e.g., skin contact pressure --normal force, FN,” paragraph 0053, line 2-- detected by “force sensor 120 (e.g., force cell, load cell) includes a capacitor plate configured to provide a capacitance proportional to plunger depression distance So,” para. 0052, lines 1-3) to historical data of at least one corresponding behavioral parameter (Goldfarb states in para. 0073, lines 4-7, “microcontroller 160 stores to first memory 161 data indicative of the force applied, e.g., the force over a shave session…” and; elaborates further, “microcontroller 160 … is configured to calculate a force applied over several shaving sessions (e.g., ‘habitual’ average force),” para. 0075, lines 1-2, wherein the “‘habitual’ average force” corresponds to the claimed “historical data”).
Goldfarb also teaches the historical data of the at least one corresponding behavioral parameter (re: skin contact duration) can be collected overtime to develop a threshold value for a user behavior parameter to determine natural behavior and non-natural behavior for a particular user. Goldfarb states in para. 0090, lines 1-10, “microcontroller 160 or the external device 505 is configured to automatically and incrementally adjust a threshold (e.g., contact duration threshold) representative of the period of time that the proximity sensor detects contact between blade 151 and the skin, for instance, based on the user’s behavior. In some embodiments, microcontroller 160 is configured to provide instructions to an external device 505 to incrementally adjust a threshold value (e.g., contact duration threshold) representative of the period of time that the proximity sensor detects contact between blade 151 and the skin based on the user’s behavior. For example, a woman shaving her legs may have long contact shaving strokes, whereas a man shaving his face may have short contact shaving strokes. In these instances, microcontroller 160 is configured to adaptively adjust (e.g., using heuristic learning) the contact duration threshold to calculate a more accurate metric for the total accumulated time that the blade 151 made contact with the skin. In conjunction with the counting of total number of shaving strokes [and other behavior parameters, see below] in a shave session, adaptive learning (e.g., heuristic learning) facilitates a more accurate estimate for predicting the blade attrition.”
In addition to skin contact pressure, Goldfarb teaches other behavior parameters of interest in operating a personal care device, including stroke frequency of the personal care device (paragraph 0076, lines 5-9), the stroke direction of the personal care device (paragraph 0112, lines 3-4 and paragraph 00114), or twisting of the personal care device (“hand motion acceleration” detected by an accelerometer - paragraph 0084). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify the method of Kraus substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Robinson and Goldfarb such that the historical data of at least one corresponding behavioral parameter is detected during at least one previous personal care treatment session in order to allow the microcontroller to establish a reference frame for what constitutes a user’s preferred way of using the personal care device over time (which corelates to natural behavior and non-natural behavior for a particular user) since heuristic learning is known concept in the art of machine learning.
Regarding claim 4, Kraus discloses the real-time data is compared with a combination of values of historical data of more than one behavioral parameter (Kraus para. 0054).
Regarding claim 5, Kraus discloses the at least one user's behavior parameter and the at least one corresponding behavioral parameter each comprise a data pattern of at least one behavioral parameter (Kraus para. 0018, lines 8-10).
Regarding claim 6, the modified method of operating a personal care device of Kraus substantially disclosed above includes wherein historical data associated with a classifier indicative of the user's non-natural behavior or natural behavior are compared to the detected real-time data to identify a set of historical data closest to the detected real-time data, wherein natural or non-natural behavior is determined on the basis of the classifier of the closest set of historical data. Goldfarb provides a “threshold” for various behavioral parameters that allow the device to adjust what is considered “natural” behavior for a specific user. Therefore, historical values outside of the threshold value may indicate that the user is performing non-natural behaviors because of a dull blade. This “learning” process on behalf of the device facilitates a more accurate estimate for predicting the blade attrition (Goldfarb paragraph 0090).
Regarding claim 7, the modified method of operating a personal care device of Kraus substantially disclosed above includes wherein the at least one detector comprises at least one of the following detectors: - a contact force detector (Kraus 37) for detecting the force at which the working head is pressed against users' skin, - a touch detector (Kraus par. 0072) for detecting contact of the working head with a user's body, - an acceleration detector for detecting acceleration of the personal care device, - a rotation detector for detecting orientation of the personal care device in three dimensions, - a stroke speed and stroke length detector for detecting a stroke speed and stroke length, - a stroke density detector for detecting the number of strokes over a predetermined area of the body portion to be treated, - a distance detector for detecting the distance of the personal care device from a mirror, - a detector for detecting pauses in the personal care treatment,- an angle sensor for detecting a change in angle of the working head to a user's face, - an angular orientation detector for detecting an angular orientation of a longitudinal axis of the handle relative to an angular rotation of the handle (Kraus para. 0028, lines 2-11), - a grip detector for detecting a change in the type of grip such of fingers on the handle, - a contact detector for detecting a contact area between the shaver head and the user's face, - a hair detector for detecting a hair property, - an environmental detector for detecting an environmental parameter, - a displacement detector for detecting displacement of the working head relative to the handle, - a cutting activity detector for detecting cutting activity of the personal care device, - a trimmer position detector for detecting a position of a long hair trimmer, - a skin moisture detector for detecting the user skin's moisture (Kraus para. 0072), - a skin oiliness detector for detecting the user skin's oiliness, - a pulse detector for sensing the user's pulse, - a camera detector for sensing the users mimic or gesture.
Regarding claim 8, the modified method of operating a personal care device of Kraus substantially disclosed above includes the real-time data of the detected at least one user's behavior parameter and the historical data of the at least one corresponding behavioral parameter are input into a behavior determination algorithm (Robinson) implemented in the control unit of the personal care device, wherein the determination of natural behavior or non-natural behavior is made by said behavior determination algorithm during a personal care treatment session.
Regarding claim 9, the modified method of operating a personal care device of Kraus substantially disclosed above includes the real-time data of the detected at least one user's behavior parameter and the historical data of the at least one corresponding behavioral parameter each comprise more than one behavioral parameter which are weighted differently by said behavior determination algorithm. (skin contact pressure is the most heavily described behavioral parameter in Kraus; Kraus briefly discusses other behavioral parameters, e.g., shaving speed in para. 0025-0026, stroke direction in para. 0028, skin friction in para. 0029, etc. and Goldfarb states other sensors may be present in addition to the force sensors, Goldfarb generally relies on the force sensors to detect user changes in the interactions between the user and the device to determine if the user’s behavior is natural or non-natural. Therefore, it can be said the information from the force sensors is given more weight than the other behavioral parameters.
Regarding claim 10, Kraus discloses wherein real-time data and historical data indicative of skin contact pressure is weighted higher than real-time data and historical data of other behavioral parameters (skin contact pressure is the most heavily described behavioral parameter in Kraus; Kraus briefly discusses other behavioral parameters, e.g., shaving speed in para. 0025-0026, stroke direction in para. 0028, skin friction in para. 0029, etc.).
Regarding claim 12, Kraus discloses wherein environmental/physiological data indicative of at least one of the following:- air humidity,- skin moisture (Kraus para. 0027), and- hair length, are analyzed if a non-natural behavior is determined (Kraus para. 0054).
Regarding claim 14, the modified method of operating a personal care device of Kraus substantially disclosed above includes wherein, upon detection of non-natural behavior, feedback information is given to the user in response to nonnatural behavior, wherein at least one user's behavior parameter characterizing the user's behavior after feedback is detected by the at least one detector when handling the personal care device, wherein the real-time data of the detected at least one user's behavior parameter after feedback is compared to the historical data of the at least one corresponding behavioral parameter, and upon such comparison, a determination of natural or non-natural behavior is again made. When the device detects non-natural behavior that may be associated with a dull blade, “a pop-up is displayed that facilitates the user to order a new replacement blade” (Goldfarb paragraph 0077, lines 12-13). Examiner notes the “microprocessor 160 is configured to store in first memory 161 the data indicative of the force applied between a new blade cartridge 150 and the skin during the first shaving session. This beneficially can be used as a baseline for a “sharp blade’ for subsequent shaving sessions” (Goldfarb paragraph 0074). In other words, when a new blade is introduced after non-natural behavior warrants the changing of the blades, the device detects the user’s behavior is now natural because the detector indicates force values correlating to the use of a sharp blade.
Regarding claim 18, the modified method of operating a personal care device of Kraus substantially disclosed above includes wherein the historical data of the at least one corresponding behavioral parameter is stored in an external database (Goldfarb, para. 0045), a cloud (Goldfarb, para. 0043) or a storage on the personal care device (Goldfarb, “first memory” 161, para. 0042).
Regarding claim 19, the modified method of operating a personal care device of Kraus substantially disclosed above includes wherein a deviation of the real-time data of the detected at least one user's behavior parameter from the historical data of the at least one corresponding behavioral parameter is used by a behavior determination algorithm implemented in the control unit of the personal care device to identify one of the natural behavior or non-natural behavior (heuristic learning process for determining the contact duration threshold) implemented in a control unit (microcontroller 160) of the personal care device to identify one of the natural behavior or non-natural behavior (paragraph 0090). Concerning paragraph 0090, Examiner notes ‘natural’ stroke length varies greatly depending upon if the user is shaving their legs or their face.
Regarding claim 22, Kraus discloses the at least one user's behavior parameter comprises at least one of stroke direction of the personal care device or twisting of the personal care device (Kraus para. 0025-0026 and para. 0028, lines 2-11).
Regarding claim 25, Kraus discloses the natural behavior comprises at least one of typical skin contact pressure or ergonomic movements of the personal care device and the non-natural behavior comprises at least one of excessive skin contact pressure, which exceeds the typical skin contact pressure by the predefined amount, or unergonomic movements of the personal care device (Kraus para 0018).
Regarding claim 27, Kraus discloses the electronic control unit (Kraus 37) controls an adjustment actuator (Kraus 47) to change the mechanical or operational setting of the personal care device (Kraus para. 0055 and para. 65).
Claims 20, 21, 23, 24 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kraus (US Publication 2009/0000126), Robinson (EP 3 513 925) and Goldfarb (WO2016/094327) in view of Bauer (US Publication 2017/0097758).
Regarding Claim 20, the modified method of Kraus substantially disclosed above as set forth above in the 103 rejection for claim 1 includes all limitations of claim 20 except for specifically including an accelerometer is used to detect a stroke length as the at least one user’s behavior parameter, wherein the real-time data of the detected at least one user’s behavior parameter comprises at least the stroke length of the personal care device.
However, Bauer teaches it is known in art of operating a personal care device to provide said personal care device with a “sensing system (212) including one or more engagement sensors such as a depression sensor, a gyroscope [and] an accelerometer” (paragraph 0025, lines 1-3), wherein the device is configured to detect a stroke length as one of the user’s behavioral parameters when operating the personal care device. In paragraph 0040, lines 35-36, Bauer states the following measurements are capable of being taken by the device, “an average length of the actual device engagement time, … a speed of the handheld device 102, an acceleration of the handheld device 102, a distance traveled by the handheld device 102, an angle of the handheld device 102 relative to the user, … and/or force against a surface, such as the user’s skin.” Examiner notes that “a distance travelled by the handheld device 102” indicates “a stroke length” as claimed, wherein the microprocessor is also capable of determining a stroke length from a “length of actual device engagement time” and “speed of the handheld device,” wherein a given speed over a period of time it takes to complete a stroke is used to calculate a distance traveled over the length of the stroke.
It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the method of operating a personal care device as disclosed by Kraus substantially disclosed above with the teaching of Bauer such that the accelerometer is used to detect real-time data with respect to a stroke length as one of the at least one user’s parameters in order to relay such “data related to the action taken by the handheld device” (Bauer, paragraph 0040, lines 50-51) to the user via a display (Bauer, paragraph 0041, lines 18-19). Examiner notes that the Goldfarb beneficially utilizes an accelerometer to determine if many short strokes are being taken due to the rapid hand motion acceleration imparted on the personal care device (Goldfarb, paragraph 0084). By incorporating the teaching of Bauer set forth above, the personal care device is provided with a more robust historical data set with which to compare real-time data.
Regarding Claim 21, the modified method of operating a personal care device of Kraus substantially disclosed above includes feedback information is presented to the user regarding the determined natural or non-natural behavior via optical or acoustic signals (Goldfarb, para. 0078, lines 4-7). Additionally, “the microcontroller 160 is configured to… display on a display a quantitative comparison between the total number of shaving strokes and a number of shaving strokes expected over the lifetime of blade 151,” Goldfarb paragraph 0091, lines 5-9).
Regarding Claim 23, the modified method of operating a personal care device of Kraus substantially disclosed above as set forth in the rejections for claims 1 and 23 includes a method of operating a personal care device comprising all limitations of claim 23.
Regarding Claim 24, the modified method of operating a personal care device of Kraus substantially disclosed above includes the change in the user’s behavior from natural behavior to non-natural behavior occurs during the personal care treatment session (e.g., if data from force sensor breaks out of the predetermined pattern, Kraus, para. 0018, lines 6-13) Regarding claim 26, the modified method of Kraus substantially disclosed above includes the natural behavior comprises ergonomic movements of the personal care device and the non-natural behavior comprises unergonomic movements of the personal care device (Kraus para. 0028).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL ALLEN DAVIES whose telephone number is (571)270-1511. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday; 9am-5pm 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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at (571)272-4502. 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.
/SAMUEL A DAVIES/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724 June 14, 2026
/BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights