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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group II, without traverse directed to claims 11–17 in the reply filed on November 26, 2025 is acknowledged.
Status of Claims
Currently pending Claim(s):
Withdrawn Claim(s):
11- 17
1-10 and 18-23
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/24/2023 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 11 line 16 “effectuating application of the one or more target profiles with the applicator;” should read “effectuating application of the one or more target profiles with the applicator; and…”. 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.
Claim 11 is 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 11 is rejected under 112b because it is indefinite for reciting limitation in line 17 that starts with “use the selected target profile…”. The rest of the claim 11 does not have any connection to this limitation that uses said target profile “to control a rate or pressure of air…in the applicators well as a position of a needle…to assist the user in effectuating the target profile.”
Perhaps the connection is not clear until claims 16 and 17; however, as defined in claim 11, the connection is not clear.
Dependent claims 12-17 are rejected for similar reason.
Positive Statement regarding 35 U.S.C. 101: Claims 11-17 are determined to be eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101. The claim 11, for example, at lines 17-20 recites “use the selected target profile and feedback from the machine-learning model, to control a rate or pressure of air expelled from an air source in the applicator as well as a position of a needle in the applicator, the rate or pressure of air and needle position influencing the applicator's spray pattern to assist the user in effectuating the target profile.”. It is given the weight of the description in the specification page 5 that using the selected target profile and feedback from the machine-learning model, to control a rate or pressure of air in the applicators well as a position of a needle is not simply transmitting and receiving data. Page 5 paragraph [0070] states “the power assembly 140 can include one or more sensors, such as a Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) sensor 718 and one or more cameras 720. These can be used in feedback loops with a processor on the second circuit board 142, a processor within the head 102, or a remote processor, to carry out automated control of functions within the head 102 and body 104 (e.g., air pump speed, needle position, and/or angle of spray pattern).” Therefore, it seems that the “use the selected target profile and feedback from the machine-learning model, to control a rate or pressure of air expelled from an air source in the applicator as well as a position of a needle in the applicator, the rate or pressure of air and needle position influencing the applicator's spray pattern” in combination with other limitation/features in the claim, claim as a whole, makes it eligible under 35 USC 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kosecoff (US 2023/0101374 A1) in view of Gullicks et al. (US 10987684 B2) (hereinafter, Gullicks).
Regarding claim 11, Kosecoff discloses a system configured for applying cosmetics (Paragraph [0001] “Systems, devices, and methods for generating, sharing, and presenting augmented reality cosmetic design filters.”), the system comprising:
one or more hardware processors configured by machine-readable instructions to (Paragraph [0001] “One or more non-transitory computer memory devices can store computer-readable instructions that”):
receive data from one or more sensors of an applicator in real time (Paragraph [0003] In some embodiments, generating the trace includes tracking a motion of the application relative to the biological surface and generating a numerical representation of the motion relative to the baseline description”) as the applicator moves from a first position relative to a user's body to at least a second position relative to the user's body ([0039] “…tracks the motion 230 of the applicator using images and or contour data generated by the camera 140. Generating the traces 115, therefore, can include generating numerical representations of the various motions 230 relative to the biological surface 180, as described in the baseline description, … The traces 115, once generated, can be transformed to reproduce the aesthetic effect of the cosmetic design 110 on differently shaped biological surfaces 180, as viewed through user device(s)”);
process the data to determine a data map of the user (Paragraph [0026] “The depth sensor 143 can capture one or more images of the biological surface 180, including, but not limited to, images of a target body surface 181 of the biological surface 180… The depth sensor 143 can generate a surface mapping 183 of the target body surface 181.”); and
transmit the data map of the user to a remote computing device comprising a display (Paragraph [0031] “the cosmetic design 110 can be distributed to the user device(s) 190 as an augmented reality filter, for example, through integration with social media, with improved accuracy and precision by mapping both the target body surface 181 and a corresponding region of a user of the user device 190, and by extrapolating the cosmetic design 110, or each constituent layer of the cosmetic design 110, to fit the corresponding region.”), the computing device configured to receive user inputs related to application of one or more media to a portion of the user's body corresponding to the data map (Paragraph [0030] “The surface mapping 183 can be used to modify the cosmetic design 110 by determining a shape type of a feature of the biological surface 180 and transforming the cosmetic design 110 to another, different shape type…:”; Paragraph [0054] “interaction with the screen 337 while the filters 325 are being presented permits the user of the user device 190 to edit, add, or remove one or more filters 325.”);
wherein the display presents the data map of the user and is configured to permit the user to select one or more target profiles (Paragraph [0082] “the client application 740 includes a user interface 745. In an embodiment, the user interface 745 includes interactive functionality including but not limited to graphical guides or prompts, presented via the display to assist a user in selecting cosmetic designs,”), the one or more target profiles comprising at least one virtual overlay of one or more media as applied to the user (Paragraph [0065-0066] “highlight layer(s) are defined that include highlight trace(s) 525 to accentuate or emphasize one or more facial features, overlying the first and second layers. At operation 507, eye layer(s) are defined including eyeshadow traces 530 and under-eye traces 531, overlying the highlight layers, the first layers, and the second layers. In this way, the augmented reality cosmetic design filter 510 can dynamically add or remove layers during presentation on the user device 190.”);
transmit the selected target profile to a machine-learning model, wherein the machine-learning model is configured to identify and store the selected target profile for future selections (Paragraph [0084] “information can include captured digital images, scans, or video, personal care device settings, custom care routines, user preferences, user identifiers, device identifiers, or the like. In an embodiment, the client computing device 130 collects data describing execution of care routines, image data of body surfaces, or other data. In an embodiment, such data is transmitted via the network interface 717 to the remote computer system 160 for further processing or storage”) and is further configured to assist the user in selecting and effectuating application of the one or more target profiles with the applicator (Paragraph [0082] “the user interface 745 includes interactive functionality including but not limited to graphical guides or prompts, presented via the display to assist a user in selecting cosmetic designs, tutorial videos, or animations.”; Paragraph [0085] “The remote computer system 160 includes a projection engine 787, the 3D model engine…”; Paragraph [0087] “The 3D model engine 781 can employ machine learning or artificial intelligence techniques”);
use the selected target profile and feedback from the machine-learning model (Paragraph [0018] “filters can reproduce step-by-step cosmetic routines, including augmented reality renderings of specific tools, application traces, and finished effects”; Paragraph [0040] “Traces 115 can encode layer-blending and layering information, such that the combination of multiple traces 115 can reproduce interactions between traces… traces 115 can reproduce manipulation of the cosmetic formulations 220, such as blending, smudging, smoothing, or other techniques that are typical of cosmetic designs. In an illustrative example, traces 115 and/or dynamic elements 117 can include a vector of transparency values referenced to a motion 230 and a formulation 220, such that the trace 115 reproduces a smoothing or blending of the formulation 220 based on the motion 230.”; Paragraph [0082] “the user interface 745 provides guidance (e.g., visual guides such as arrows or targets, progress indicators, audio/haptic feedback, synthesized speech, etc.) to guide a user under particular lighting conditions, angles, etc.”).
However, Kosecoff fails to teach to control a rate or pressure of air expelled from an air source in the applicator as well as a position of a needle in the applicator, the rate or pressure of air and needle position influencing the applicator's spray pattern to assist the user in effectuating the target profile.
Gullicks teaches to control a rate or pressure of air expelled from an air source in the applicator (Column 10, lines 55-60 “the pressure can be increased and the tip moved slowly. For smaller beads, the pressure can be reduced and the tip moved quickly. Optionally, additional attachments may be implemented to help provide a more controllable bead size and reduced technique sensitivity.”) as well as a position of a needle in the applicator (Column 8, lines 10-14 “fluid needle 112, which is controlled by the spray gun platform 130, advances and retracts longitudinally within the fluid passageway 156 as the operator depresses and releases the trigger 22 of the spray gun”) , the rate or pressure of air and needle position influencing the applicator's spray pattern to assist the user in effectuating the target profile (Paragraph Column 5, lines 42-50 “the fan control regulator 26 is a rotatable knob and allows an operator to control air flow to a pair of optional air horns used to adjust the spray pattern geometry (air horns not present in the nozzle assembly 10). The fluid control knob (center air regulator 28) can be adjusted so as to limit the longitudinal travel distance of a fluid needle in a needle valve (not visible here).”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date to modify Kosecoff’s reference to control a rate or pressure of air expelled from an air source in the applicator as well as a position of a needle in the applicator, the rate or pressure of air and needle position influencing the applicator's spray pattern to assist the user in effectuating the target profile taught by Gullicks’ reference. The motivation for doing so would have been to form beads of different geometry and reduce technique sensitivity as suggested by Gullicks (see Gullicks Column 10, lines 48-60).
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements described above by known methods with no change to the respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more that predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Gullicks with Kosecoff to obtain the invention specified in claim 11.
Regarding claim 12, which claim 11 is incorporated, Kosecoff fails to teach wherein a head of the applicator is removable from a body of the applicator and comprises a head control system that converts user inputs into movement of the needle.
Gullicks teaches which claim 11 is incorporated, Kosecoff fails to teach wherein a head of the applicator is removable from a body of the applicator (Column 1, lines 42-44, “Advantageously, the spray head assembly can be easily detached for cleaning.”) and comprises a head control system that converts user inputs into movement of the needle (Column 8, lines 33-42 “the trigger 22 is fully depressed, causing the fluid needle 112 to be fully retracted. With the fluid needle 112 in this open position, the tapered distal end 112′ of the fluid needle 112 does not fully occlude the fluid aperture 104, thus allowing coating fluid to flow freely though the fluid passageway 156 and fluid aperture 104. When the trigger 22 is released, the fluid needle 112 returns to its neutral position (not shown), in which the distal end 112′ of the fluid needle 112 fully occludes the fluid aperture 104.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date to modify Kosecoff’s reference to include wherein a head of the applicator is removable from a body of the applicator and comprises a head control system that converts user inputs into movement of the needle taught by Gullicks’ reference. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow the head to be easily detached for cleaning and to allow the fluid to flow freely as suggested by Gullicks (see Gullicks Column 1, lines 42-44 and Column 8, lines 36-38).
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements described above by known methods with no change to the respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more that predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Gullicks with Kosecoff to obtain the invention specified in claim 12.
Regarding claim 13, which claim 12 is incorporated, Kosecoff fails to teach wherein the head control system mechanically couples a lever to the needle.
Gullicks teaches wherein the head control system mechanically couples a lever to the needle (Column 8, lines 33-42 “the trigger 22 is fully depressed, causing the fluid needle 112 to be fully retracted.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date to modify Kosecoff’s reference to include wherein the head control system mechanically couples a lever to the needle taught by Gullicks’ reference. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow the fluid to flow freely as suggested by Gullicks (see Gullicks Column 8, lines 36-38).
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements described above by known methods with no change to the respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more that predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Gullicks with Kosecoff to obtain the invention specified in claim 13.
Regarding claim 14, which claim 12 is incorporated, Kosecoff discloses wherein the head control system receives a user input, digitizes the user input (Paragraph [0076] “The human-machine interface (HMI) 713 can include any type of device capable of receiving user input”; Paragraph [0082] “user interface 745. In an embodiment, the user interface 745 includes interactive functionality including but not limited to graphical guides or prompts, presented via the display to assist a user in selecting cosmetic designs, tutorial videos, or animations. In some embodiments, the user interface 745 provides guidance (e.g., visual guides such as arrows or targets, progress indicators, audio/haptic feedback, synthesized speech, etc.) to guide a user under particular lighting conditions, angles, etc.”)
However, Kosecoff fails to teach controls a position of the needle.
Gullicks teaches controls a position of the needle [based on the digitized input] (Column 8, lines 33-42 “the trigger 22 is fully depressed, causing the fluid needle 112 to be fully retracted. With the fluid needle 112 in this open position, the tapered distal end 112′ of the fluid needle 112 does not fully occlude the fluid aperture 104, thus allowing coating fluid to flow freely though the fluid passageway 156 and fluid aperture 104. When the trigger 22 is released, the fluid needle 112 returns to its neutral position (not shown), in which the distal end 112′ of the fluid needle 112 fully occludes the fluid aperture 104.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date to modify Kosecoff’s reference to include controls a position of the needle [based on the digitized input] taught by Gullicks’ reference. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow the fluid to flow freely as suggested by Gullicks (see Gullicks Column 8, lines 36-38).
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements described above by known methods with no change to the respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more that predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Gullicks with Kosecoff to obtain the invention specified in claim 14.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kosecoff (US 2023/0101374 A1) in view of Gullicks et al. (US 10987684 B2) (hereinafter, Gullicks) further in view of Du (US 5,188,255 A).
Regarding claim 15, which claim 12 is incorporated, Kosecoff and Gullicks fail to teach wherein a head and a body are joined by a keyed coupling assembly, the keyed coupling assembly comprising: a plurality of protrusions and a plurality of recesses configured to mate the head and the body, wherein: the plurality of recesses are further configured to permit vertical mating of the plurality of protrusions of the head with the plurality of protrusions of the body when the plurality of protrusions and the plurality of recesses are in alignment, and rotation of the head or the body past a first, predefined degree of rotation will decouple the head from the body.
Du teaches wherein a head and a body are joined by a keyed coupling assembly, the keyed coupling assembly comprising (Column 5, lines 47-56 “the attachment of the head housing 40 to the upper housing section 38 by bayonet latch male member 80 and bayonet latch female member 82 is illustrated. Head housing 40 is attached to upper housing section 38 by inserting bayonet latch male member 80 into the corresponding bayonet latch female member 82 and rotating clockwise.”):
a plurality of protrusions and a plurality of recesses configured to mate the head and the body, wherein (Column 4, lines 66-68 “Bayonet latch male member 80 is captured by bayonet latch female member 82”:
the plurality of recesses are further configured to permit vertical mating of the plurality of protrusions of the head with the plurality of protrusions of the body when the plurality of protrusions and the plurality of recesses are in alignment (Figure 4, elements 80 and 82), and
Figure 4:
PNG
media_image1.png
356
368
media_image1.png
Greyscale
rotation of the head or the body past a first, predefined degree of rotation will decouple the head from the body (Column 6, lines 33-45 “Because of the modular design of the proportioning pump 10 of the present invention, it is a simple matter to change the head housing 40 and piston 70. The inlet and outlet hoses (not shown) are first removed from the inlet 86 and outlet 88 of the head housing 40. Then the head housing 40 is rotated counterclockwise as viewed in FIG. 4 and pulled away from the upper housing 38 to disconnect the bayonet male member 80 of the head housing 40 from the bayonet female member 82 of the upper housing 38. Removal of the head housing 40 from the proportioning pump 10 exposes the second piston 70. The second piston 70 is removed from the shaft 64 by sliding it laterally off of the T-slide connector 66.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date to modify Kosecoff in view of Gullicks to include wherein a head and a body are joined by a keyed coupling assembly, the keyed coupling assembly comprising: a plurality of protrusions and a plurality of recesses configured to mate the head and the body, wherein: the plurality of recesses are further configured to permit vertical mating of the plurality of protrusions of the head with the plurality of protrusions of the body when the plurality of protrusions and the plurality of recesses are in alignment, and rotation of the head or the body past a first, predefined degree of rotation will decouple the head from the body taught by Du’s reference. The motivation for doing so would have been to facilitates the easy and rapid changing of the head as suggested by Du (see Du Column 5, lines 57-61).
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements described above by known methods with no change to the respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more that predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Du with Kosecoff and Gullicks to obtain the invention specified in claim 15.
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kosecoff (US 2023/0101374 A1) in view of Gullicks et al. (US 10987684 B2) (hereinafter, Gullicks) further in view of Lieber (US 6,527,201 B2).
Regarding claim 16, which claim 11 is incorporated, Kosecoff fails to teach discloses the system further comprising at least one media reservoir.
Gullicks teaches the system further comprising at least one media reservoir (Column 4, lines 56-60 “outwardly from the nozzle assembly 10 in generally upward and rearward directions is a fluid inlet 12, adapted for releasable connection to a fluid container or other fluid source”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date to modify Kosecoff’s reference to include the system further comprising at least one media reservoir taught by Gullicks’ reference. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow the fluid to exit through the fluid outlet by pressurization of the fluid in the fluid container as suggested by Gullicks (see Gullicks Column 10, lines 25-27).
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements described above by known methods with no change to the respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more that predictable results.
However, Kosecoff and Gullicks fail to teach wherein the at least one media reservoir comprises two or more sub-chambers, the two or more sub- chamber configured to contain at least one media in each sub-chamber.
Lieber teaches wherein the at least one media reservoir comprises two or more sub-chambers (Column 4, lines 10-15 “an integrated system is shown for an airbrush 10 and means 11 for selecting any one (or two for blending) of a group of colors stored in a set 12 of bottles attached to an air pressure manifold 13 so that paint in the bottles may be maintained at a regulated pressure that is set in a range of up to 25 psi at a regulator 14.”), the two or more sub- chamber configured to contain at least one media in each sub-chamber (Column 4, lines 10-15 “an integrated system is shown for an airbrush 10 and means 11 for selecting any one (or two for blending) of a group of colors stored in a set 12 of bottles attached to an air pressure manifold 13 so that paint in the bottles may be maintained at a regulated pressure that is set in a range of up to 25 psi at a regulator 14.”):
Figure 1.
PNG
media_image2.png
528
732
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date to modify Kosecoff in view of Gullicks to include wherein the at least one media reservoir comprises two or more sub-chambers, the two or more sub- chamber configured to contain at least one media in each sub-chamber taught by Lieber’s reference. The motivation for doing so would have been to providing a paint-channel connection to the airbrush as suggested by Lieber (see Lieber Column 2, lines 26-29).
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements described above by known methods with no change to the respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more that predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Lieber with Kosecoff and Gullicks to obtain the invention specified in claim 16.
Regarding claim 17, which claim 16 is incorporated, Kosecoff and Gullicks fail to teach wherein outputs of the two or more sub-chambers are mixed in different ratios to achieve different output colors for the applicator.
Lieber teaches wherein outputs of the two or more sub-chambers are mixed in different ratios to achieve different output colors for the applicator (Column 4, lines 39-43 “air under pressure from the source is delivered to the airbrush through the flexible tube 15 that is wound around a bundle 16 of paint tubes that are connected to the means 11 for color selection and blending.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date to modify Kosecoff in view of Gullicks to include wherein outputs of the two or more sub-chambers are mixed in different ratios to achieve different output colors for the applicator by Lieber’s reference. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow for color selection and blending as suggested by Lieber (see Lieber Column 4, lines 40-43).
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements described above by known methods with no change to the respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more that predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Lieber with Kosecoff and Gullicks to obtain the invention specified in claim 17.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tsai (US 2018/0141063 A1) discloses an applicator that includes an airbrush body connected to a reservoir and a removable spray head that is connected to the airbrush body. The spray head allows for the fluid to flow through by using [pressurized gas flow.
Mehta (US 2012/0217318 A1) discloses and air brush for the application of ink or dye using compressed air. The air brush comprises a housing, a head assembly, and a trigger assembly. The trigger included a lever assembly which actuates the needle to disengage from the nozzle in order to release compressed air, and different positions of the lever correlate with the release of both air and contents of the reservoir.
Kim et al. ("Verification of air brush effectiveness using cosmeceutical ingredients." Biomedical Dermatology 2.1 (2018): 24.) discloses an airbrush which dispels the fluid from a nozzle after a lever is pulled which in turn moves the needle. The liquid is then mixed with the air injected by the compressor to create a spray.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to UROOJ FATIMA whose telephone number is (571)272-2096. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Henok Shiferaw can be reached at (571) 272-4637. 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.
/UROOJ FATIMA/Examiner, Art Unit 2676
/Henok Shiferaw/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2676