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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant amended claims 1, 7, 10, 12, 17, and 19-20, and canceled claim 18. Claims 1-17 and 19-20 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 5 of Applicant’s Remarks, filed 12/03/25, with respect to the objections to claims 1 and 17-18 and rejections of claims 7, 10, and 17-18 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as indefinite have been fully considered and are persuasive, and therefore the rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-10, with respect to the rejections of claim 17 and canceled claim 18 under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the amendment to claim 17. Accordingly the rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 10-11, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-11, 13-16, and 19-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Young have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Young does not disclose a felt packet with securing cap where saturated felt teeth are attached to an applicator which allows for removal and disposal as required by the amended claims. However, amended independent claim 1 as written requires, among other things, “… a removable packet with saturated felt teeth as a dispenser …”, and amended independent claim 20 as written requires, among other things, “… a packet with saturated felt teeth as a dispenser …”. As discussed below, Young discloses a dispenser comprising felt teeth (Fig. 5, feat. 30; ¶0030) which may be part of a packet portion (Fig. 3 and 5, feats. 18 and 22) which is removable from a handle portion (12; ¶0027-0029). The packet may be pre-filled with a treatment liquid (¶0046), and because the felt teeth are absorbent (¶0030), they would be saturated with the treatment liquid. In light of the amendment to include similar subject matter as that recited by claim 17 into claim 20, new grounds of rejection have been made of claim 20 as indicated below.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 11-13, with respect to the rejection of claim 12 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Young in view of Johnson and of claim 17 over Young in view of Zhou have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the amendment. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection have been made as indicated below.
The declaration under 37 CFR 1.132 filed 12/03/25 is insufficient to overcome the rejection of claims 1-11, 13-16, and 19 based upon 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Young as set forth in the last Office action because: Young includes prefilling an applicator (¶0046), and as discussed above discloses a dispenser comprising felt teeth (Fig. 5, feat. 30; ¶0030) which may be part of a packet portion (Fig. 3 and 5, feats. 18 and 22) which is removable from a handle portion (12; ¶0027-0029). The packet may be pre-filled with a treatment liquid (¶0046), and because the felt teeth are absorbent (¶0030), they would be saturated with the treatment liquid. Although Young is silent with respect to imaging the scalp for data analysis as pointed out by applicant, this is not germane to the rejections of claims 1-11, 13-16, or 19 because these claims do not include limitations regarding imaging or data analysis.
Additionally, the declaration is insufficient to overcome the rejection of claim 12 based upon 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Young in view of Johnson as set forth in the last Office action because: whether or not a given reference or combination of references achieves the same purpose of the claimed application method is not relevant with respect to a conclusion of obviousness, so long as the reference or combination of references includes or suggests all of the claimed structural features or method steps.
Additionally, the declaration is insufficient to overcome the rejection of claims 17-18 based upon 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Young in view of Zhou as set forth in the last Office action because: while Zhou alone does not describe application to the scalp or hair, the combination of Young in view of Zhou renders it obvious to apply the customized treatment method of Zhou to the hair. Furthermore, the scalp is a form of skin, and therefore, Zhou’s method of application to the skin is applicable to the scalp.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-11, 13-16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Young (US 2008/0038044 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Young discloses a method for dispensing a liquid substance onto a subject’s hair follicles or scalp (¶0027-0035 and 0039-0047) comprising: a. prefilling an applicator (Figs. 1-9, feat. 10; ¶0027; Figs. 11-18, feat. 100; ¶0041 and 0046: applicator reservoir may be pre-filled) comprising: i. a handle portion (Fig. 1, feat. 12; ¶0027) having an engagement portion (52; ¶0029); ii. a removable packet with saturated felt teeth (Figs. 1-3 and 5, feats. 18, 22, 26 and 30; ¶0029-0032) as a dispenser (16, 18; ¶0027-0031) having a hollow interior space (Fig. 7, feat. 20; ¶0028) for holding a liquid substance and a liquid substance held at least partially within the hollow interior space (¶0027-0028); b. dispensing the liquid substance (¶0032); c. engaging the dispenser removably engageable with the engagement portion of the handle portion (¶0029: cartridge 18 of the dispenser 16 may be selectively attached to and disengaged from the engagement portion 52 of the handle 12), wherein the liquid substance is released onto the subject’s hair follicles or scalp (¶0031-0032).
Regarding claim 2, Young discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses that the liquid substance comprises a substance selected from the group consisting of pharmaceutical agents and supplements (¶0028).
Regarding claim 3, Young discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses that the liquid substance comprises a composition containing vitamin E oil (¶0028 and 0037), cotton seed oil, aloe vera oil, lanolin oil, lavender oil, vanilla bean oil, clove ingredients and combinations thereof.
Regarding claim 4, Young discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses that the handle portion (Figs. 1 and 7-8, feat. 12) comprises an actuator (Fig. 7, feat. 32; Fig. 8, feat. 36; ¶0033-0034) and a reservoir located within the interior space (Fig. 7, feat. 34; Fig. 8, feat. 38; ¶0033-0034), the liquid substance held within the reservoir (¶0034), the actuator adapted to cause the reservoir to selectively dispense the liquid substance when actuated (¶0033-0034).
Regarding claim 5, Young discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses that the dispenser comprises a removable cartridge (Fig. 1, feat. 18; ¶0028-0029).
Regarding claim 6, Young discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses that the dispenser comprises at least one removable ampule (Fig. 9, feat. 44; ¶0036).
Regarding claim 7, Young discloses the method of claim 5, and further discloses at least one tooth (Figs. 1, 2, 4, and 5-7, feat. 22; ¶0030) having a reservoir therein (24), the reservoir in communication with the hollow interior space (Figs. 6-7, feat. 20) via at least one opening (¶0033: hollow interior space is in fluid communication with tooth reservoir 24).
Regarding claim 8, Young discloses the method of claim 7, and further discloses that the at least one tooth further comprises an open application end for selectively dispensing the liquid substance (Fig. 2, feat. 26; ¶0030).
Regarding claim 9, Young discloses the method of claim 7, and further discloses a plug engageable with the application end (Fig. 5, feat. 30; ¶0031), the plug configured to control passage of liquid from the reservoir of the at least one tooth (¶0031).
Regarding claim 10, Young discloses the method of claim 6, and further discloses a plug engageable with at least one opening (Fig. 5, feat. 30; ¶0031), the plug configured to control passage of liquid from the reservoir of at least one ampule (¶0031 and 0036).
Regarding claim 11, Young discloses the method of claim 9, and further discloses caps fittable over the at least one opening (¶0036).
Regarding claim 13, Young discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses that the applicator has a breakable body (¶0039-0041) comprising an internal cavity comprising a liquid substance (104; ¶0041) and a handle (105).
Regarding claim 14, Young discloses the method of claim 13, and further discloses that the applicator is formed from a foam material (¶0040-0041).
Regarding claim 15, Young discloses the method of claim 13, and further discloses an open application end for selectively dispensing the liquid substance (Figs. 14-15, feat. 108; ¶0042-0043) and a cover formed to cover the application end (Figs. 14-15, feats. 112, 114; ¶0043).
Regarding claim 16, Young discloses the method of claim 13, and further discloses that the applicator further comprises fracture lines providing areas along which the applicator will fracture upon the application of sufficient force (Fig. 18, feat. 113; ¶0047).
Regarding claim 19, Young discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses that the subject is selected from the group consisting of a person (¶0027 and 0032), a pet.
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.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Young in view of Inoue (US 2005/0257800 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Young discloses the method of claim 12, but does not disclose an optimum back-and-forth motion for dispersal conditions of the liquid substance among hair follicles.
Inoue teaches a hair care device (Figs. 1-3B, feat. 1; ¶0056-0067) comprising a liquid reservoir handle (5) and a brush head (2) which dispenses liquid from the reservoir handle (¶0067). Inoue teaches that moving the brush part in a back and forth motion through the user’s hair allows liquid to be applied to the hair and scalp, while also massaging the scalp (¶0067). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Young to include an optimum back-and-forth motion for dispersal conditions of the liquid substance among hair follicles in order to also massage the scalp as taught by Inoue.
Claims 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Young in view of Zhou (US 2016/0331308 A1) and in further view of Zahler et al. (US 6,236,881 B1).
Regarding claim 17, Young discloses the method of claim 1, but does not disclose that the applicator having electronics and image analysis software in the dispenser to capture scalp and hair follicle images wherein analysis detects moisture, elasticity, oil, melanin, or skin conditions comprising: a. interfacing a cell phone with the dispenser for analysis of the scalp and hair follicle images; and b. capturing high definition scalp and hair follicle data using a 24bit DSP sensor clip of 50X-500X magnification for built-in photo and video acquisition and having an image resolution of 640-480 pixels, wherein image analysis provides detection of skin conditions.
Zhou teaches dispensing devices and methods which can advantageously provide customized skin care based on an individual user’s need (¶0008). Zhou teaches that the dispensing device (Figs. 21 and 71, feat. 10; ¶0290-0300) may include processing electronics (Fig. 21, feats. 17, 171, and 172; ¶0291) and a skin sensor, which may be an imaging device (Fig. 71, feat. 7114) for capturing images of the skin, analyze the skin for skin features, comparing the analyzed features to a local or remote database of the user’s skin features, and then dispensing the corresponding customized skin care specimen (¶0294). Because hair may be on skin, the images of the skin may include images of hair and hair follicles. Zhou further teaches that the device may interface with an external device such as a smart phone for information processing (¶0177 and 0302) Zhou teaches that the analyzed skin features may include melanin, in the form of discoloration or dark spots, oiliness, hydration level, or skin symptoms (¶0169). Zhou teaches that the results of the analysis may be used to dispense a desired skin treatment from a dispenser (¶0294). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Young so that the applicator has electronics and image analysis software in the dispenser to capture scalp and hair follicle images in the dispenser wherein analysis detects moisture, elasticity, oil, melanin, or skin conditions comprising a. interfacing a cell phone with the dispenser for analysis of the scalp and hair follicle images, wherein image analysis provides detection of skin conditions in order to provide customized skin care to the subject as taught by Zhou.
Young in view of Zhou is silent with respect to capturing high definition scalp and hair follicle data using a 24 bit DSP sensor clip of 50X-500X magnification for built-in photo and video acquisition and having an image resolution of 640-480 pixels.
Zahler teaches an apparatus (Fig. 2, feat. 200; Col. 6, lines 1-24) for imaging diseased tissues (220) and performing real-time analysis and detection of disease conditions (Col. 6, lines 25-32; Col. 7, line 28 – Col. 8, line 2). Zahler teaches that a sensor system comprising a camera (206) with a CCD sensor with a resolution of 752x528 or 768x494 and a 24 bit DSP provides sufficient information for real-time analysis and detection of disease conditions in an imaged tissue (Col. 6, line 61 – Col. 8, line 2). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device and method suggested by Young in view of Zhou so that it includes capturing high definition scalp and hair follicle data using a 24 bit DSP sensor clip for built-in photo and video acquisition in order to provide real-time analysis and detection of disease conditions as taught by Zahler.
Young in view of Zhou and in further view of Zahler are silent with respect to the magnification of the sensor clip, and Zahler teaches a different image resolution. However, the Federal Circuit has held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Please see MPEP §2144.04(IV)(A) with respect to Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). In the present case, Young in view of Zhou and in further view of Zahler suggests the claimed device and method, with the exception of the claimed magnification and image resolution, and would not perform differently because it includes the structural features of the claimed applicator and image analysis steps of claim 17. Therefore, the claimed magnification of 50X-500X and claimed image resolution of 640-480 pixels does not render the claimed method patentably distinct from that suggested by Young in view of Zhou and in further view of Zahler.
Regarding claim 20, Young discloses a device for dispensing a liquid substance onto a subject’s hair follicles or scalp (¶0027-0035 and 0039-0047) comprising: an applicator capable of prefilling (Figs. 1-9, feat. 10; ¶0027; Figs. 11-18, feat. 100; ¶0041 and 0046) comprising: i. a handle portion (Fig. 1, feat. 12; ¶0027) having an engagement portion (52; ¶0029); and ii. a packet with saturated felt teeth as a dispenser (Figs. 1-3 and 5, feats. 16, 18, 26, 30; ¶0027-0031) having a hollow interior space (Fig. 7, feat. 20; ¶0028) for holding a liquid substance and a liquid substance held at least partially within the hollow interior space (¶0027-0028), c. a liquid substance dispenser (18; ¶0027-0031); and d. a means for engaging the dispenser with the engagement portion of the handle portion (¶0029: cartridge 18 has ridges for engaging flanges of the engagement portion 52), wherein a liquid substance is released onto a subject’s hair or skin (¶0031-0032).
Young does not disclose that the device is for image analysis, that the device comprises an image detector capable of imaging a subjects hair follicles or scalp at a distance of 0-40 mm having a high-performance sensor clip with a 24 DSP chip providing 50X-500X magnification for built-in photo and video acquisition, or that the image detector provides for analysis and release of the liquid substance onto the subject’s hair follicles or scalp.
Zhou teaches dispensing devices and methods which can advantageously provide customized skin care based on an individual user’s need (¶0008). Zhou teaches that the dispensing device (Figs. 21 and 71, feat. 10; ¶0290-0300) may include processing electronics (Fig. 21, feats. 17, 171, and 172; ¶0291) and a skin sensor, which may be an imaging device (Fig. 71, feat. 7114) for capturing images of the skin, analyze the skin for skin features, comparing the analyzed features to a local or remote database of the user’s skin features, and then dispensing the corresponding customized skin care specimen (¶0294). The skin sensor, which may be an imaging device, may further detect when the device has made contact with the user, or in other words when the device is 0 mm away from the user’s skin (¶0294). Because hair may be on skin, the images of the skin may include images of hair and hair follicles. Zhou further teaches that the device may interface with an external device such as a smart phone for information processing (¶0177 and 0302) Zhou teaches that the analyzed skin features may include melanin, in the form of discoloration or dark spots, oiliness, hydration level, or skin symptoms (¶0169). Zhou teaches that the results of the analysis may be used to dispense a desired skin treatment from a dispenser (¶0294). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Young so that it performs image analysis, includes an image detector capable of imaging a subjects hair follicles or scalp at a distance of 0-40 mm for built-in photo and video acquisition, and so that the image detector provides for analysis and release of the liquid substance onto the subject’s hair follicles or scalp in order to provide customized skin care to the subject as taught by Zhou.
Young in view of Zhou is silent with respect to the image detector having a high-performance sensor clip with a 24 bit DSP chip providing 50X-500X magnification.
Zahler teaches an apparatus (Fig. 2, feat. 200; Col. 6, lines 1-24) for imaging diseased tissues (220) and performing real-time analysis and detection of disease conditions (Col. 6, lines 25-32; Col. 7, line 28 – Col. 8, line 2). Zahler teaches that a sensor system comprising a camera (206) with a CCD sensor with a resolution of 752x528 or 768x494 and a 24 bit DSP provides sufficient information for real-time analysis and detection of disease conditions in an imaged tissue (Col. 6, line 61 – Col. 8, line 2). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device and method suggested by Young in view of Zhou so that it includes capturing high definition scalp and hair follicle data using a 24 bit DSP sensor clip for built-in photo and video acquisition in order to provide real-time analysis and detection of disease conditions as taught by Zahler.
Young in view of Zhou and in further view of Zahler are silent with respect to the magnification of the sensor clip, and Zahler teaches a different image resolution. However, the Federal Circuit has held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Please see MPEP §2144.04(IV)(A) with respect to Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). In the present case, Young in view of Zhou and in further view of Zahler suggests the claimed device and method, with the exception of the claimed magnification and image resolution, and would not perform differently because it includes the structural features of the claimed applicator and image analysis steps of claim 17. Therefore, the claimed magnification of 50X-500X and claimed image resolution of 640-480 pixels does not render the claimed method patentably distinct from that suggested by Young in view of Zhou and in further view of Zahler.
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 ARJUNA P CHATRATHI whose telephone number is (571)272-8063. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached at 5712727159. 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.
/ARJUNA P CHATRATHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/PHILIP R WIEST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781