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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 11-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/9/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/12/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-9 objected to because of the following informalities: the claims recite “A system…” and should instead recite “The system” to avoid antecedent basis issues. 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.
Claims 1-10 are 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.
Claims 1 and 10 recite the limitation "the kind" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim “… a test patch comprising…”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "it" in line 9 and Claim 10 recites the limitation “it” in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim “… a test patch comprising…”. It is unclear from the context of the claim whether “it” refers to the camera, computer, scorecard, etc., For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim “… image of the scorecard with a test patch placed on the test patch”. Generally, the limitation “it” should be avoided in claims.
Regarding Claim 7, the limitation “configured to store in a database in the memory captured images captured over a period of time using the camera, or the processed images, and to store alongside each image the results of the processing of the captured image” renders the claim indefinite, as the claim is grammatically confusing:
The claim does not specify what is configured to store in a database, therefore, it is not understood how this storage is being performing.
The “or” state renders the claim indefinite because it is not known if the claim is to be read as “configured to store in a database in the memory captured images captured over a period of time using the camera and to store alongside each image the results of the processing of the captured image “configured to store in a database in the memory the processed images, and to store alongside each image the results of the processing of the captured image”, or “configured to store in a database in the memory processed images captured over a period of time using the camera, and to store alongside each image the results of the processing of the captured image”.
The limitation “each image” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the captured images, the processed images, some other images, or a combination of images thereof are stored alongside one another.
The limitation "the results” lacks sufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as results have not been previously claimed.
For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim that the database stores one or more of captured images and processed images overtime, and are stored together as results.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the results" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim “results”.
Claim 10 recites the phrase "for example" which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20080166268 A1 to Yamaguchi et al. (hereinafter, Yamaguchi).
Regarding Claim 1, Yamaguchi discloses a system for use in determining a skin dryness by processing images of a test patch of the kind ([0002] “The present invention relates to a test sheet suitable for measuring a condition of an object such as human skin, an apparatus and method for diagnosing an object using the test sheet, and a computer readable recording medium containing a program for causing a computer to carry out the method for diagnosing an object.”) comprising inter alia:
a membrane (reagent 4) impregnated with a moisture indicator ([0010] “…a reagent layer disposed on the substrate film… the reagent layer including a reagent which changes the color thereof depending on an amount of substance evaporating from a surface of the object…”) which has a first color in the dry anhydrous state, and which changes to a second color at a certain moisture content which corresponds to normal skin moisture ([0040] “…reagent layer 4 is formed of cobalt chloride paper containing cobalt chloride as the reagent, which changes its color depending on the amount of moisture evaporating through the skin surface.”), the system comprising:
a user operable computer device having a camera (digital camera 10), a processor (image processing unit 22), and an area of memory (memory 25);
a computer program stored in the memory of the user operable device ([0079] “…the invention may also be implemented as a program for causing a computer to function as means corresponding to the above-described image processing unit 22, the moisture amount measuring unit 23 and the surface information obtaining unit 24 to carry out the process as shown in FIG. 11.”); and
a scorecard (correction chart 5) having at least one color reference target ([0040] “…a first correction chart 5 used for correcting the color…”) ([0044] “The first correction chart 5 is a color chart including color areas 5A-5C of three different colors, for example, blue, pale flesh color and pale red corresponding to changes of the color of the cobalt chloride paper.”), wherein the computer program causes the user operable computer device to process an image of the scorecard with a test patch placed on it after the test patch has been applied to an area of skin, the processing determining the dryness of the area of the skin ([0021] “…correcting color and lightness of the image based on the first and second correction chart contained in the image to obtain a processed image…”) ([0057] “The moisture amount measuring unit 23 measures the amount of moisture evaporating through the skin based on the color of an area in the processed image corresponding to the reagent layer 4 (hereinafter referred to as a "reagent area").”).
Regarding Claim 2, Yamaguchi discloses wherein the moisture indicator comprises cobalt (II) chloride which has blue color when in the dry anhydrous state and a pink color (e.g., from blue to pale red) when at the certain moisture content ([0042] “The cobalt chloride paper changes its color depending on the amount of absorbed moisture. Specifically, as the amount of absorbed moisture increases, the color of the cobalt chloride paper changes from blue to pale red.”).
Regarding Claim 3, Yamaguchi discloses a system according to claim 1 wherein the color reference target comprises a first target which has a color that corresponds to a fully dehydrated test patch ([0044] “… the color area 5A is blue which is similar to the color of the anhydrous salt of cobalt chloride…”) and a second target having a color that corresponds to a fully hydrated test patch ([0044] “…he color area 5C is pale red which is the color of cobalt chloride saturated with moisture.”) and a region in which a test patch can be placed (test sheet 1 has multiple regions is which a “test patch” is capable of being placed, e.g., the test patch has a surface where a user can placed a test patch wherever they desire).
Regarding Claim 4, Yamaguchi discloses wherein the computer program causes the computer device to process the captured image to extract a two-dimensional image of the test patch ([0054] “The image processing unit 22 applies color conversion to the image…”) ([0057] “The moisture amount measuring unit 23 measures the amount of moisture evaporating through the skin based on the color of an area in the processed image corresponding to the reagent layer 4 (hereinafter referred to as a "reagent area").”) which is color balanced using the colors of the color reference target or targets as seen in the captured image ([0054] “ The image processing unit 22 applies color conversion to the image to correct colors of the image so that the colors of the color areas 5A-5C contained in the image are matched with the original colors of the color areas 5A-5C stored in the memory 25.”).
Regarding Claim 7, Yamaguchi discloses a system configured to store in a database in the memory the processed images, and to store alongside each image the results of the processing of the captured image ([0051] “… a surface information obtaining unit 24 for obtaining information of the skin surface based on the processed image; a memory 25 for storing various information…”) ([0019] “a storing means for storing in a database the amount of the substance and the information of the surface of the object.”) ([0081] “By measuring and storing actual amounts of the substance corresponding to changes of the color of the reagent in the first correction chart in advance, a quantitative amount of the substance can be found.”) ([0083] “…information of the surface of the object is obtained from areas of the object in the processed image…”).
Regarding Claim 8, Yamaguchi discloses wherein the computer program is configured to cause the processor to process the results in the database ([0081] “By measuring and storing actual amounts of the substance corresponding to changes of the color of the reagent in the first correction chart in advance, a quantitative amount of the substance can be found.”) to determine if the abnormality is changing over time ([0083] “…changes over time of the amount of the substance and the information of the object surface for the same object can be learned.”) and in the event that a change is detected over time to present a message or alarm to the user ([0068] “FIG. 13 is a graph containing the amounts of skin moisture, the total areas of age spots and the numbers of wrinkles. From such a graph, one can know changes over time in the amount of skin moisture, the total area of age spots and the number of wrinkles.”) ([0078] “…the database 31 and the diagnosis generating unit 33 may be included in the skin diagnostic apparatus 20 so that the graph of the amount of skin moisture… shown in FIG. 13 and the diagnostic report may be created in the skin diagnostic apparatus 20.”).
Regarding Claim 9, Yamaguchi discloses wherein the scorecard comprises a backing portion (adhesive layer 3) having a front face (substrate film 2) (see FIG. 2) which is provided with markings (any one of 6A-C or barcode, FIG. 2) defining an area of the front face to which a test patch can be adhered (substrate film 2 has multiple markings (e.g., 6A-C or barcode, FIG. 2) that are capable of defining an area of the front face to which a test patch can be adhered e.g., the substrate film has markings which are capable of defining an area to place a test patch).
Regarding Claim 10, Yamaguchi discloses a system for use in determining a skin dryness by processing images of a test patch of the kind ([0002] “The present invention relates to a test sheet suitable for measuring a condition of an object such as human skin, an apparatus and method for diagnosing an object using the test sheet, and a computer readable recording medium containing a program for causing a computer to carry out the method for diagnosing an object.”) comprising inter alia:
a membrane (reagent 4) impregnated with a moisture indicator ([0010] “…a reagent layer disposed on the substrate film… the reagent layer including a reagent which changes the color thereof depending on an amount of substance evaporating from a surface of the object…”), which has a first color in the dry anhydrous state, and which changes to a second color at a certain moisture content which corresponds to normal skin moisture ([0040] “…reagent layer 4 is formed of cobalt chloride paper containing cobalt chloride as the reagent, which changes its color depending on the amount of moisture evaporating through the skin surface.”), the system comprising:
a user operable computer device having a camera (digital camera 10), a processor (image processing unit 22) and an area of memory (memory 25),
a computer program stored in the memory of the user operable device ([0079] “…the invention may also be implemented as a program for causing a computer to function as means corresponding to the above-described image processing unit 22, the moisture amount measuring unit 23 and the surface information obtaining unit 24 to carry out the process as shown in FIG. 11.”), and
a scorecard (correction chart 5) having at least one color reference target ([0040] “…a first correction chart 5 used for correcting the color…”) ([0044] “The first correction chart 5 is a color chart including color areas 5A-5C of three different colors, for example, blue, pale flesh color and pale red corresponding to changes of the color of the cobalt chloride paper.”), for example a first target which has a color that corresponds to a fully dehydrated test patch ([0044] “… the color area 5A is blue which is similar to the color of the anhydrous salt of cobalt chloride…”) and a second target having a color that corresponds to a fully hydrated test patch ([0044] “…he color area 5C is pale red which is the color of cobalt chloride saturated with moisture.”) and a region in which a test patch can be placed (test sheet 1 has multiple regions is which a “test patch” is capable of being placed, e.g., the test patch has a surface where a user can placed a test patch wherever they desire), and
wherein the computer program causes the user operable computer device to capture an image of the scorecard with a test patch placed on it after the test patch has been applied to an area of skin ([0054] “The image processing unit 22 applies color conversion to the image…”) ([0057] “The moisture amount measuring unit 23 measures the amount of moisture evaporating through the skin based on the color of an area in the processed image corresponding to the reagent layer 4 (hereinafter referred to as a "reagent area").”) and to transmit the captured image across a network to a remote server that is configured to process the image to determine a dryness of the area of the skin ([0062] “The input/output unit 26 is formed by a known network interface. Information of the moisture amount measured by the moisture amount measuring unit 23 and the surface information obtained by the surface information obtaining unit 24 are transmitted as skin information of the user via the input/output unit 26 to a diagnostic server, which analyzes the skin information of the user to diagnose the skin. A user ID for identifying the user is also transmitted together with the skin information.”)
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaguchi in view of US 20150359459 A1 to Taylor et al. (hereinafter, Taylor).
Yamaguchi discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing where the color reference target includes a color swatch including a region of cyan color, a region of magenta color, and a region of yellow color.
However, Taylor teaches a color calibration target with a plurality of color regions ([0007] “A standardized color calibration target can be used to facilitate the color balancing process. The color calibration target can include a plurality of standardized color regions…”) that accounts for differences in lighting that affect color balance of images ([0041] “The color calibration targets described herein (also known as “color calibration cards” and “color cards”) can be used to account for differences in lighting or other environmental conditions that affect the resultant color balance of the skin image data.”) and specifically states that the color regions can be cyan, magenta and yellow ([0041] “Each of the standardized colored regions 304 can be of a different color (e.g., black, gray, white, cyan, magenta, yellow, light brown, dark brown) and be positioned in a known arrangement on the card 302.”).
One having an ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have found it obvious to modify the color reference target of Yamaguchi to include the colors swatch including a region of cyan, magenta and yellow of Taylor, as Taylor teaches that such color swatches can be used for account of differences in lighting or other environmental conditions that affect color balance of images ([0041]) and would have improved accuracy of diagnosis ([0037]).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaguchi in view of Automated Analysis of Paper-Based Immunoassay Tests on Mobile Devices to D’Silva et al. (hereinafter, D’Silva).
Yamaguchi discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing where the scorecard further comprises one or more fiducial markers that have at least one of a known shape, a known pattern and a known location on the scorecard and the processor uses the fiducial markers to produce a modified image of the scorecard which is corrected for perspective and brought into focus.
However, D’Silva teaches fiducial markers with known shapes, patterns that are identified as locations on a scorecard (e.g., blue circles in FIG. 3) (e.g., 3.1 Determining locations of fiducial markers “Each immunoassay test has four fiducials markers (one on each corner)…”) (3.1.1. MATLAB implementation “…the circles were then run through an algorithm that selected the four fiducials that were most likely to be the fiducials. This is determined by the intensity of the circle, distances from each other, and size of the circle.”). After finding the locations of the fiducial markers a processor uses the fiducials to orient/correct geometry and bring the location of the test strips, QR code and color standards into “focus” so they can be processed (3. Development Process “…determining the location of four fiducial markers and using these locations to orient the image…”) (3.1 Determining locations of fiducial markers “Therefore, the location of the test strips, QR code, and color standards may not always be at a constant position in the photo. The primary purpose of the first phase was to develop an algorithm to locate the four fiducial markers so that the image could then be orientated and further processed.”).
One having an ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have found it obvious to modify the scorecard of Yamaguchi with the fiducial markers of D’Silva, as D’Silva teaches in the Abstract that such technology would have been cheap and easy to use, and would not require prior training.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN PATRICK DOUGHERTY whose telephone number is (571)270-5044. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm (Pacific Time).
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, Jacqueline Cheng can be reached at (571)272-5596. 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.
/SEAN P DOUGHERTY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791