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 .
Drawings
The 5-page drawings have been considered and placed on record in the file.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 7 recites “…to collect sensor date relating…” in which it is assumed a typographical error occurred wherein “date” is supposed to recite “data”. Appropriate correction is required.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lai et al. (US 20170259920 A1).
Regarding Claim 14, Lai teaches "A cosmetic application drone system comprising: a cosmetic application drone including: a drone body, a navigation system connected to the drone body, a cosmetic housing connected to the drone body, a cosmetic distribution system connected to the drone body, a drone wireless communication system connected to the drone body, and a drone controller in communication with the navigation system, the cosmetic distribution system, and the wireless communication system, the drone controller including a non-transitory memory and one or more processors"; (Lai, FIG. 6 and Paras. 20-21, 24, and 73, teaches an unmanned aerial vehicle or drone equipped with an on-board painting system for rendering a visual image on a target structure comprising a communications sub-system for receiving control and navigation information including a flight path for traversing structure in which the drone also includes an on-board automated spray paint delivery system with three color sources in associated containers or canisters that are fixed on the drone wherein the color source is electronically activated to supply an amount of paint to a manifold or mixer device that includes a spray nozzle and wherein the mobile device is configured as a UAV base station equipped with device processor, memory, and a transceiver for transmitting wireless signals with commands or instructions for effecting navigation and painting operations and wherein the UAV instrumentation includes a flight controller/processor and computer readable storage mediums, i.e., drone system comprises a drone body, navigation system, cosmetic housing being the paint canisters, cosmetic distribution system being the spray nozzle, a wireless communication system in communication with the navigation system and cosmetic distribution system, and the controller includes memory and processors);
"and a user input system comprising: a control wireless communication system selectively in communication with the drone wireless communication system"; (Lai, Paras. 24 and 34, teaches the user's mobile device is configured as a UAV base station for transmitting wireless signals with commands or instructions for effecting navigation and painting operations wherein a user's mobile device may guide the real-time positions of the UAV to a target or initial position relative to the target structure in response to received user commands, i.e., user input system comprising a control of wireless communication system selectively in communication with the drone wireless communication system);
"a user interface"; (Lai, FIG. 2B and Para. 29, teaches a visual user interface at the camera or remotely located device allows a user to draw a target pattern or desired image as an overlay onto the image of the target structure, i.e., a user interface);
"and an input controller in communication with the control wireless communication system, the input controller including a non-transitory memory and one or more processors"; (Lai, FIG. 6 and Paras. 7, 20-21, 24, and 73, teaches a controller device at the UAV configured to receive instruction signals for controlling real time navigation of the UAV to a target location at the target structure wherein the transmitted signals may be wireless and wherein the controller contains processors and computer readable storage mediums).
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.
Claims 1, 4, 6-7, and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Fliszar et al. (US 20230350434 A1), Liang (US 20180164610 A1), and Beardsley et al. (US 20200222929 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Lai teaches "A cosmetic application drone comprising: a drone body; at least one sensor connected to the drone body, the at least one sensor configured to collect sensor data"; (Lai, FIG. 6 and Para. 20, teaches an unmanned aerial vehicle or drone with a well-known Quadcopter structure comprising a variety of sensors wherein data obtained from sensors are transmitted to ground equipment, i.e., drone comprising a drone body and at least one sensor which collects sensor data);
"a navigation system connected to the drone body"; (Lai, FIG. 6 and Para. 20, teaches the drone includes a communications sub-system for receiving control and navigation information including a flight path for traversing a structure, i.e., navigation system connected to drone body);
"a cosmetic housing connected to the drone body"; (Lai, FIG. 6 and Para. 21, teaches a drone including an on-board automated spray paint delivery system including three color sources located within associated containers that are fixed on the drone, i.e., cosmetic housing to store cosmetic material which is connected to the drone body);
"a cosmetic distribution system connected to the drone body"; (Lai, FIG. 6 and Para. 21, teaches the automated spray paint delivery system includes a manifold and spray nozzle connected with each paint canister and each color source is electronically activated to supply an amount of color paint to a manifold or mixer device that includes a spray nozzle also actuated under electronic control to spray a desired color of paint on a surface, i.e., cosmetic distribution system connected to the drone body);
"and a controller in communication with the at least one sensor, the navigation system, the cosmetic distribution system, the controller including a non-transitory memory and one or more processors"; (Lai, FIG. 6 and Paras. 7, 20-21, and 73 teaches UAV instrumentation including a flight controller/processor, a navigation system, an altimeter, sensors and mapping systems and wherein the controller device configures the UAV to automatically actuate the paint fluid dispensing system in which these instructions may be provided to a processor and the instructions may be stored on a computer readable storage medium, i.e., controller in communication with the sensor, navigation system, and cosmetic distribution system in which it also includes memory and processors).
However, Lai does not explicitly teach “wherein the non-transitory memory stores instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the controller to: control the navigation system to fly the cosmetic application drone to collect sensor data relating to a face, control the at least one sensor to collect the sensor data relating to the face, store the sensor data relating to the face in the memory, generate as a face map from the sensor data relating to the face, and control the navigation system and the cosmetic distribution system to apply a cosmetic to the user using the face map”.
In an analogous field of endeavor, Fliszar teaches "wherein the non-transitory memory stores instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the controller to: control the navigation system to fly the cosmetic application drone to collect sensor data relating to a face"; (Fliszar, Para. 135, teaches a navigation system of the drone having two navigation types wherein during the first type of navigation the orientation of the drone is based on a position relative to the initial face wherein the drone captures images and sensor data, i.e., control navigation system to fly the drone to collect sensor data relating to a face);
"control the at least one sensor to collect the sensor data relating to the face; store the sensor data relating to the face in the memory"; (Fliszar, Para. 23, teaches the drone hovering and stabilizing to continue to take images of the face or person or use other sensors to determine whether the drone is stable wherein the drone navigates to one or more waypoints while capturing images and storing sensor data, i.e., control sensor to collect the data relating to the face and storing the sensor data in memory).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lai by including the controlling of the drone to collect sensor data relating to the face and storing the data taught by Fliszar. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since it improves photography and ensures reliability (Fliszar, Para. 112, teaches the motivation of combination to be to improve photography and determine if photographs are reliable).
However, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar does not explicitly teach “generate as a face map from the sensor data relating to the face, and control the navigation system and the cosmetic distribution system to apply a cosmetic to the user using the face map”.
In an analogous field of endeavor, Liang teaches "generate as a face map from the sensor data relating to the face"; (Liang, Para. 31, teaches a digital 3D camera module having at least a plurality of image sensors which enables a three-dimensional face map of the tested subject to be generated, i.e., generate a face map from the sensor data relating to the face).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lai and Fliszar by including the generating of a face map from face sensor data taught by Liang. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since it improves the measuring of faces (Liang, Para. 6, teaches the motivation of combination to be to improve the measuring of human faces).
However, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar and Liang does not explicitly teach "and control the navigation system and the cosmetic distribution system to apply a cosmetic to the user using the face map".
In an analogous field of endeavor, Beardsley teaches "and control the navigation system and the cosmetic distribution system to apply a cosmetic to the user using the face map"; (Beardsley, Paras. 28 and 30, teaches generating a 3D map of the target surface prior to painting operations and storing it in the memory on the drone wherein the drone is autonomous and can sense the environment about its body with sensors as it flies or makes a painting run and its controller can process sensor output to determine 3D position and localization which is used to implement the paint trajectory as well as to provide live painting or depositing via the paint commands using the 3D map of the surfaces of the targeted structure, i.e., control the navigation and cosmetic distribution to apply a cosmetic to the surface using the map).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lai, Fliszar, and Liang wherein the surface is a user’s face and the map of the surface is a face map by including the controlling of the navigation and cosmetic distribution to apply the cosmetic to the surface using the map taught by Beardsley. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since it provides a less expensive method for painting 3D surfaces (Beardsley, Para. 4, teaches the motivation of combination to be to provide a less expensive method for painting large structures with 3D surfaces and paint with specific designs and textures).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley teaches "The cosmetic application drone of claim 1, the cosmetic distribution system including an applicator device, the applicator device configured to secure a cosmetic applicator"; (Lai, Para. 21, teaches the automated spray paint delivery system includes a manifold and spray nozzle connected with each paint canister and is electronically activated to supply an amount of color paint to a manifold or mixer device that includes a spray nozzle to spray a desired color, i.e., cosmetic distribution system includes an applicator device configured to secure a cosmetic applicator).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley teaches "The cosmetic application drone of claim 1 further comprising a rechargeable battery secured to the drone body and electrically connected to at least one of the at least one sensor, the navigation system, the cosmetic distribution system, and the controller"; (Lai, Para. 53, teaches a control device is configured to evaluate the battery life of the UAV and use this information to minimize the UAV work time and consider UAV's remaining battery life, i.e., rechargeable battery secured to drone body and electrically connected to the controller and systems).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley teaches "The cosmetic application drone of claim 1, wherein the at least one sensor includes a proximity sensor, the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the proximity sensor configured to collect sensor date relating to safety information, and the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the controller to control at least one of the navigation system and the cosmetic distribution system based on the safety information"; (Fliszar, Paras. 23, 151, and 164, teaches the environmental components of the drone includes proximity sensor components to detect nearby objects wherein the autonomous drone determines whether it is safe to continue to fly based on windspeed to determine if the drone can remain stable or in one location so that the flight is not unpredictable, i.e., sensor includes a proximity sensor which collects sensor data relating to safety information by determining if it is safe to fly or not and control the drone based on the safety information).
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Lai, Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley references presented in the rejection of Claim 1, applies to claim 7. Thus, the system recited in claim 7 is met by Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley.
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley teaches "The cosmetic application drone of claim 1, where the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the controller to control the navigation system and cosmetic distribution system to apply the cosmetic to more than one user"; (Beardsley, Para. 18, teaches the mobile robot using the nozzle to perform the painting of surfaces of large structures, i.e., apply the cosmetic being the paint to more than one surface or structure).
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Lai, Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley references presented in the rejection of Claim 1, applies to claim 11. Thus, the system recited in claim 11 is met by Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley.
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley teaches "The cosmetic application drone of claim 1 further comprising a camera system configured to capture images of a user’s face, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the controller to analyze the images and produce an analysis of the images"; (Fliszar, Para. 23, teaches the autonomous drone taking images of the face of the person wherein the sequence of images are analyzed, i.e., camera system of the drone captures images of a user's face and the images are analyzed to produce an analysis).
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Lai, Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley references presented in the rejection of Claim 1, applies to claim 12. Thus, the system recited in claim 12 is met by Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, Beardsley, and Cadet et al. (US 20240331294 A1).
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley does not explicitly teach "The cosmetic application drone of claim 1, the sensor data relating to the face including at least one of face topography, skin tone, and skin texture".
In an analogous field of endeavor, Cadet teaches "The cosmetic application drone of claim 1, the sensor data relating to the face including at least one of face topography, skin tone, and skin texture"; (Cadet, Para. 6, teaches sensor sources obtaining skin tone information including the color or texture of the surface of a user's skin and combining data to produce a 3D mesh of the user's face portion, i.e., sensor data relating to the face including face topography, skin tone, and skin texture).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lai, Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley by including the sensor data relating to the face including at least face topography, skin tone, and texture taught by Cadet. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since it improves efficiency (Cadet, Para. 43, teaches the motivation of combination to be to improve efficiency and enhance properties).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, Beardsley, and Reyzis (US 20200154871 A1).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley does not explicitly teach "The cosmetic application drone of claim 1, the cosmetic housing configured to hold at least one of a foundation, concealer, eyeshadow, eyeliner, mascara, blush, and lipstick".
In an analogous field of endeavor, Reyzis teaches "The cosmetic application drone of claim 1, the cosmetic housing configured to hold at least one of a foundation, concealer, eyeshadow, eyeliner, mascara, blush, and lipstick"; (Reyzis, Para. 8, teaches a container containing a fluid, a cap for covering the container, and an applicator joined to the cap for dispensing the liquid held in the container onto an object wherein liquid lipsticks, mascaras, liquid eyeliner, liquid eyeshadow, liquid foundation or concealer, and liquid blush may be used, i.e., container configured to hold foundation, concealer, eyeshadow, eyeliner, mascara, blush, and lipstick).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lai, Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley wherein the housing is attached to a drone by including a housing that holds at least one of foundation, concealer, eyeshadow, eyeliner, mascara, blush, and lipstick taught by Reyzis. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since it allows a user to alter combinations (Reyzis, Para. 7, teaches the motivation of combination to be to allow a user to alter cap and brush combination).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Claims 5 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, Beardsley, and Schwartz (US 20240365767 A1 with effective filing date of 05/02/2023).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley does not explicitly teach "The cosmetic application drone of claim 4, the cosmetic applicator being an airbrush nozzle".
In an analogous field of endeavor, Schwartz teaches "The cosmetic application drone of claim 4, the cosmetic applicator being an airbrush nozzle"; (Schwartz, Para. 45, teaches a drone configured to spray paint with an equipped paint applicator such as a spray nozzle wherein the paint applicator module is configured to accept airbrush spray guns, i.e., applicator being airbrush nozzle).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lai, Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley by including the cosmetic applicator being an airbrush nozzle taught by Schwartz. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since it autonomously applies a product (Schwartz, Para. 4, teaches the motivation of combination to be to autonomously apply insecticide to a singing insect nest).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, Beardsley, and Schwartz teaches "The cosmetic application drone of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the controller to cease controlling at least one of the navigation system and the cosmetic distribution system when one of the cosmetic housing and the cosmetic distribution system is engaged manually by a user"; (Schwartz, Para. 32, teaches the nozzles may be changed manually when not in use or may be changed by the drone during operation, i.e., cosmetic distribution system is engaged manually by a user being the nozzles wherein the controller ceases operation of the navigation system by the drone being not in use).
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Lai, Fliszar, Liang, Beardsley, and Schwartz references presented in the rejection of Claim 5, applies to claim 9. Thus, the system recited in claim 9 is met by Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, Beardsley, and Schwartz.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, Beardsley, and Desai et al. (US 20160318607 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley does not explicitly teach "The cosmetic application drone of claim 1 further comprising a lighting system connected to the drone body, the lighting system configured to provide light during makeup application".
In an analogous field of endeavor, Desai teaches "The cosmetic application drone of claim 1 further comprising a lighting system connected to the drone body, the lighting system configured to provide light during makeup application"; (Desai, Claim 8, teaches a drone assembly for dispensing a liquid wherein the bottom surface of the drone supports a light and the support aims the light, i.e., drone comprises a lighting system connected to the body which provides light during liquid dispensing).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lai, Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley by including the lighting system connected to the drone to provide light during application taught by Desai. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since it delivers materials to the surrounding environment (Desai, Para. 5, teaches the motivation of combination to be to deliver materials to the surrounding environment).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Claims 10 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, Beardsley, and Warren et al. (US 20200113166 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley does not explicitly teach "The cosmetic application drone of claim 1, the cosmetic distribution system including a plurality of applicator devices, each applicator device configured to secure a cosmetic applicator, and wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the controller to control the cosmetic distribution system to apply cosmetic to the user using more than one of the plurality of applicator devices simultaneously".
In an analogous field of endeavor, Warren teaches "The cosmetic application drone of claim 1, the cosmetic distribution system including a plurality of applicator devices, each applicator device configured to secure a cosmetic applicator, and wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the controller to control the cosmetic distribution system to apply cosmetic to the user using more than one of the plurality of applicator devices simultaneously"; (Warren, FIG. 2A-2B and Para. 36, teaches the UAV being fitted with a plurality of spray nozzles which may be singly operated or operated in concert simultaneously, i.e., distribution system comprises a plurality of applicator devices to secure the applicator being the nozzles and apply the treatment using more than one nozzle simultaneously).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lai, Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley by including the application of cosmetic to the surface using more than one of the plurality of applicators simultaneously taught by Warren. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since it more efficiently applies the treatment (Warren, Abstract, teaches the motivation of combination to be to more efficiently apply the treatment).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, Beardsley, and Warren teaches "The cosmetic application drone of claim 12, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the controller to control the navigation system and the cosmetic distribution system based on the analysis of the images"; (Warren, Abstract and Claim 1, teaches photographing at least one small area and analyzing the area by comparing it with a weed and pest database and flying the unmanned aerial vehicle across the area and spraying the treatment liquid onto the weeds and pests when environmental conditions are within preset limits, i.e., control navigation and distribution system based on analysis of images).
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Lai, Fliszar, Liang, Beardsley, and Warren references presented in the rejection of Claim 10, applies to claim 13. Thus, the system recited in claim 13 is met by Lai in view of Fliszar, Liang, Beardsley, and Warren.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Fliszar and Cadet.
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar and Cadet teaches "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 14, further comprising at least one sensor connected to the drone body, wherein the non-transitory memory of the drone controller stores instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors of the drone controller, control the at least one sensor to collect sensor data relating to at least one of face topography, (Fliszar, Para. 135, teaches a navigation system of the drone having two navigation types wherein during the first type of navigation the orientation of the drone is based on a position relative to the initial face wherein the drone captures images and sensor data, i.e., control navigation system or sensor to fly the drone to collect sensor data relating to a face);
" (Cadet, Para. 6, teaches sensor sources obtaining skin tone information including the color or texture of the surface of a user's skin and combining data to produce a 3D mesh of the user's face portion, i.e., sensor data relating to the face including face topography, skin tone, and skin texture).
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Lai, Fliszar, Liang, Beardsley, and Cadet references presented in the rejection of Claims 1 and 2, applies to claim 15. Thus, the system recited in claim 15 is met by Lai in view of Fliszar and Cadet.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Fliszar, Cadet, and Beardsley.
Regarding Claim 16, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Cadet, and Beardsley teaches "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 15, wherein one of the non-transitory memory of the input controller and the non-transitory memory of the drone controller stores instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors of the input controller or the one or more processors of the drone controller, cause the input controller or the drone controller to generate an application plan based on the sensor data"; (Beardsley, Para. 42, teaches providing a 3D model of a target surface by scanning the target surface wherein the 3D model is used to provide the underlying scene representation and coordinate frame to which task planning commands like drone trajectory and spray-nozzle control are attached in which the 3D model and task planning commands are used to guide the live system, i.e., generate application plan being the task planning based on sensor data being the surface scan).
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Lai, Fliszar, Liang, Beardsley, and Cadet references presented in the rejection of Claims 1 and 2, applies to claim 16. Thus, the system recited in claim 16 is met by Lai in view of Fliszar, Cadet, and Beardsley.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Fliszar, Cadet, Beardsley, and Chekh et al. (US 20230132201 A1).
Regarding Claim 17, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Cadet, and Beardsley does not explicitly teach "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 16, wherein the non-transitory memory of the input controller stores instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors of the input controller, cause the user interface to display the application plan and cause the input controller to receive input from a user to change or approve the application plan".
In an analogous field of endeavor, Chekh teaches "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 16, wherein the non-transitory memory of the input controller stores instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors of the input controller, cause the user interface to display the application plan and cause the input controller to receive input from a user to change or approve the application plan"; (Chekh, Paras. 61 and 75, teaches a treatment visualization component providing a user interface with tools allowing the user to provide feedback on the treatment plan by changing positions and shapes and the process can be repeated until the user approves the plan, i.e., user interface displays plan and receive input from a user to change or approve the plan).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lai, Fliszar, Cadet, and Beardsley wherein the application plan is applied by a drone with a nozzle by including the user interface displaying the application plan and allowing the user to change or approve the plan taught by Chekh. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since it improves positioning, convenience, and satisfaction (Chekh, Para. 47, teaches the motivation of combination to be to improve positioning, convenience, and patient outcomes).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Fliszar, Cadet, Beardsley, and Silva (US 20140305466 A1).
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Cadet, and Beardsley does not explicitly teach "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 16, wherein the application plan is also based on at least one of previously approved application plans, expected lighting conditions, event information, and makeup style".
In an analogous field of endeavor, Silva teaches "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 16, wherein the application plan is also based on at least one of previously approved application plans, expected lighting conditions, event information, and makeup style"; (Silva, Para. 2, teaches a makeup artist creating a customized makeup plan for the client depending on skin color, tone, facial structure, body type, lighting, setting, the desired character, and others, i.e., application plan based on expected lighting conditions, event information being the setting, and makeup style being the desired character).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lai, Fliszar, Cadet, and Beardsley wherein the application plan is applied by a drone with a nozzle by including the application plan being based on lighting, events, and style taught by Silva. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since it prevents the exaggeration of any flaws.
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Regarding Claim 19, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Cadet, Beardsley, and Silva teaches "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 18, wherein the expected lighting conditions are either collected as sensor data by the at least one sensor or entered into the user interface"; (Fliszar, Para. 107, teaches the functional groups including sensors such as a light detector, i.e., lighting conditions collected as sensor data).
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Lai, Fliszar, Liang, Beardsley, Cadet, and Silva references presented in the rejection of Claims 1, 2, and 18 applies to claim 19. Thus, the system recited in claim 19 is met by Lai in view of Fliszar, Cadet, Beardsley, and Silva.
Claim 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Fliszar, Cadet, Beardsley, Silva, Lin et al. (US 20210258534 A1), and Kolleri (US 20180068173 A1).
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Cadet, Beardsley, and Silva does not explicitly teach "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 18, wherein the non-transitory memory of the input controller stores instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors of the input controller, cause the user interface to display a plurality of event types and a plurality of makeup styles, and wherein the event information is one of the plurality of event types displayed using the user interface and the makeup style is one of the plurality of makeup styles displayed using the user interface".
In an analogous field of endeavor, Lin teaches "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 18, wherein the non-transitory memory of the input controller stores instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors of the input controller, cause the user interface to display (Lin, Para. 4, teaches live video comprising a plurality of images frames of the users in which the computing device obtains selection of at least one makeup effect and generates a user interface displaying the live video in a virtual mirror with at least one makeup effect applied to a facial region of the user, i.e., display a potential plurality of makeup styles being the at least one makeup effect and displaying the makeup style using the user interface).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lai, Fliszar, Cadet, Beardsley, and Silva by including the display of a plurality of makeup styles and displaying the one of the plurality of styles using the user interface taught by Lin. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since t improves the users’ ability to experience virtual makeup (Lin, Para. 3, teaches the motivation of combination to be to improve users' ability to fully experience virtual application of makeup effects).
However, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Cadet, Beardsley, Silva, and Lin does not explicitly teach "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 18, wherein the non-transitory memory of the input controller stores instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors of the input controller, cause the user interface to display a plurality of event types
In an analogous field of endeavor, Kolleri teaches "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 18, wherein the non-transitory memory of the input controller stores instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors of the input controller, cause the user interface to display a plurality of event types (Kolleri, Para. 175, teaches selecting an event type from one or more of the supported event types designated on the user interface, i.e., user interface displays a plurality of event types and the event information is one of the plurality of event types displayed using the user interface being the user selecting the event type).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lai, Fliszar, Cadet, Beardsley, Silva, and Lin by including the display of a plurality of event types and displaying one of the event types using the user interface taught by Kolleri. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since it improves application performance (Koller, Para. 43, teaches the motivation of combination to be to improve application performance by providing superior event correlation).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Fliszar, Cadet, and Zou (US 20230154083 A1).
Regarding Claim 21, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar and Cadet does not explicitly teach "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 15, wherein the non-transitory memory of the input controller stores instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors of the input controller, cause the user interface to provide at least one of tutorials, tips, and cosmetic recommendations based on the sensor data".
In an analogous field of endeavor, Zou teaches "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 15, wherein the non-transitory memory of the input controller stores instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors of the input controller, cause the user interface to provide at least one of tutorials, tips, and cosmetic recommendations based on the sensor data";(Zou, FIGs. 3A-3D and Paras. 154, 158, and 161, teaches obtaining a face image of the user collected by the camera and displays a user interface so that the user may select an intelligently recommended makeup effect image, i.e., user interface provides at least a cosmetic recommendation based on sensor data being the face image).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lai, Fliszar, and Cadet by including the user interface providing at least one of cosmetic recommendations based on sensor data taught by Zou. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since it performs modification improvement (Zou, Para. 4, teaches the motivation of combination to be to perform modification and improvement based on a makeup effect).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Fliszar, Cadet, Beardsley, and Shalah-Abboud et al. (US 20250214250 A1).
Regarding Claim 22, the combination of references of Lai in view of Fliszar, Cadet, and Beardsley does not explicitly teach "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 16, wherein the application plan includes at least one of a type of cosmetic, a shade of cosmetic, an application location, an applicator type, and a quantity of cosmetic";(Shalah-abboud, Paras. 6, 103, and 108, teaches instructions of the makeup plan comprise instructions to apply the makeup materials from predefined locations in space that are distant form a surface of the face by a defined distance wherein the material application instructions indicate an application location, a material to be applied, and application properties to be implemented by the automatic makeup applicator, i.e., application plan includes at least one of a type of cosmetic, an application location, and an applicator type).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lai, Fliszar, Cadet, and Beardsley by including the application plan including at least one of a type of cosmetic, an application location, and an applicator type taught by Shalah-abboud. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since it helps consumers save money (Shalah-abboud, Para. 4, teaches the motivation of combination to be to help consumers save time, money, and improve hygiene when applying makeup).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Van der Steur (US 20220169387 A1).
Regarding Claim 23, Lai does not explicitly teach "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 14 comprising a plurality of cosmetic application drones, the plurality of drones configured to apply cosmetic to multiple users simultaneously or to apply cosmetic on a single user simultaneously".
In an analogous field of endeavor, Van der Steur teaches "The cosmetic application drone system of claim 14 comprising a plurality of cosmetic application drones, the plurality of drones configured to apply cosmetic to multiple users simultaneously or to apply cosmetic on a single user simultaneously";(Van der Steur, FIG. 3 and Paras. 21 and 48, teaches a plurality of drone-based surface treatment material delivery systems to paint an object, i.e., a plurality of drones configured to apply a cosmetic to a single object simultaneously).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Lai by including the use of a plurality of drones to apply a cosmetic to a single object simultaneously taught by Van der Steur. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since it provides an automated paint delivery system (Van der Steur, Para. 4, teaches the motivation of combination to be to provide an automated drone-based paint delivery system).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fliszar in view of Liang, Beardsley, and Stasiowski et al. (US 20240044651 A1).
Regarding Claim 24, the combination of references of Fliszar in view of Liang and Beardsley teaches "A drone-based method of applying cosmetics by controlling a cosmetic application drone using a drone controller, the method comprising: controlling, using the drone controller, a navigation system of the cosmetic distribution drone to fly the cosmetic application drone to collect sensor data relating to a face"; (Fliszar, Paras. 125 and 135, teaches the movement of the autonomous drone may be controlled by a remote controller and wherein a navigation system of the drone having two navigation types wherein during the first type of navigation the orientation of the drone is based on a position relative to the initial face wherein the drone captures images and sensor data, i.e., control navigation of the drone with a controller to fly the drone to collect sensor data relating to a face);
"controlling, using the drone controller, at least one sensor of the cosmetic distribution drone to collect the sensor data relating to the face"; (Fliszar, Paras. 23, 135, and 146, teaches the autonomous drone capturing images and sensor data during navigation wherein drone position is relative to the initial face, i.e., controlling the sensor of the drone to collect sensor data relating to the face);
"storing, using the drone controller, the sensor data relating to the face in a memory in communication with the drone controller"; (Fliszar, Para. 23, teaches the drone navigates to one or more waypoints while capturing images and storing sensor data wherein the images are of the face of the person, i.e., storing the sensor data relating to the face in memory in communication with the drone);
"generating, using the drone controller, a face map from the sensor data relating to the face"; (Liang, Para. 31, teaches a digital 3D camera module having at least a plurality of image sensors which enables a three-dimensional face map of the tested subject to be generated, i.e., generate a face map from the sensor data relating to the face);
"
"and controlling, using the drone controller, the navigation system of the cosmetic application drone and a cosmetic distribution system of the cosmetic application drone to apply a cosmetic based on the face map and the selections";(Beardsley, Paras. 10, 28, 30, and 36 teaches a spray pattern selector that adjusts the nozzle to define a shape of a spray pattern output by the nozzle in which a motor/actuator is selectively opened and closed in response to control signals from the controller in the body to spray the paint and wherein a 3D map is generated of the target surface prior to painting operations and storing it in the memory on the drone wherein the drone is autonomous and can sense the environment about its body with sensors as it flies or makes a painting run and its controller can process sensor output to determine 3D position and localization which is used to implement the paint trajectory as well as to provide live painting or depositing via the paint commands using the 3D map of the surfaces of the targeted structure, i.e., control the navigation and cosmetic distribution to apply a cosmetic to the surface using the map and selections being the selective control of the nozzles).
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley references presented in the rejection of Claim 1, applies to claim 24.
However, the combination of references of Fliszar in view of Liang and Beardsley does not explicitly teach "receiving, using the drone controller, selections entered in a user interface of a user input system and communicated by an input controller of the user input system to the drone controller".
In an analogous field of endeavor, Stasiowski teaches "receiving, using the drone controller, selections entered in a user interface of a user input system and communicated by an input controller of the user input system to the drone controller"; (Stasiowski, Para. 16, teaches displaying at least one suggested exploration route on a display of the user device, receive the selected exploration route from user input, and transmit the selected exploration route to the UAV, i.e., receive selections entered in a user interface of a user input system and communicated by an input controller/processor of the user input system to the drone).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Fliszar, Liang, and Beardsley by including the receiving of selections entered in a user interface which are communicated to the drone controller taught by Stasiowski. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the references since it improves predicted scouting sensor detection and collision safety (Stasiowski, Para. 16, teaches the motivation of combination to be to improve predicted scouting sensor detection and collision safety buffer).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW STEVEN BUDISALICH whose telephone number is (703)756-5568. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am-5:00pm 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, Amandeep Saini can be reached on (571) 272-3382. 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.
/ANDREW S BUDISALICH/Examiner, Art Unit 2662
/AMANDEEP SAINI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2662