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 .
This communication is in response to the Election to Restriction Requirement received on 10/13/2025. Claims 1-19 remain pending in this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1:
Claims 1-19 are drawn to a system which is within the four statutory categories (i.e. machine).
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Claim 1 recites “(1) receive pre-treatment data about a treatment area associated with the person's skin; (2) based on the pre-treatment data about the treatment area, identify one or more target medicament injection sites relative to the treatment area; and (3) output targeting data for the one or more target medicament injection sites relative to the treatment area”, which corresponds to an abstract idea of “certain methods of organizing human activity”. This is a method of managing interactions between people, such as user following rules and instructions. The mere nominal recitation of a generic computing device does not take the claim out of the methods of organizing human interactions grouping.
Dependent claims also recite limitations that are directed to an abstract idea of “certain methods of organizing human activity”, such as claim 2 recites “identifying the one or more target medicament injection sites relative to the treatment area comprises identifying at least one muscle animation associated with the person's skin”, claim 6 recites “based on a spatial relationship between the at least one rhytid and an animation of at least one muscle associated with the at least one rhytid, identify the one or more target medicament injection sites relative to the treatment area”, claim 12 recites “identify one or more target medicament dosages for the one or more target medicament injection sites”, claim 14 recites “based on the post-treatment data, output a recommendation for a retreatment”, claim 18 recites “based on the data about earlier treatments and based on the follow-up data, output a recommendation for a follow-up treatment”. Thes limitations correspond to an abstract idea of certain methods of organizing human activity, such as user following rules and instructions using generic computing components.
The current specification recites, for instance, “As illustrated in FIG. 14, 15 and 17, in some embodiments, the treatment management subsystem 180 may include at least one personal electronic device 214. The personal electronic device 214 may include at least one smartphone or tablet computer, for example and without limitation. In some embodiments, the treatment management subsystem 180 may include at least one smart stand 200, which will be hereinafter described. The smart stand 200 may be configured to be used alone or in conjunction with the personal electronic device 214. As illustrated in FIG. 16, in some embodiments, the treatment management subsystem 180 may include at least one smart mirror 224. In various other embodiments, the treatment management subsystem 180 may include at least one desktop computer, laptop computer, and/or any other device, subsystem, web-based system or platform, or combination of devices or subsystems which, with supporting software, is configured and programmed to carry out the functions of the treatment management subsystem 180 described herein. In embodiments in which the treatment management subsystem 180 includes the personal electronic device 214, the software program for the various functions of the treatment management subsystem 180 may include an app which can be downloaded onto the device and installed. The app or other software may be configured to maintain statistics on injection procedures, treatment sessions, and other actions provided by the application after analyzing the obtained data. In some embodiments, the app may be configured to provide the capability for online purchase and shipping of medicament cartridges 132.” in [0147], where the personal electronic device corresponds to a generic computing device.
After considering all claim elements, both individually and in combination and in ordered combination, it has been determined that the claims do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Claims 2-19 are ultimately dependent from claim 1 and include all the limitations of claim 1. Therefore, claims 2-19 recite the same abstract idea. Claims 2-19 describe a further limitation regarding the basis for identifying medicament injection sites. These are all just further describing the abstract idea recited in claim 1, without adding significantly more.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, claims 1-19 recite the additional elements of “a medicament injection component comprising an injector and a replaceable medicament cartridge, wherein actuation of the injector injects a set medicament dosage into or beneath a person's skin; a computing device comprising: (i) a processor device; and (ii) a non-transitory computer-readable medium having instructions stored thereon that are executable by the processor device”, using processor to perform: “receiving pre-treatment data…, identifying one or more target medicament injection sites relative to the treatment area; and output targeting data…”, “captured image data that is a static image or a video image”, “computing device component further comprises a camera that captures the at least one image”, “the system further comprises a display”, “the display outputs the targeting data”, “the display outputs the targeting data overlaid on an image comprising the treatment area”, “the computing device component comprises the display”, which are hardware and software elements, these limitations are not enough to qualify as “practical application” being recited in the claims along with the abstract idea since these elements are merely invoked as a tool to apply instructions of the abstract idea in a particular technological environment, and mere instructions to apply/implement/automate an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular field or technological environment do not provide practical application for an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f) & (h)).
Claims also recite other additional limitations beyond abstract idea, including functions such as receiving/retaining (storing) data from/to a database, displaying/outputting data are insignificant extra-solution activities (see MPEP 2106.05 (g)), which do not provide a practical application for the abstract idea.
Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B:
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a processor to perform the identifying and outputting steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
The claims are not patent eligible.
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)(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.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Rios et al. (hereinafter Rios) (US 12,217,626 B2).
Claim 1 recites a custom medicament injection system comprising:
(a) a medicament injection component comprising an injector and a replaceable medicament cartridge, wherein actuation of the injector injects a set medicament dosage into or beneath a person's skin (Rios discloses “…an injection apparatus and training system…cosmetic injection” in col. 2, lines 52-55);
(b) a computing device comprising:
(i) a processor device (Rios; col. 15, lines 38-58); and
(ii) a non-transitory computer-readable medium having instructions stored thereon that are executable by the processor device (Rios; col. 36, lines 20-36) to cause the computing device to:
(1) receive pre-treatment data about a treatment area associated with the person's skin (Rios discloses “…the injection apparatus can be configured to mimic certain muscle contraction conditions common with a particular type of injection. For example, this can include contractions of facial features, such as furrowing of an eyebrow, squinting of the eyes, or pursing of the lips. The removable skin can also include blemishes, such as scars or wrinkles.” in col. 5, lines 39-45);
(2) based on the pre-treatment data about the treatment area, identify one or more target medicament injection sites relative to the treatment area (Rios discloses “…the injection apparatus can be configured to mimic certain muscle contraction conditions common with a particular type of injection. For example, this can include contractions of facial features, such as furrowing of an eyebrow, squinting of the eyes, or pursing of the lips. The removable skin can also include blemishes, such as scars or wrinkles.” in col. 5, lines 39-45 and “…The base layer 400 may be mapped with a grid of target zones…” in col. 18, lines 43-60); and
(3) output targeting data for the one or more target medicament injection sites relative to the treatment area (Rios discloses “…The program can communicate with the processor 604 to control the movement of the camera 120 to record or measure the specific injection sites for injection testing…” in col. 17, line 60 to col. 18, line 23).
Claim 2 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 1 wherein identifying the one or more target medicament injection sites relative to the treatment area comprises identifying at least one muscle animation associated with the person's skin (Rios; col. 5, lines 39-45).
Claim 3 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 1 wherein the pre-treatment data is at least one captured image of the treatment area including at least one indicia associated with at least one muscle animation (Rios; col. 5, lines 39-45).
Claim 4 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 3 wherein the at least one captured image is a static image or a video image (Rios; col. 21, lines 47-60).
Claim 5 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 3 wherein the at least one indicia is at least one rhytid in the treatment area (Rios; col. 18, lines 16-23).
Claim 6 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 5 wherein the non-transitory computer-readable medium has instructions stored thereon that are executable by the processor device to cause the computing device to, based on a spatial relationship between the at least one rhytid and an animation of at least one muscle associated with the at least one rhytid, identify the one or more target medicament injection sites relative to the treatment area (Rios; col. 17, line 60 to col. 18, line 23).
Claim 7 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 3 wherein the computing device component further comprises a camera that captures the at least one image (Rios; col. 17, line 60 to col. 18, line 23).
Claim 8 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 1 wherein the system further comprises a display (Rios; col. 18, lines 43-59).
Claim 9 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 7 wherein the display outputs the targeting data (Rios; col. 18, lines 43-59).
Claim 10 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 8 wherein the display outputs the targeting data overlaid on an image comprising the treatment area (Rios; col. 9, lines 5-21).
Claim 11 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 9 wherein the computing device component comprises the display (Rios; col. 18, lines 43-59).
Claim 12 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 1 wherein the non-transitory computer-readable medium has instructions stored thereon that are executable by the processor device to cause the computing device to identify one or more target medicament dosages for the one or more target medicament injection sites (Rios; col. 18, lines 43-59).
Claim 13 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 1 wherein the non-transitory computer-readable medium has instructions stored thereon that are executable by the processor device to cause the computing device to receive post-treatment data about the treatment area associated with the person's skin (Rios; col. 18, lines 24-29).
Claim 14 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 13 wherein the non-transitory computer-readable medium has instructions stored thereon that are executable by the processor device to cause the computing device to, based on the post-treatment data, output a recommendation for a retreatment (Rios; col. 18, lines 24-29).
Claim 15 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 14 wherein the retreatment includes at least one modified target medicament injection site or at least one modified injection dosage (Rios; col. 23, lines 44-64).
Claim 16 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 13 wherein the non-transitory computer-readable medium has instructions stored thereon that are executable by the processor device to cause the computing device to receive follow-up data about the treatment area associated with the person's skin (Rios; col. 23, lines 44-64).
Claim 17 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 16 wherein the non-transitory computer-readable medium has instructions stored thereon that are executable by the processor device to cause the computing device to retain data about earlier treatments (Rios; col. 21, lines 47-60).
Claim 18 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 17 wherein the non-transitory computer-readable medium has instructions stored thereon that are executable by the processor device to cause the computing device to, based on the data about earlier treatments and based on the follow-up data, output a recommendation for a follow-up treatment (Rios; col. 23, lines 44-64).
Claim 19 recites the custom medicament injection system of claim 18 wherein the follow-up treatment includes at least one modified target medicament injection site or at least one modified injection dosage (Rios; col. 23, lines 44-64).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DILEK B COBANOGLU whose telephone number is (571)272-8295. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00 ET.
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, Obeid Mamon can be reached at (571) 270-1813. 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.
/DILEK B COBANOGLU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3687