DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 24 Apr 2026. As directed by the amendment: claims 1-2, 5-6, and 8-15 have been amended, no claims have been canceled, and claims 16-20 have been added. Thus, claims 1-20 are presently pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Drawings
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 24 Apr 2026, with respect to objections to the drawings have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the drawing amendments. The objections to the drawings have been withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 24 Apr 2026, with respect to objections to the claims have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the claim amendments. The objections to the claims have been withdrawn.
35 U.S.C. § 112(1) or U.S.C. § 112, Sixth Paragraph
Applicant's arguments filed 24 Apr 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “the term ‘mapping unit’ takes its name from the function it performs” and thus “interpretation of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(±) or 35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph, is not applicable” (Remarks, pages 9-10). Examiner respectfully disagrees. In claim 1, the term “mapping unit” comprises a generic placeholder (unit) and functional language (mapping, configured to obtain a map and to obtain a reference position). Claim 1 does not recite any further structure of the mapping unit. Therefore, the term “mapping unit” meets the three-prong test to be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
35 U.S.C § 101 Rejection
Applicant's arguments filed 24 Apr 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Step 2A, Prong 1
Applicant argues that “the human mind cannot detect the overlap of the compartments of the map and the treatment windows on the skin area during the skin treatment process” (Remarks, page 12). Examiner respectfully disagrees. The overlap of compartments of the map and the treatment window encompasses nothing more than a human actor evaluating data previously collected from the mapping unit and treatment window, and drawing a conclusion of whether the treatment window overlaps the map compartment.
Applicant further argues that “the claims are tied to a particular machine that is integral to the claimed method” because “the claims are implemented by a skin treatment apparatus that includes a treatment window…and a mapping unit”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. The processor’s operations are based on data collected from the mapping unit and treatment window. Therefore, the steps performed by the processor can be performed in the human mind.
Step 2A, Prong 2
Applicant argues that “the claims are directed to performing the skin treatment, and are not directed to any alleged abstract ideas” (Remarks, page 13). Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claims are directed to a device that is capable of performing a skin treatment. The claims do not recite that the device performs the skin treatment, nor that the skin treatment is related to the abstract ideas carried out by the processor.
Applicant further argues that additional elements recited in the claims “reflects…an improvement to the technical field of skin treatment devices” (Remarks, page 13). Examiner respectfully disagrees. Mapping a skin area to be treated, obtaining a reference position, and registering contact are pre-solution activities of data gathering. The limitation “guiding the user through the compartments in the map based on a measured displacement of the treatment applier” encompasses nothing more than a human actor drawing out the map on a piece of paper and communicating instructions to the user.
Step 2B
Applicant argues that the treatment window, mapping unit, and user interface recited in claim 1 “amount to ‘significantly more’ than the assertedly abstract idea itself” (Remarks, page 16). Examiner respectfully disagrees. The treatment window and mapping unit amount to no more than mere pre-solution activity of data gathering. Furthermore, these three elements are recited at a high level of generality, and are well-understood, routine, and conventional in the field of guided light treatment technology. The abstract ideas performed by the processor do not affect any recited skin treatment.
Therefore, the rejections of claims 1-20 are maintained.
35 U.S.C. § 102 Rejection
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 24 Apr 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1-15 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the claim amendments. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Adanny (US 20150032092 A1), as explained in further detail below.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 1: “a mapping unit” (line 5) – specification page 5, lines 13-15 (displacement sensor), 22-28 (camera)
Claim 15: “a mapping unit” (line 5) – specification page 5, lines 13-15 (displacement sensor), 22-28 (camera)
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-11, 15, and 19-20 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.
Regarding claim 1, the use of “for” in the limitation “for performing a skin treatment process on a user” (line1 1-2) is unclear. It is unclear as to whether this limitation claims the function that follows, or whether the element only must be capable of performing the function. For the purposes of examination, “for” in the above limitation will be interpreted as “configured for” and the limitation above will be interpreted as being required to perform the function described.
Claims 2-11 are also rejected because they are dependent on claim 1.
Similarly, the use of “for” in the limitation “for generating the treatment light” in claim 6, lines 1-2 is unclear for similar reasons, and therefore also rejected.
Similarly, the use of “for” in the limitation “for performing a skin treatment process” in claim 15, line 3 is unclear for similar reasons, and therefore also rejected.
Claims 19-20 are also rejected because they are dependent on claim 15.
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception without significantly more.
Determination as to whether a claim satisfies the criteria for subject matter eligibility is a stepwise process (MPEP 2016).
Step 1: Does the claim fall within a statutory category of invention?
Claims 1-11 recite a machine (apparatus), and claims 12-14 and 16-18 recite a process (method), and claims 15 and 19-20 recite a non-transitory computer readable medium (manufacture), which are within the four statutory categories. Therefore, claims 1-20 are directed to a statutory category of invention.
Step 2A, Prong 1: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
Claims 1-20 are directed to an abstract idea.
Claim 12 is directed to obtaining a map of a skin area to be treated; obtaining a reference position on a boundary of the map; dividing an area of the map into a plurality of compartments which each represent a respective one of a plurality of positions of the working area of the treatment applier on the skin area to be treated required for uniform exposure of the skin to the skin treatment;
registering contact of the treatment applier in a position within the skin area to be treated corresponding with the reference position; and guiding the user through the compartments in the map based on a measured displacement of the treatment applier relative to the reference position. Claim 1 is directed to an apparatus that carries out the same steps recited in claim 12, and claim 15 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium that causes a processor to perform the method of claim 12.
The limitations of dividing an area of the map into compartments, registering contact of the treatment applier, and guiding the user, as drafted, under their broadest reasonable interpretations, are merely mental processes, because these steps are akin to having a doctor or other human actor performing these operations with pen and paper. For example, “dividing an area of the map into a plurality of compartments which each represent a respective one of a plurality of positions of the working area of the treatment applier on the skin area to be treated required for uniform exposure of the skin area to the skin treatment encompasses nothing more than a human actor mentally evaluating the map and deciding where each compartment should be.
The limitations of “obtaining a map of a skin area to be treated” and “obtaining a reference position on a boundary of the map” encompasses nothing more than a human actor collecting these pieces of information by hand.
The limitation “guiding the user through the compartments in the map based on a measured displacement of the treatment applier” encompasses nothing more than a human actor drawing out the map on a piece of paper and communicating instructions to the user.
Therefore, claims 1 and 12 recite an abstract idea.
Claims 2-11 depend on claim 1, claims 13-14 and 16-18 depend on claim 12, and claims 19-20 depend on claim 15. These dependent claims only recite additional features of the analysis described in claims 1 and 12, which may also be performed by a human actor mentally and using a pen and paper. For example, claims 8 and 13 recite “calculating treatment parameters based on at least one of the map and the treatment applier”, which encompasses nothing more than a human actor performing calculations with pen and paper using the collected data.
Therefore, claims 1-20 recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong 2: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Claim 1 recites the additional limitation of “a user interface unit”. Claims 1 and 15 recite the additional limitation of “a processor”. Claim 4 recites the additional limitation of “a memory”. These additional elements are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. most generic computers would be known to have these components). Page 8, line 18-page 9, line 16 of the specification describe the processor, memory, and user interface unit at a high level of generality. These generic processor and memory limitations are no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Therefore claims 1, 4, and 15 do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 1 recites the additional limitation “a mapping unit”, and claim 2 recites the additional limitations “a displacement sensor and/or an imaging unit”, which amounts to no more than mere pre-solution activity of data gathering. Therefore the claimed generic mapping imaging elements do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Thus, 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. Therefore, the claims are directed to an abstract idea. As described above, dependent claims 2-11 and 13-14, and 16-20 only recite other limitations of the methods described in claims 1, 12, and 15, which may be done mentally by a human actor and/or with a pen and paper.
Step 2B: Does the claim include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
As explained above with respect to the integration of the judicial exception into a practical application (Step 2A, Prong 2), the additional elements of using computer components to perform the process steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using generic computer elements. Claim 1 recites the additional limitation of “a user interface unit”. Claims 1 and 15 recite the additional limitation of “a processor”. Claim 4 recites the additional limitation of “a memory”. These additional elements are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. most generic computers would be known to have these components). Page 8, line 18-page 9, line 16 of the specification describes the processor, memory, and user interface, at a high level of generality, and only provides conventional, well-known computing functions that do not add meaningful limits to practicing the abstract idea.
Claim 1 recites the additional limitation “a mapping unit”, and claim 2 recites the additional limitations “a displacement sensor and/or an imaging unit”. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application (Step 2A, Prong 2), the additional element of a mapping unit to collect data amounts to no more than mere pre-solution activity of data gathering. This pre-solution activity of data gathering using a displacement sensor and/or a camera is well-understood, routine, and conventional in the field of guided light treatment technology. For example, see Chan et al. (US 20070093797 A1), which describes known methods of guided light treatment. Therefore, the claimed generic mapping unit and computer processing elements are all well-understood, routine, and conventional in the field of guided light treatment technology.
Therefore, claims 1-20 are not patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-9, 11-16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Adanny (US 20150032092 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Adanny discloses a skin treatment apparatus for performing a skin treatment process on a user (Fig. 1A, paragraph [0040], system 100 for cosmetic skin procedures), the apparatus comprising:
a treatment window (Fig. 1A, paragraph [0041], aperture 112) having a working area via which treatment light is applied to a user's skin when the treatment window contacts the skin (paragraph [0041], "Light energy emitter 104 can apply light energy to a segment 150 of skin 116 through an aperture 112 in a surface 114 of applicator 102 facing and optionally being in contact with skin 116 during a cosmetic procedure session"); and
a mapping unit configured to obtain a map of a skin area to be treated (Fig. 1A, paragraph [0042], "Camera 118 could provide an image of the segment of skin"; paragraph [0067], "Grid 502 could be, for example, divided into squares the size of which corresponds to the size of fractions 202 (FIGS. 2 and 3) of skin 116 (FIGS. 1A and 1B)"), and to obtain a reference position on a boundary of the map (paragraph [0048], "device 190 could store raw captured image and/or the generated analysis or communicate to applicator 102 the location of the captured image on the body of a user"; paragraph [0059], "The segment of skin 150 captured by camera 118 is defined by borders 120 of aperture 112 and could be the same size, smaller or larger than segment 150 of skin 116"); and
a processor (paragraph [0046], processor 140) configured to:
divide an area of the map into a plurality of compartments, wherein each compartment of the plurality of compartments represents a respective one of a plurality of positions of the working area of the treatment window on the skin area to be treated required for uniform exposure of the skin area to the treatment light (paragraph [0043], "system 100 could automatically scan a large segment of skin (e.g., a face of a user) and communicate images of the scan captured by camera 118 to computer 108, which could display on display 122 images of the scanned segment of skin to be treated or not treated, identify to system 100 specific blemishes, scars or wrinkles or hair to be treated and define a sequence and scanning pattern of application of light energy doses to the skin fractions within the scanned area of skin"; Figs. 5A-5B, paragraph [0067], "Grid 502 could be, for example, divided into squares the size of which corresponds to the size of fractions 202 (FIGS. 2 and 3) of skin 116 (FIGS. 1A and 1B)"; paragraph [0097], "Applying a uniform level of electromagnetic energy such as laser energy, RF energy or a combination of both to an segment of skin 150 including such blemishes may result in under heating some areas within segment of skin 150 whereas overheating others. This is due to different energy (primarily light) absorption qualities of the various blemishes. A solution to this type of disadvantage and as described above could be achieved by limiting the application of light energy to the hair or blemish and avoiding application of energy to other hairless or blemishless areas within segment of skin 150 as well as controlling the level of energy (light and/or RF) applied to each specific fraction 202 of segment 150 of skin 116");
register contact of the treatment window in a position within the skin area to be treated corresponding with the reference position in the map (paragraph [0052], contact sensors 124; paragraph [0067], "determination of the dose of light energy to be applied at each grid square could be based on...location of segment 150 on the body,...skin 116 segment 150 temperature and/or impedance obtained from sensors 124,...blemish shape and location within the skin segment some of which could be obtained from image 450"); and
guide the user, via a user interface, through the plurality of compartments in the map based on a measured displacement of the treatment window relative to the reference position (paragraph [0044], "user interface 125 could include a touch-screen, which could be display 122 or an additional display operative to display an image captured by camera 118 and allow a user, employing a finger or a stylus to outline an area or a segment of skin 150 within the displayed image to be treated or not treated, define a sequence of light energy or RF energy application, identify to system 100 specific hairs 130, blemishes, scars or wrinkles to be treated and define a sequence and scanning pattern of application of light energy doses to two or more skin fractions within the segment of skin"; paragraph [0061], "a visible light outline such as a visible light laser beam could be used to enable a user to visualize area or segment 150 to be treated").
Regarding claim 2, Adanny discloses the apparatus of claim 1, as explained above. Adanny further discloses that the mapping unit comprises a camera (paragraph [0041], camera 118).
Regarding claim 3, Adanny discloses the apparatus of claim 2, as explained above. Adanny further discloses that the displacement sensor is an optical sensor (paragraph [0048], "device 190 could store raw captured image and/or the generated analysis or communicate to applicator 102 the location of the captured image on the body of a user as well as other information extracted from the image"; paragraph [0041], camera 118).
Regarding claim 4, Adanny discloses the apparatus of claim 1, as explained above. Adanny further discloses a memory for storing information relating to the map, the information comprising at least one of an area of the map, a number of compartments and the reference position (paragraph [0042], "System 100 could also include a display 122 operative to display in real time images captured by camera 118 or images stored and retrieved for comparison purposes from an image bank in computer 108 memory"; paragraph [0046], "Device 190 processor 140 could either store the generated analysis and/or communicate the generated analysis to applicator 102 computer 108"; paragraph [0070], "The protocol could be stored in computer 108 memory for use at a later time").
Regarding claim 5, Adanny discloses the apparatus of claim 1, as explained above. Adanny further discloses that the mapping unit is configured to obtain the map via a camera (paragraph [0041], camera 118).
Regarding claim 6, Adanny discloses the apparatus of claim 1, as explained above. Adanny further discloses a light source configured for generating the treatment light applied via the treatment window to the skin area (Fig. 1A, paragraph [0041], "Light energy emitter 104 can apply light energy to a segment 150 of skin 116 through an aperture 112 in a surface 114 of applicator 102 facing and optionally being in contact with skin 116 during a cosmetic procedure session").
Regarding claim 7, Adanny discloses the apparatus of claim 6, as explained above. Adanny further discloses that the light source comprises a light emitting diode or a laser (paragraph [0053], "Light energy emitter 104 could be any form of light energy applied in a light beam form such as a laser selected from a group of lasers including gas lasers, solid-state lasers, fiber lasers, semiconductor lasers, dye lasers and similar, e.g., a Alexandrite, Nd:Yag, CO.sub.2 laser, ER:YAG laser, laser diodes as well as non-coherent light such as Intense Pulse Light (IPL) sources and Light Emitting Diodes (LED)").
Regarding claim 8, Adanny discloses the apparatus of claim 1, as explained above. Adanny further discloses that the processor is further configured to calculate treatment parameters based on at least one of the map and the treatment window (paragraph [0045], "Device 190 could be operative to capture an image such as, for example, image 450 (FIG. 4) of hair on skin 1164) and process the captured image, generate an analysis, e.g., in a form of a mapped X-Y grid 502 (FIG. 5), determine and communicate specific optimal treatment doses of light energy and/or RF energy for one or more fractions 202 within segment 150 of skin 116"; paragraphs [0055], [0062]-[0063]).
Regarding claim 9, Adanny discloses the apparatus of claim 8, as explained above. Adanny further discloses that the treatment parameters comprise a number of estimated treatments (paragraph [0045], "Device 190 could be operative to capture an image such as, for example, image 450 (FIG. 4) of hair on skin 1164) and process the captured image, generate an analysis, e.g., in a form of a mapped X-Y grid 502 (FIG. 5), determine and communicate specific optimal treatment doses of light energy and/or RF energy for one or more fractions 202 within segment 150 of skin 116"), an intensity of an applied treatment (paragraph [0068], "the dose of light energy could also depend on the type of light energy, the pulse frequency and duration"), a position of a previously treated compartment, or a position of at least one untreated compartment (paragraph [0043], "Computer 108 could also display a list of blemishes or areas with hair to be treated and have the user confirm the listed blemishes or areas with hair to be treated. Once confirmed, computer 108 could automatically activate application of appropriate light energy doses to confirmed blemishes to be treated").
Regarding claim 11, Adanny discloses the apparatus of claim 1, as explained above. Adanny further discloses that the user interface comprises a visual indicator (paragraph [0042], "System 100 could also include a display 122 operative to display in real time images captured by camera 118"; paragraph [0061], "Additionally and optionally, a visible light outline such as a visible light laser beam could be used to enable a user to visualize area or segment 150 to be treated. Alternatively and optionally, the visible light could outline for system 100 a desired area or segment 150 to be treated and/or to be captured by camera 118").
Regarding claim 12, Adanny discloses a computer-implemented method of performing skin treatment by a user by means of a skin treatment apparatus (Fig. 1A, paragraph [0040], system 100 for cosmetic skin procedures) comprising a treatment window (Fig. 1A, paragraph [0041], aperture 112) having a working area via which treatment light is applied to a user's skin when the treatment window contacts the skin (paragraph [0041], "Light energy emitter 104 can apply light energy to a segment 150 of skin 116 through an aperture 112 in a surface 114 of applicator 102 facing and optionally being in contact with skin 116 during a cosmetic procedure session"), the method comprising:
obtaining a map of a skin area to be treated (paragraph [0042], "Camera 118 could provide an image of the segment of skin"; paragraph [0067], "Grid 502 could be, for example, divided into squares the size of which corresponds to the size of fractions 202 (FIGS. 2 and 3) of skin 116 (FIGS. 1A and 1B)");
obtaining a reference position on a boundary of the map (paragraph [0048], "device 190 could store raw captured image and/or the generated analysis or communicate to applicator 102 the location of the captured image on the body of a user"; paragraph [0059], "The segment of skin 150 captured by camera 118 is defined by borders 120 of aperture 112 and could be the same size, smaller or larger than segment 150 of skin 116");
dividing an area of the map into a plurality of compartments which each represent a respective one of a plurality of positions of the working area of the treatment window on the skin area to be treated required for uniform exposure of the skin area to the treatment light (paragraph [0043], "system 100 could automatically scan a large segment of skin (e.g., a face of a user) and communicate images of the scan captured by camera 118 to computer 108, which could display on display 122 images of the scanned segment of skin to be treated or not treated, identify to system 100 specific blemishes, scars or wrinkles or hair to be treated and define a sequence and scanning pattern of application of light energy doses to the skin fractions within the scanned area of skin"; Figs. 5A-5B, paragraph [0067], "Grid 502 could be, for example, divided into squares the size of which corresponds to the size of fractions 202 (FIGS. 2 and 3) of skin 116 (FIGS. 1A and 1B)"; paragraph [0097], "Applying a uniform level of electromagnetic energy such as laser energy, RF energy or a combination of both to an segment of skin 150 including such blemishes may result in under heating some areas within segment of skin 150 whereas overheating others. This is due to different energy (primarily light) absorption qualities of the various blemishes. A solution to this type of disadvantage and as described above could be achieved by limiting the application of light energy to the hair or blemish and avoiding application of energy to other hairless or blemishless areas within segment of skin 150 as well as controlling the level of energy (light and/or RF) applied to each specific fraction 202 of segment 150 of skin 116");
registering contact of the treatment window in a position within the skin area to be treated corresponding with the reference position (paragraph [0052], contact sensors 124; paragraph [0067], "determination of the dose of light energy to be applied at each grid square could be based on...location of segment 150 on the body,...skin 116 segment 150 temperature and/or impedance obtained from sensors 124,...blemish shape and location within the skin segment some of which could be obtained from image 450"); and
guiding the user through the compartments in the map based on a measured displacement of the treatment window relative to the reference position (paragraph [0044], "user interface 125 could include a touch-screen, which could be display 122 or an additional display operative to display an image captured by camera 118 and allow a user, employing a finger or a stylus to outline an area or a segment of skin 150 within the displayed image to be treated or not treated, define a sequence of light energy or RF energy application, identify to system 100 specific hairs 130, blemishes, scars or wrinkles to be treated and define a sequence and scanning pattern of application of light energy doses to two or more skin fractions within the segment of skin"; paragraph [0061], "a visible light outline such as a visible light laser beam could be used to enable a user to visualize area or segment 150 to be treated").
Regarding claim 13, Adanny discloses the method of claim 12, as explained above. Adanny further discloses calculating treatment parameters based on at least one of the map and the treatment window (paragraph [0045], "Device 190 could be operative to capture an image such as, for example, image 450 (FIG. 4) of hair on skin 1164) and process the captured image, generate an analysis, e.g., in a form of a mapped X-Y grid 502 (FIG. 5), determine and communicate specific optimal treatment doses of light energy and/or RF energy for one or more fractions 202 within segment 150 of skin 116"; paragraphs [0055], [0062]-[0063]).
Regarding claim 14, Adanny discloses the method of claim 12, as explained above. Adanny further discloses that the light source comprises a light emitting diode or a laser (paragraph [0053], "Light energy emitter 104 could be any form of light energy applied in a light beam form such as a laser selected from a group of lasers including gas lasers, solid-state lasers, fiber lasers, semiconductor lasers, dye lasers and similar, e.g., a Alexandrite, Nd:Yag, CO.sub.2 laser, ER:YAG laser, laser diodes as well as non-
coherent light such as Intense Pulse Light (IPL) sources and Light Emitting Diodes (LED)").
Regarding claim 15, Adanny discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium storing computer readable code (Fig. 1A, paragraph [0042], computer 108) for performing a skin treatment process of a user using a skin treatment apparatus (Fig. 1A, paragraph [0040], system 100 for cosmetic skin procedures) comprising a treatment window (Fig. 1A, paragraph [0041], aperture 112) having a working area via which treatment light is applied to a user's skin when the treatment window contacts the skin (paragraph [0041], "Light energy emitter 104 can apply light energy to a segment 150 of skin 116 through an aperture 112 in a surface 114 of applicator 102 facing and optionally being in contact with skin 116 during a cosmetic procedure session"), and a mapping unit configured to obtain a map of a skin area to be treated (Fig. 1A, paragraph [0042], "Camera 118 could provide an image of the segment of skin"; paragraph [0067], "Grid 502 could be, for example, divided into squares the size of which corresponds to the size of fractions 202 (FIGS. 2 and 3) of skin 116 (FIGS. 1A and 1B)"), and to obtain a reference position on a boundary of the map (paragraph [0048], "device 190 could store raw captured image and/or the generated analysis or communicate to applicator 102 the location of the captured image on the body of a user"; paragraph [0059], "The segment of skin 150 captured by camera 118 is defined by borders 120 of aperture 112 and could be the same size, smaller or larger than segment 150 of skin 116"), the computer readable code being configured such that, on execution by a processor (paragraph [0046], processor 140), the processor is caused to:
divide an area of the map into a plurality of compartments, wherein each compartment of the plurality of compartments represents a respective one of a plurality of positions of the working area of the treatment window on the skin area to be treated required for uniform exposure of the skin area to the treatment light (paragraph [0043], "system 100 could automatically scan a large segment of skin (e.g., a face of a user) and communicate images of the scan captured by camera 118 to computer 108, which could display on display 122 images of the scanned segment of skin to be treated or not treated, identify to system 100 specific blemishes, scars or wrinkles or hair to be treated and define a sequence and scanning pattern of application of light energy doses to the skin fractions within the scanned area of skin"; Figs. 5A-5B, paragraph [0067], "Grid 502 could be, for example, divided into squares the size of which corresponds to the size of fractions 202 (FIGS. 2 and 3) of skin 116 (FIGS. 1A and 1B)"; paragraph [0097], "Applying a uniform level of electromagnetic energy such as laser energy, RF energy or a combination of both to an segment of skin 150 including such blemishes may result in under heating some areas within segment of skin 150 whereas overheating others. This is due to different energy (primarily light) absorption qualities of the various blemishes. A solution to this type of disadvantage and as described above could be achieved by limiting the application of light energy to the hair or blemish and avoiding application of energy to other hairless or blemishless areas within segment of skin 150 as well as controlling the level of energy (light and/or RF) applied to each specific fraction 202 of segment 150 of skin 116");
register contact of the treatment window in a position within the skin area to be treated corresponding with the reference position in the map (paragraph [0052], contact sensors 124; paragraph [0067], "determination of the dose of light energy to be applied at each grid square could be based on...location of segment 150 on the body,...skin 116 segment 150 temperature and/or impedance obtained from sensors 124,...blemish shape and location within the skin segment some of which could be obtained from image 450"); and
guide the user, via a user interface, through the plurality of compartments in the map based on a measured displacement of the treatment window relative to the reference position (paragraph [0044], "user interface 125 could include a touch-screen, which could be display 122 or an additional display operative to display an image captured by camera 118 and allow a user, employing a finger or a stylus to outline an area or a segment of skin 150 within the displayed image to be treated or not treated, define a sequence of light energy or RF energy application, identify to system 100 specific hairs 130, blemishes, scars or wrinkles to be treated and define a sequence and scanning pattern of application of light energy doses to two or more skin fractions within the segment of skin"; paragraph [0061], "a visible light outline such as a visible light laser beam could be used to enable a user to visualize area or segment 150 to be treated").
Regarding claim 16, Adanny discloses the method of claim 13, as explained above. Adanny further discloses that the treatment parameters comprise a number of estimated treatments (paragraph [0045], "Device 190 could be operative to capture an image such as, for example, image 450 (FIG. 4) of hair on skin 1164) and process the captured image, generate an analysis, e.g., in a form of a mapped X-Y grid 502 (FIG. 5), determine and communicate specific optimal treatment doses of light energy and/or RF energy for one or more fractions 202 within segment 150 of skin 116"), an intensity of an applied treatment (paragraph [0068], "the dose of light energy could also depend on the type of light energy, the pulse frequency and duration"), a position of a previously treated compartment, or a position of at least one untreated compartment (paragraph [0043], "Computer 108 could also display a list of blemishes or areas with hair to be treated and have the user confirm the listed blemishes or areas with hair to be treated. Once confirmed, computer 108 could automatically activate application of appropriate light energy doses to confirmed blemishes to be treated").
Regarding claim 19, Adanny discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 15, as explained above. Adanny further discloses that the mapping unit comprises a camera (paragraph [0041], camera 118).
Regarding claim 20, Adanny discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 19, as explained above. Adanny further discloses that the displacement sensor is an optical sensor (paragraph [0048], "device 190 could store raw captured image and/or the generated analysis or communicate to applicator 102 the location of the captured image on the body of a user as well as other information extracted from the image"; paragraph [0041], camera 118).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 10 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adanny (US 20150032092 A1) in view of Gurovich et al. (US 20160045762 A1, previously cited), hereinafter Gurovich.
Regarding claim 10, Adanny discloses the apparatus of claim 1, as explained above. Adanny does not explicitly disclose that the processor is further configured to: determine, while guiding the user through the plurality of compartments, that a contact is lost between the treatment window and the skin; obtain a position of a last treated compartment; and indicate to the user, via the user interface, a position of a next compartment to be treated.
However, Gurovich teaches a device for treating a skin surface (Abstract) comprising a processor (paragraph [0066], processor 22) configured to:
determine, while guiding the user through the compartments, that a contact is lost between the treatment applier and the skin (paragraph [0068], "User control 18 may include a proximity or contact sensor ... that senses when treatment head 26 is placed near or in contact with a skin surface");
obtain a position of a last treated compartment (paragraph [0044], "The controller may be configured to prevent repeated application of the treatment to a position that had previously been treated. For example, if the current position is displaced by less than a predetermined threshold distance from a previously treated position, application of the treatment may completely or partially interrupted. Treatment may be resumed when the treatment head is displaced to beyond the threshold distance."); and
indicate to the user, via the user interface unit, a position of a next compartment to be treated (paragraph [0083], "generation of an alert may be indicated when the device has … resumed or started application of the treatment").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Adanny with the teachings of Gurovich so that the processor is configured to obtain a position of a last treated compartment; and indicate to the user, via the user interface unit, a position of a next compartment to be treated, because doing so prevents unintentional repeated treatment of a previously treated region, thus avoiding injury to the skin (Gurovich, paragraph [0004]).
Regarding claim 17, Adanny discloses the method of claim 12, as explained above. Adanny does not explicitly disclose determining, while guiding the user through the plurality of compartments, that a contact is lost between the treatment window and the skin; obtaining a position of a last treated compartment; and indicating to the user, via the user interface, a position of a next compartment to be treated.
However, Gurovich teaches a device for treating a skin surface (Abstract) comprising a processor (paragraph [0066], processor 22) configured to:
determine, while guiding the user through the compartments, that a contact is lost between the treatment applier and the skin (paragraph [0068], "User control 18 may include a proximity or contact sensor ... that senses when treatment head 26 is placed near or in contact with a skin surface");
obtain a position of a last treated compartment (paragraph [0044], "The controller may be configured to prevent repeated application of the treatment to a position that had previously been treated. For example, if the current position is displaced by less than a predetermined threshold distance from a previously treated position, application of the treatment may completely or partially interrupted. Treatment may be resumed when the treatment head is displaced to beyond the threshold distance."); and
indicate to the user, via the user interface unit, a position of a next compartment to be treated (paragraph [0083], "generation of an alert may be indicated when the device has … resumed or started application of the treatment").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Adanny with the teachings of Gurovich so that the processor is configured to obtain a position of a last treated compartment; and indicate to the user, via the user interface unit, a position of a next compartment to be treated, because doing so prevents unintentional repeated treatment of a previously treated region, thus avoiding injury to the skin (Gurovich, paragraph [0004]).
Regarding claim 18, the method of claim 17 is obvious over Adanny and Gurovich, as explained above. Adanny further discloses that the user interface comprises a visual indicator (paragraph [0042], "System 100 could also include a display 122 operative to display in real time images captured by camera 118"; paragraph [0061], "Additionally and optionally, a visible light outline such as a visible light laser beam could be used to enable a user to visualize area or segment 150 to be treated. Alternatively and optionally, the visible light could outline for system 100 a desired area or segment 150 to be treated and/or to be captured by camera 118").
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Ha (US 20220211320 A1) discloses a composite medical treatment apparatus using skin map that detects the current position of the handpiece and generates control parameters based on the acquired skin condition (Fig. 4).
Podmore et al. (US 20200367961 A1) discloses a method involving applying targeted energy comprising a visually guided procedure a display where targeted follicles/glands are indicated and treatment durations and other variables are displayed while the treatment system is in use (paragraph [0084]).
Subhash et al. (US 20200179713 A1) discloses a personal care implement with an emitting end and an electromagnetic source for projecting electromagnetic radiation onto an area of skin to treat a skin condition, comprising a position indicator that tracks positions of a skin treatment device at it moves so that the user can see, for example, whether the user is treating the identified treatment areas (paragraph [0215]).
Levernier et al. (US 20050107852 A1) discloses a system and method for non-ablative laser treatment of dermatologic conditions wherein the skin area may be temporarily marked with a set of lines or a grid to help guide device 22 in order to ensure full treatment of the entire area of the skin without missing areas or having excessive overlaps in area (paragraph [0087]).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE SISON whose telephone number is (703)756-4661. The examiner can normally be reached 8 am - 5 pm PT, Mon - Fri.
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, Jennifer McDonald can be reached at (571) 270-3061. 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.
/CHRISTINE SISON/Examiner, Art Unit 3796
/Benjamin J Klein/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Prosecution Insights