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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because a “computer program product comprising computer program code” is not one of the four statutory categories and is considered to be software per se.
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.
Claim 18 is 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.
Claim 18, which depends from claim 17, sets forth “[t]he computer program product of claim 17.” Claim 17 is no longer directed to a “computer program product.” Therefore, this limitation lacks antecedent basis in the claims.
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.
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Serval et al. (US 2024/0065554 A1, Feb. 29, 2024) (hereinafter “Serval”).
Regarding claim 19: Serval discloses a computer program product comprising computer program code configured to control one or more processors of a computerized processing system ([0210]) to perform the following steps: receiving from an electronic device a 6D-model of a skin surface of a person, the 6D-model of the skin surface comprising a plurality of surface data points, each surface data point comprising 3D-coordinates and RGB-color information ([0080]-[0084], [0099], [0123], [0204]; fig. 1B); generating a dermatological evaluation of the 6D-model of the skin surface of the person ([0080]-[0084], [0099], [0123], [0204]; fig. 1B); and transmitting the dermatological evaluation to the electronic device ([0080]-[0084], [0099], [0123], [0204]; fig. 1B).
Regarding claim 20: Serval discloses the computer program product of claim 19, wherein the computer program code is further configured to control the one or more processors to perform a method according to one of the claims 5 to 12 (see rejections of at least claims 10-11 above).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-17 are allowed.
Claim 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, and 35 U.S.C. §101 set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art, alone or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious every limitation of independent claims 1, 14, and 17.
Response to Arguments
The rejection of claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. §101 is withdrawn in light of the amendment to claim 17. However, claims 18-20 have not been suitably amended. The rejection of claims 18-20 are maintained.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to prior art rejection of claims 1, 14, 17, and dependents thereof, filed 05/11/2026, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections under 35 U.S.C. §102 and §103 of claims 1-18 are withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 19 and 20, filed 05/11/2026, have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 19-20 are merely a statement that Serval does not teach or suggest the limitations of claim 19, with no evidence to support this assertion. Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kruglick (US 2011/0213253 A1, Sep. 1, 2011) discloses multi-directional imaging for skin evaluation.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CAROLYN A PEHLKE whose telephone number is (571)270-3484. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am - 5:00pm (Central Time), Monday - Friday.
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, Chris Koharski can be reached at (571) 272-7230. 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.
/CAROLYN A PEHLKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights