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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on November 11, 2024 and April 16, 2026 comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
35 USC § 101 Statutory Analysis
The claims do not recite any of the judicial exceptions enumerated in the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance. Further, the claims do not recite any method of organizing human activity, such as a fundamental economic concept or managing interactions between people. Finally, the claims do not recite a mathematical relationship, formula, or calculation. Thus, the claims are eligible because they do not recite a judicial exception.
Claim rejections - 35 U.S.C. §112(b)
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.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 30 which is a system claims fails to recite critical elements, namely a processor and a memory, as described in paragraph [0083] of the specification.
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 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 16-23 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Taylor et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2015/0359459 A1) (hereafter referred to as “Taylor”).
With regard to claim 16, Taylor describes wherein the digital image comprises a calibration marker located on or near the skin tissue, and wherein the calibration marker comprises benchmark elements wherein at least one benchmark attribute value of at least one attribute type (see Figure 2, element 202 and Figures 3A-D, and refer for example to paragraphs [0040] through [0042]; the computer-implemented method comprising detecting the calibration marker within the digital image (see Figures 5A-F and refer for example to paragraphs [0040] and [0044]); detecting the benchmark elements within a cropped portion of the digital image that includes the calibration marker (refer for example to paragraph [0083], Taylor’s system uses a zoom function for detecting the benchmark elements within a cropped portion of the digital image that includes the calibration marker); for the respective benchmark elements, determining at least one depicted attribute value of the at least one attribute type based on pixels of the digital image located within the respective benchmark elements (refer for example to paragraphs [0035], [0036], [0051] and paragraphs [0058] through [0060], Taylor’s features correspond to applicant’s “attributes”); and calibrating the digital image by correcting deviations between the depicted attribute values and the benchmark attribute values associated with the respective benchmark elements (refer for example to paragraphs [0049] and [0050]).
As to claim 17, Taylor describes wherein detecting the calibration marker is performed by a machine learning model trained for detecting the calibration marker within a digital image (refer for example to paragraphs [0035], [0059], [0060], [0063] through [0067], [0073], [0078] and [0080]).
In regard to claim 18, Taylor describes wherein detecting the benchmark elements is performed by a machine learning model trained for assigning respective pixels within the cropped portion of the digital image to the benchmark elements (refer to paragraphs [0049] and [0052] which discuss the pixel values of the images, and to paragraphs [0035], [0059], [0060], [0063] through [0067], [0073], [0078] and [0080] which discuss that the process is performed by a machine learning model).
With regard to claim 19, Taylor describes wherein one or more benchmark elements are wherein respective benchmark color values of a color type and wherein calibrating the digital image comprises correcting color values of pixels within the digital image (refer for example to paragraphs [0035], [0036], [0041], [0050], [0051], and to paragraphs [0056] through [0058]).
As to claim 20, Taylor describes wherein determining at least one depicted attribute value of the color type comprises determining an average depicted color value of the pixels of the digital image located within the respective one or more benchmark elements (refer for example to paragraphs [0055] and [0058], where Taylor’s mean or median color value corresponds to applicant’s “average depicted color value”).
In regard to claim 21, Taylor further comprising determining respective color deviations between the average depicted color value and the benchmark color value associated with the respective one or more benchmark elements (refer for example to paragraphs [0049], [0058], [0059] and [0067]).
With regard to claim 22, Taylor describes wherein at least four benchmark elements are characterized by a benchmark location value of a location type and wherein calibrating the digital image comprises adjusting a perspective of the digital image (refer for example to paragraphs [0043], [0053]).
As to claim 23, Taylor describes wherein determining at least one depicted attribute value of the location type comprises determining a depicted location of the respective at least four benchmark elements (refer for example to paragraph [0043]).
In regard to claim 30, Taylor describes a data processing system configured to perform the computer- implemented method according to claim 16 (see Figures 12 and 13, and refer for example to paragraphs [0081, [0082], [0085] and [0086]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24-29 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
DiMaio, Yaroslavsky and Shachaf all disclose systems similar to applicant’s claimed invention.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jose L. Couso whose telephone number is (571) 272-7388. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 5:30am to 1:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew Bella, can be reached on 571-272-7778. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Center information webpage on the USPTO website. For more information about the Patent Center, see https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center. Should you have questions about access to the Patent Center, contact the Patent Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 571-272-4100 or via email at: ebc@uspto.gov .
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.
/JOSE L COUSO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2667
April 21, 2026
Prosecution Insights