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 action is in response to the amendment filed on 6/15/2026. In the amendment, claims 20, 22, & 24 have been amended.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 6/15/2026. These drawings are accepted. The previous Drawings objections have been overcome.
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 20-23 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Boudjema et al. (US Pat. No. 10,813,667 B1).
Regarding claim 20, Boudjema et al. disclose an implantation handpiece (Figs. 1-5F) comprising: a generally cylindrical body 2, 5 (Fig. 2) for gripping by a user of the implantation handpiece; first and second channels 110, 101 (Fig. 2) positioned on the cylindrical body 2, 5 (Fig. 2), wherein the first channel 110 is connectable to a source of vacuum (NOTE: a source of vacuum is not positively recited as part of the claimed invention, the channel merely needs to be capable of being connected thereto, which 110 is considered to be capable of; further, channel 110 is also disclosed by Boudjema et al. as being connected to a vacuum source - column 14, lines 13-15) and the second channel 101 is connectable to a source of harvested follicular units (NOTE: a source of harvested follicular units is not positively recited as part of the claimed invention, the channel merely needs to be capable of being connected thereto, which 110 is considered to be capable of; further, channel 101 is also disclosed by Boudjema et al. as being connected to a hair graft reservoir - column 13, lines 27-29); a central rod 131 (Fig. 2) and a hollow needle 6 (Fig. 2), wherein the central rod 131 and the hollow needle 6 are positioned for slidable and relative movement of the rod 131 inside the needle 6 (Figs. 3A-3B & 5A-5F), wherein in a retracted position of the rod 131 relative to the needle 6, a harvested follicular unit is delivered from the second channel 101 to an interior of the hollow needle 6 under force of pressure (or vacuum) applied to the first channel 110 at a position forward of the central rod 131, and wherein in an implantation position, slidable movement of the central rod 131 relative to the hollow needle 6 drives the follicular unit from the hollow needle 6 into an implantation site (NOTE: the harvested follicular unit is not positively recited as part of the claimed invention, therefore, the above limitations with respect to the retracted and implantation positions are read functionally with respect to the rod, needle, and channel capability to perform such an intended function; since the implantation handpiece of Boudjema et al. meets all of the structural requirements of the claims, it is considered to also be capable of performing such function in the claimed positions; furthermore, Boudjema et al. is considered to disclose these claimed positions as shown in Figs. 5A-5F), wherein the implantation handpiece is configured to receive at least one follicular unit directly from a donor area with a robotic arm (it is considered that since implantation handpiece already has a channel/tube 101 connected thereto for receiving a hair graft from an external source, this channel/tube 101 is capable of being attached to a harvesting source such as from a robotic harvesting instrument; it is noted that the ‘robotic arm’ is not positively recited as part of the claimed invention, nor is any additional structure being provided for the functionality of receiving the follicular from said robotic arm).
Regarding claim 21, Boudjema et al. further disclose a third channel 4 (Fig. 2) for controllable introduction of pressure under control of the user or channeling vacuum to accomplish the same function (column 7, lines 51-55), wherein introduction of pressure (or vacuum) from the third channel 4 drives the central rod 131 from the retracted position to the implantation position (column 8, lines 59-66 - note that 131 is an extension of the discussed piston 13).
Regarding claim 22, Boudjema et al. further disclose wherein in the retracted position the central rod 131 is fit loosely inside the hollow needle 6 (Figs. 2 & 4A-B), wherein the first channel 110 is positioned at a rearward side of a forward end of the central rod 131 (shown in Fig. 4B position) and the second channel 101 is positioned at forward side of the forward end of the central rod 131 (shown in Fig. 4B position), and wherein the fit of the central rod 131 inside the hollow needle 6 is sufficiently loose as to allow vacuum applied from the first channel 110 to reach alongside the central rod 131 and to suction a harvested follicular unit from the second channel 101 (NOTE: harvested follicular unit is not part of the claimed invention, the structure merely needs to be capable of performing the intended function, which it is considered to be capable of doing as seen in Figs. 4A-4C & 5A-5F).
Regarding claim 23, Boudjema et al. further disclose wherein slidable movement of the central rod 131 relative to the hollow needle 6 is effectuated manually by the user (channel 4 is disclosed by Boudjema et al. as being connected to a source of compressed air - not shown; there are many sources of compressed air known in the art, including manually effectuated sources; therefore, it is considered that since the source of the manually effectuation is not explicitly disclosed in the claim as a structure, any known source such as a manually effectuated compressed air source would be suitable to meet the criteria of the claim).
Regarding claim 40, Boudjema et al. disclose a method of loading a hair graft into an implantation handpiece (Figs. 5A-5F; column 9, lines 11-59) comprising loading a hair graft into the implantation handpiece according to Claim 20 (see rejection of claim 20 above for handpiece specific rejection; Figs. 5A-5f; column 9, lines 11-59) in preparation for a surgeon to implant the loaded hair graft to a recipient region (Figs. 5A-5F; column 9, lines 11-59).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 24 is allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: claim 24 has been rewritten in independent form in response to the previous indication of allowable subject matter (see Reasons for Allowance indicated in the Non-Final Rejection mailed on 1/15/2026).
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
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 ASHLEY LAUREN FISHBACK whose telephone number is (571)270-7899. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30a-3:30p.
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, Darwin Erezo can be reached at (571) 272-4695. 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.
ASHLEY LAUREN FISHBACK
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3771
/ASHLEY L FISHBACK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771 June 26, 2026
Prosecution Insights