IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Ignon et al.
`In re Patent of:
`11,865,287
`U.S. Patent No.:
`January 9, 2024
`Issue Date:
`Appl. Serial No.: 18/094,884
`January 9, 2023
`Filing Date:
`Title:
`DEVICES AND METHODS FOR TREATING SKIN
`
` Attorney Docket No.: 58484-0001IP1
`
`Mail Stop Patent Board
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`DECLARATION OF ERIC SIMON IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR
`INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 11,865,287
`
`1
`
`Sinclair Pharma et al.
`EUNSUNG-1003
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
`ASSIGNMENT ................................................................................................ 5 
`QUALIFICATIONS ........................................................................................ 5 
`SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS FORMED ................................................ 9 
` 
`  BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO THE PRIORITY DATE OF
`THE ’287 PATENT ....................................................................................... 10 
`LEGAL PRINCIPLES ................................................................................... 10 
`A.  Claim construction .................................................................................. 11 
`B.  Priority .................................................................................................... 11 
`C.  Anticipation ............................................................................................. 12 
`D.  Obviousness ............................................................................................ 12 
`  MATERIALS CONSIDERED ...................................................................... 14 
`  TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW ...................................................................... 16 
`A.  Microdermabrasion ................................................................................. 16 
`  OVERVIEW OF THE ’287 PATENT .......................................................... 22 
`  OVERVIEW OF THE PROSECUTION HISTORY .................................... 26 
`SUMMARY OF THE PRIOR ART .............................................................. 27 
`1.  Karasiuk Overview ........................................................................ 27 
`2. 
`Palmer Overview ........................................................................... 32 
`3. 
`Trueba Overview ........................................................................... 35 
`4.  Greenberg Overview ..................................................................... 38 
`[GROUND 1A] – Karasiuk And Palmer ....................................................... 43 
`1. 
`The Karasiuk-Palmer Combination ............................................... 43 
`2. 
`Claim 1 .......................................................................................... 61 
`3. 
`Claim 2 .......................................................................................... 97 
`4. 
`Claim 3 .......................................................................................... 99 
`5. 
`Claim 8 ........................................................................................101 
`6. 
`Claim 9 ........................................................................................106 
`7. 
`Claim 10 ......................................................................................109 
`8. 
`Claim 11 ......................................................................................113 
`9. 
`Claim 12 ......................................................................................127 
`10.  Claim 14 ......................................................................................129 
`11.  Claim 15 ......................................................................................129 
`12.  Claim 16 ......................................................................................131 
`13.  Claim 22 ......................................................................................131 
`
` 
`
`1
`
`2
`
`

`

` 
`
`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`14.  Claim 23 ......................................................................................150 
`15.  Claim 26 ......................................................................................152 
`16.  Claim 28 ......................................................................................156 
`17.  Claim 29 ......................................................................................157 
`18.  Claim 34 ......................................................................................157 
`19.  Claim 35 ......................................................................................158 
`20.  Claim 36 ......................................................................................158 
`21.  Claim 37 ......................................................................................159 
`22.  Claim 39 ......................................................................................162 
`23.  Claim 40 ......................................................................................163 
`24.  Claim 45 ......................................................................................163 
`[GROUND 1B] – Karasiuk, Palmer, And Trueba .......................................164 
`1. 
`The Karasiuk-Palmer-Trueba Combination ................................164 
`2. 
`Claim 1 and its Dependent Claims ..............................................171 
`3. 
`Claims 12, 22, 23, 29, 40 and their Dependent Claims ...............174 
`4. 
`Claims 3, 26 and their Dependent Claims ...................................175 
`5. 
`Claim 4 ........................................................................................175 
`6. 
`Claim 5 ........................................................................................176 
`7. 
`Claim 6 ........................................................................................176 
`8. 
`Claim 7 ........................................................................................177 
`9. 
`Claim 17 ......................................................................................177 
`10.  Claim 18 ......................................................................................177 
`11.  Claim 19 ......................................................................................178 
`12.  Claim 20 ......................................................................................178 
`13.  Claim 24 ......................................................................................178 
`14.  Claim 25 ......................................................................................179 
`15.  Claim 30 ......................................................................................179 
`16.  Claim 31 ......................................................................................179 
`17.  Claim 32 ......................................................................................179 
`18.  Claim 33 ......................................................................................180 
`19.  Claim 41 ......................................................................................180 
`20.  Claim 42 ......................................................................................180 
`21.  Claim 43 ......................................................................................180 
`22.  Claim 44 ......................................................................................181 
`  [GROUND 2A] – Greenberg .......................................................................181 
`1. 
`Claim 1 ........................................................................................181 
`2. 
`Claim 2 ........................................................................................210 
`3. 
`Claim 3 ........................................................................................212 
`4. 
`Claim 8 ........................................................................................214 
`
`2
`
`3
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`Claim 9 ........................................................................................216
`5.
`Claim 10 ......................................................................................218
`6.
`Claim 11 ......................................................................................222
`7.
`Claim 12 ......................................................................................236
`8.
`Claim 14 ......................................................................................237
`9.
`10. Claim 15 ......................................................................................237
`11. Claim 16 ......................................................................................238
`12. Claim 22 ......................................................................................239
`13. Claim 23 ......................................................................................250
`14. Claim 26 ......................................................................................253
`15. Claim 28 ......................................................................................256
`16. Claim 29 ......................................................................................256
`17. Claim 34 ......................................................................................257
`18. Claim 35 ......................................................................................257
`19. Claim 36 ......................................................................................257
`20. Claim 37 ......................................................................................258
`21. Claim 39 ......................................................................................260
`22. Claim 40 ......................................................................................261
`23. Claim 45 ......................................................................................261
`[GROUND 2B] – Greenberg And Trueba ...................................................262
`1.
`The Greenberg-Trueba Combination ..........................................262
`1.
`Claim 1 and its Dependent Claims ..............................................267
`Claims 12, 22, 23, 29, 40 and their Dependent Claims ...............271
`2.
`3.
`Claims 3, 26 and their Dependent Claims ...................................271
`4.
`Claim 4 ........................................................................................272
`5.
`Claim 5 ........................................................................................272
`6.
`Claim 6 ........................................................................................273
`7.
`Claim 7 ........................................................................................273
`8.
`Claim 17 ......................................................................................274
`9.
`Claim 18 ......................................................................................274
`10. Claim 19 ......................................................................................274
`11. Claim 20 ......................................................................................274
`12. Claim 24 ......................................................................................275
`13. Claim 25 ......................................................................................275
`14. Claim 30 ......................................................................................275
`15. Claim 31 ......................................................................................275
`16. Claim 32 ......................................................................................276
`17. Claim 33 ......................................................................................276
`18. Claim 41 ......................................................................................276
`
`3
`
`4
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`19.  Claim 42 ......................................................................................277 
`20.  Claim 43 ......................................................................................277 
`21.  Claim 44 ......................................................................................277 
`  CONCLUSION ............................................................................................277 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`5
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`I, Eric Simon, of Salt Lake City, Utah, declare that:
`
`
`
`1.
`
`ASSIGNMENT
`I have been retained on behalf of Eunsung Global Corp (“Eunsung”)
`
`to offer technical opinions related to U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287 (“The ’287
`
`patent”) (EUNSUNG-1001). I understand that Eunsung is requesting that the
`
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB” or “Board”) to institute an inter partes
`
`review (“IPR”) proceeding of the ’287 patent.
`
`2.
`
`I have been asked to provide my independent analysis of the ’287
`
`patent in light of the prior art publications cited in this declaration.
`
`3.
`
`I am not and never have been, an employee of Eunsung. I received no
`
`compensation for this declaration beyond my normal hourly compensation based
`
`on my time actually spent analyzing the ’287 patent, the prior art publications cited
`
`below, and issues related thereto, and I will not receive any added compensation
`
`based on the outcome of any IPR or other proceeding involving the ’287 patent.
`
` QUALIFICATIONS
`A detailed description of my professional qualifications, including a
`
`4.
`
`list of publications, patents, awards, and professional activities, is contained in my
`
`curriculum vitae, a copy of which is attached as Appendix A.
`
`5.
`
`I received a Master of Engineering (M.Eng.) in Bioengineering and a
`
`Bachelor of Science (B.S.) in Materials Science and Engineering, both degrees
`
`5
`
`6
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`from the University of Utah. My focus during my master’s degree was on device
`
`design, mechanical engineering, and manufacturing processes; my focus during my
`
`bachelor’s degree was on biomaterials and materials processing. In addition to
`
`various traditional engineering disciplines, my studies included physics, chemistry,
`
`ergonomics, optics, and applied biomaterials, I also had extensive coursework in
`
`the biological sciences including neurobiology, cell biology, and medical-school
`
`level anatomy and physiology,
`
`6.
`
`I have been designing biomedical products since 1981. I am the
`
`President, Principal Design Engineer, and Founder of Dexterity Design, a product
`
`design, development, and engineering firm specializing in the design and
`
`development of biomedical and biotechnical products, including dermatology and
`
`cosmetology devices. The product scope of Dexterity Design is primarily
`
`biomedical and biotechnical devices and instrumentation, both for therapeutics and
`
`diagnostics. I have also designed and developed consumer, industrial, and
`
`recreational products.
`
`7.
`
`I have experience designing and implementing a wide range of
`
`medical therapeutic and diagnostic devices including those used in orthopedics,
`
`dermatology, cosmetology, ophthalmology, and cardiovascular medicine. These
`
`encompass implantables, procedural tools, and extra-corporeals, both durable and
`
`disposable. I also have experience in designing biotechnical instruments used in
`
`6
`
`7
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`proteomics, genomics, and other areas of molecular analysis, as well as cell culture
`
`systems. I am often called upon to develop mechanical components and enclosures
`
`for these products and am very familiar with the design and the materials,
`
`prototyping, and manufacturing thereof. I have expertise in fluidics and
`
`microfluidics, both liquid and gaseous, utilized in these products. Furthermore, I
`
`work closely with electronic designers/engineers and programmers and have solid
`
`working knowledge of the use of microcontrollers and other circuitry for device
`
`control, and the programming requirements they encumber.
`
`8. My experience with the development of cosmetology/dermatology
`
`devices includes the design, prototyping, testing, and manufacturing of various
`
`products for dermal and subdermal conditions. These conditions include various
`
`disease-based skin disorders, as well as dermal rejuvenation for aging and sun
`
`damage. I have also designed and developed products to reduce tissue pain and
`
`damage to near-surface structures such as tendons, ligaments, and muscles such as
`
`ultrasonic and photonic therapeutic devices.
`
`9.
`
`Pertaining to the case herein, I have designed and developed
`
`microdermabrasion devices which utilize abrasive particles fluidized into an air
`
`stream which is directed onto the skin of the patient/customer for purposes of
`
`removing epidermal cells. Typically, these devices are used for cosmetology to
`
`induce skin regeneration within the dermis and lower epidermis which in turn
`
`7
`
`8
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`gives the recipient the appearance of more youthful skin. In some cases, the device
`
`may be powerful enough to abrade deeper into the skin tissue, making it useful for
`
`remediating scars and tattoo removal. The devices I designed all used vacuum
`
`(negative pressure) to draw the abrasive grit from a supply vessel, fluidize the grit
`
`in a separate chamber, carburate it into an air stream, and deliver it into a
`
`handpiece where it is then directed onto the skin. Concurrently, impacted abrasive
`
`grit, debrided skin cells, and body fluids are withdrawn from the site of impact and
`
`then returned to the device and deposited into a waste containment vessel for later
`
`disposal. During the course of this development, I was required to read and
`
`understand numerous prior art patents relating to dermabrasion,
`
`microdermabrasion, and other forms of fluidized-stream surface abrasion (e.g.,
`
`those sued for industrial sand-blasting and bead-blasting). I also studied various
`
`microdermabrasion apparatuses offered from competitive manufacturers. A
`
`product based on this design and development efforts was offered for sale and
`
`generated good sales and user reviews for many years; I was listed as an inventor
`
`on two utility patents and two design patents relating to this product.
`
`10. To date, I am a listed inventor on 22 U.S. patents, issued and pending.
`
`As mentioned, several of these include microdermabrasion apparatuses, and others
`
`relating to dermal and subdermal therapeutics.
`
`11. Please see my CV, attached hereto as Appendix A, for further
`
`8
`
`9
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`
`information.
`
` SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS FORMED
`12. This Declaration explains the conclusions that I have formed based on
`
`my analysis. To summarize those conclusions:
`
`
`
`Ground 1A: Based upon my knowledge and experience and my review of
`
`the prior art publications in this declaration, I believe that claims 1-3, 8-12,
`
`14-16, 22-23, 26, 28-29, 34-37, 39-40, and 45 of the ’287 patent are
`
`rendered obvious by Karasiuk and Palmer.
`
`
`
`Ground 1B: Based upon my knowledge and experience and my review of
`
`the prior art publications in this declaration, I believe that claims 1-10, 12,
`
`17-20, 22-26, 28-36, and 40-44 of the ’287 patent are rendered obvious by
`
`Karasiuk, Palmer, and Trueba.
`
`
`
`Ground 2A: Based upon my knowledge and experience and my review of
`
`the prior art publications in this declaration, I believe that claims 1-3, 8-12,
`
`14-16, 22-23, 26, 28-29, 34-37, 39-40, and 45 of the ’287 patent are
`
`rendered obvious by Greenberg.
`
`
`
`Ground 2B: Based upon my knowledge and experience and my review of
`
`the prior art publications in this declaration, I believe that claims 1-10, 12,
`
`17-20, 22-26, 28-36, and 40-44 of the ’287 patent are rendered obvious by
`
`Greenberg and Trueba.
`
`9
`
`10
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
` BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO THE PRIORITY
`DATE OF THE ’287 PATENT
`I have been informed that a person of ordinary skill in the art is a
`
`13.
`
`hypothetical person who is presumed to have the skill and experience of an
`
`ordinary worker in the field at the time of the alleged invention. Based on my
`
`knowledge and experience in the field and my review of the ’287 patent and file
`
`history, I believe that a person having ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) at the time
`
`of the alleged invention would have had an undergraduate degree (B.S.) in
`
`Mechanical Engineering or equivalent knowledge, training, or experience, with
`
`two years of work experience in the design of mechanical products, design of
`
`fluidic systems, and/or the design of devices intended for medical or
`
`cosmetological applications. Additional education or industry experience may
`
`compensate for a deficit in one of the other aspects of the requirements stated
`
`above
`
`14. My analysis and conclusions set forth in this declaration are based on
`
`the perspective of a person of ordinary skill in the art having this level of
`
`knowledge and skill as of the date of the alleged invention of the ’287 patent.
`
`Based on instruction from Counsel, I have applied December 30, 2005 (“Critical
`
`Date”), as the date of the alleged invention of the ’287 patent.
`
` LEGAL PRINCIPLES
`15.
`I am not a lawyer and I will not provide any legal opinions in this IPR.
`
`10
`
`11
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`Although I am not a lawyer, I have been advised that certain legal standards are to
`
`be applied by technical experts in forming opinions regarding the meaning and
`
`validity of patent claims.
`
`A. Claim construction
`I understand that claim terms are generally given their plain and
`
`16.
`
`ordinary meaning in light of the patent’s specification and file history as
`
`understood by a POSITA at the time of the purported invention. In that regard, I
`
`understand that the best indicator of claim meaning is its usage in the context of the
`
`patent specification as understood by a POSITA. I further understand that the
`
`words of the claims should be given their plain meaning unless that meaning is
`
`inconsistent with the patent specification or the patent’s history of examination
`
`before the Patent Office. I also understand that the words of the claims should be
`
`interpreted as they would have been interpreted by a POSITA at the time of the
`
`invention was made (not today).
`
`B.
`Priority
`I understand that a continuation application is a later-filed application
`
`17.
`
`that has the same disclosure (specification and figures) as an earlier-filed
`
`application to which the later-filed application claims priority. A continuation is
`
`generally entitled to the same priority date as the earlier-filed application to which
`
`it claims priority.
`
`11
`
`12
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`
`C. Anticipation
`I understand that a patent claim is invalid as anticipated if each and
`
`18.
`
`every element as set forth in the claim is found, either expressly or inherently
`
`described, in a single prior art reference. I also understand that, to anticipate, the
`
`reference must teach all of the limitations arranged or combined in the same way
`
`as recited in the claim.
`
`19. With respect to inherency, I understand that the fact that a certain
`
`result or characteristic may occur or be present in the prior art is not sufficient to
`
`establish the inherency of that result or characteristic. Instead, the inherent
`
`characteristic must necessarily flow from the teaching of the prior art.
`
`D. Obviousness
`I understand that a patent claim is invalid if the claimed invention
`
`20.
`
`would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the field at the time of the
`
`purported invention, which is often considered the time the application was filed.
`
`Thus, even if all of the claim limitations are not found in a single prior art
`
`reference that anticipates the claim, the claim can still be invalid.
`
`21. To obtain a patent, a claimed invention must have, as of the priority
`
`date, been nonobvious in view of the prior art in the field. I understand that an
`
`invention is obvious when the differences between the subject matter sought to be
`
`patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have
`
`12
`
`13
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill
`
`in the art.
`
`22.
`
`I understand that, to prove that prior art or a combination of prior art
`
`renders a patent obvious it is necessary to: (1) identify the particular references
`
`that, singly or in combination, make the patent obvious; (2) specifically identify
`
`which elements of the patent claim appear in each of the asserted references; and
`
`(3) explain a motivation, teaching, need, market pressure or other legitimate reason
`
`that would have inspired a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine prior art
`
`references to solve a problem.
`
`23.
`
`I also understand that certain objective indicia can be important
`
`evidence regarding whether a patent is obvious or nonobvious. Such indicia
`
`include:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Commercial success of products covered by the patent claims;
`
`A long-felt need for the invention;
`
`Failed attempts by others to make the invention;
`
`Copying of the invention by others in the field;
`
`Unexpected results achieved by the invention as compared to the closest
`
`prior art;
`
`Praise of the invention by the infringer or others in the field;
`
`The taking of licenses under the patent by others;
`
`13
`
`14
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`Expressions of surprise by experts and those skilled in the art at the making
`
`of the invention; and
`
`The patentee proceeded contrary to the accepted wisdom of the prior art.
`
`24. To the extent these factors have been brought to my attention, if at all,
`
`I have taken them into consideration in rendering my opinions and conclusions.
`
` MATERIALS CONSIDERED
`25. Based on my above-described experience, I believe that I am
`
`considered to be an expert in the field. Also, based on my experiences, I
`
`understand and know of the capabilities of persons of ordinary skill in the field
`
`during the early 1990s–2010s, and I have worked closely with persons in the field
`
`during that time frame.
`
`26. As part of my independent analysis for this declaration, I have
`
`considered the following: the background knowledge/technologies that were
`
`commonly known to persons of ordinary skill in this art during the time before the
`
`Critical Date; my own knowledge and experiences gained from my work
`
`experience in the field of the ’287 patent and related disciplines; and my
`
`experience in working with others involved in this field and related disciplines.
`
`27.
`
`In addition, I have analyzed the following publications and materials:
`
`
`
`EUNSUNG-1001 U.S. Pat. No. 11,865,287 to Ignon (“the ’287 patent”)
`
`14
`
`15
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`EUNSUNG-1002 Excerpts from the Prosecution History of the ’287 patent
`
`(“the Prosecution History”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1004 U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0212415 (“Karasiuk”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1005 U.S. Patent No. 5,199,604 (“Palmer”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1006 U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0093089 (“Greenberg”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1007 U.S. Patent No. 6,390,815 (“Pond”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1008 U.S. Patent No. 6,684,880 (“Trueba”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1009 U.S. Patent No. 4,512,764 (“Wunsch 1982”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1010 U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0018252 (“Duchon”)
`
`
`
`EUNSUNG-1011 U.S. Patent No. 4,215,476 (“Armstrong”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1012 Friedman, et al., Chemical peels, dermabrasion, and laser
`
`therapy, Disease-a-Month 55.4 (2009): 223-235 (“Friedman”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1013 Burgess, Cheryl M., Cosmetic dermatology, Heidelberg,
`
`Germany: Springer, 2005 (“Burgess”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1014 Pickering, J. A., Touch-sensitive screens: the
`
`technologies and their application, International Journal of Man-Machine
`
`Studies 25.3 (1986): 249-269 (“Pickering”)
`
`
`
`EUNSUNG-1015 Friedman, Mark J. et al., The AMSA injection: A new
`
`concept for local anesthesia of maxillary teeth using a computer-controlled
`
`injection system. Quintessence Int 29 (1998): 297-3 (“Friedman 1998”)
`
`15
`
`16
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`EUNSUNG-1016 Lee, Woan-Ruoh, et al., Lasers and microdermabrasion
`
`enhance and control topical delivery of vitamin C, Journal of investigative
`
`dermatology 121.5 (2003): 1118-1125 (“Lee”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1017 U.S. Patent No. 9,550,052 (“the ’052 patent”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1018 U.S. Patent No. 11,446,477 (“the ’477 patent”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1019 U.S. Patent No. 6,428,518 (“Brengle”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1020 U.S. Patent No. 4,559,036 (“Wunsch”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1021 U.S. Patent No. 6,099,511 (“Devos”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1022 U.S. Patent No. 5,163,902 (“Lynn”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1023 U.S. Patent No. 5,190,525 (“Oswald”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1024 U.S. Patent No. 6,673,082 (“Mallett”)
`
`EUNSUNG-1025 Rajan, Poonam, et al., Skin barrier changes induced by
`
`aluminum oxide and sodium chloride microdermabrasion, Dermatologic
`
`surgery 28.5 (2002): 390-393 (“Rajan”)
`
`
`
`EUNSUNG-1026 Karimipour, Darius J., et al., Molecular analysis of
`
`aggressive microdermabrasion in photoaged skin, Archives of dermatology
`
`145.10 (2009): 1114-1122 (“Karimipour”)
`
`
`
`EUNSUNG-1027 U.S. Patent No. 6,241,739 (“Waldron”)
`
` TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW
`A. Microdermabrasion
`
`16
`
`17
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`28. Dermabrasion mechanically removes the upper layer of skin to treat
`
`various skin conditions including wrinkles, acne scars, uneven skin surfaces, and
`
`pigmentary disorders of photoaging. EUNSUNG-1012, 6; EUNSUNG-1013, 57.
`
`Microdermabrasion, a variation of dermabrasion, typically relies on two basic
`
`functions: “(1) superficially abrading the skin with fine, sharp particles or
`
`“crystals” (aluminum oxide, salt, or sodium bicarbonate) suspended in an airstream
`
`and actuated via positive- or negative-flowing pressure, and (2) a vacuum closed-
`
`loop suction device to remove the crystals, along with dead skin, oil, and surface
`
`debris.” EUNSUNG-1013, 84. “The intensity of the treatment, as determined by
`
`the number of passes and level of suction, is chosen based on the condition being
`
`treated.” EUNSUNG-1013, 86. After treatment, the skin can be rinsed with tepid
`
`water and a moisturizer with adequate sunscreen applied. EUNSUNG-1013, 86.
`
`29. As an alternative to laser resurfacing, chemical peels, and
`
`dermabrasion, microdermabrasion is indicated for similar skin issues but with the
`
`limitation of having relatively superficial results. EUNSUNG-1013, 85.
`
`Microdermabrasion, described as a “skin polishing,” is used for atrophic acne
`
`scars, mild facial rhytids, clogged pores, traumatic scars, enlarged pores, brown
`
`spots, stretch marks, melasma, keratosis pilaris, and to improve skin texture. Id.
`
`Microdermabrasion has also been used to prime the skin for superficial chemical
`
`peels by stripping the stratum corneum to ensure more even absorption. Id. When
`
`17
`
`18
`
`

`

`Attorney Docket No. 58484-0001IP1
`IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,865,287
`used in conjunction with microdermabrasion, traditional superficial chemical
`
`peeling agents. Id.
`
`30. Prior to treatment, the area is cleansed and allowed to dry completely.
`
`EUNSUNG-1013, 85. Vacuum level and crystal pressure may be determined by
`
`testing an area of nonfacial skin, but patient tolerance can also dictate an
`
`adjustment in the power setting. EUNSUNG-1013, 85-86. The first pass is
`
`performed by allowing gentle suction of the skin into the hand piece as it is made
`
`to glide along the skin surface. EUNSUNG-1013, 86. The surface area being
`
`treated is stretched taut by the clinician’s free hand to avoid excessive suction in
`
`any one area, which can cause an abrasion or pinpoint bleeding. Id. A second pass
`
`is made at a right angle to the first, and if more passes are required, they should
`
`continue to follow this alternating pat