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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-3, 5-13, and 15-20 were previously pending and subject to a non-final Office Action having a notification date of March 30, 2026 (“non-final Office Action”). Following the non-final Office Action, Applicant filed an amendment on September 30, 2026 (the “Amendment”), amending claims 1 and 11 and canceling claims 9 and 19.
The present Final Office Action addresses pending claims 1-3, 5-8, 10-13, 15-18, and 20 in the Amendment.
Response to Arguments
Response to Applicant’s Arguments Regarding Claim Rejections Under 35 USC §103
These rejections are withdrawn in view of the Amendment.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120 as follows:
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application No. 17/139,109 (“Prior Application”), fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of the present application.
Specifically, independent claims 1 and 11 (and thus dependent claims 2, 3, 5-8, 10, 12, 13, 15-18, and 20 by virtue of their dependency) in the present application recite a “functional signature,” a “conduct indicator,” and a “functional program.” However, the Prior Application does not disclose or support these limitations. Claims 1-3, 5-8, 10-13, 15-18, and 20 in the present application also recite other limitations not disclosed or supported by the Prior Application.
Accordingly, claims 1-3, 5-8, 10-13, 15-18, and 20 of the present application are not entitled to the benefit of the Prior Application and thus the effective filing date of claims 1-3, 5-8, 10-13, 15-18, and 20 of the present application is September 1, 2021, the actual filing date of the present application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-8, 10-13, 15-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Each of independent claims 1 and 11 has been amended to recite "wherein producing the functional program further comprises determining a holistic prospect comprising a potential adjustment to the functional signature of the user, wherein the potential adjustment comprises a guideline to modify a chakra flow exercise practice of the user."
For reference, [0045] of the present application discloses:
Still referring to FIG. 2, computing device 104 may produce functional program 216 as a function of determining a holistic prospect. As used in this disclosure a "holistic prospect" is a potential adjustment to an individual's functional signature, wherein a "potential adjustment," as used herein, is modification and/or alteration of a user's habits and/or behaviors that may be performed. For example, and without limitation, holistic project may denote that a potential adjustment may include adjusting the amount of exercise and/or strenuous activity performed by the individual. As a further non-limiting example, holistic project may denote that a potential adjustment may include adjusting the amount of religious guidance that an individual receives. As a further non-limiting example, holistic project may denote that a potential adjustment may include adjusting the amount of chakra flow of an individual. (Emphasis added).
Also for reference, [0046] of the present application discloses:
For example, and without limitation, mitigation goal may include reducing the effects of ulcerative colitis as a function of recommending magnesium and/or zinc supplements and/or recommending enhanced chakra flow of an individual's body. Additionally or alternatively, digestive functional goal may include one or more goals associated with gene therapy to alter and/or mutate an individual's epigenetic factors. (Emphasis added).
Thus, while the above paragraphs generally disclose how producing the functional program can include determining a holistic prospect including an adjustment to the user's functional signature such as adjusting a chakra flow amount in an individual's body, neither these nor any other portions of the present specification disclose or suggest such potential adjustment to include "a guideline to modify a chakra flow exercise practice of the user" as now recited in the present claims.
The remaining claims are rejected based on their dependencies from one of the above claims.
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.
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 JONATHON A. SZUMNY whose telephone number is (303) 297-4376. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-5.
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, Jason Dunham, can be reached on 571-272-8109. 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.
/JONATHON A. SZUMNY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3686
