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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/19/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Applicant's arguments, filed 02/19/2026, have been fully considered. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application.
Applicants have amended their claims, filed 02/19/2026, and therefore rejections newly made in the instant office action have been necessitated by amendment.
Applicants have amended claims 1 and 11.
Applicants have left claims 2, 10, and 20 as originally filed/previously presented.
Applicants have introduced new claims 21-23.
Applicants have canceled/previously canceled claims 3-9, and 12-19.
Claims 1-2, 10-11, and 20-23 are the current claims hereby under examination.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections - Newly Applied Necessitated by Applicant’s Amendments
Claims 1 and 21-23 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, line 35 recites “detecting brain waves”, however it appears it should read --detecting the brain waves-- (emphasis added).
Regarding claim 1, line 38 recites “a biological database”, however it appears it should read --the biological database-- (emphasis added).
Regarding claim 21, lines 1-2 recite “detect heart rate variability data”, however it appears it should read --detect the heart rate variability data-- (emphasis added).
Regarding claim 21, line 3 recites “heart rate variability data”, however it appears it should read --the heart rate variability data-- (emphasis added).
Regarding claim 22, line 2 recites “detecting brain waves”, however it appears it should read --detecting the brain waves-- (emphasis added).
Regarding claim 22, line 5 recites “a biological database”, however it appears it should read --the biological database-- (emphasis added).
Regarding claim 23, lines 1-2 recite “detect heart rate variability data”, however it appears it should read --detect the heart rate variability data-- (emphasis added).
Regarding claim 23, line 3 recites “heart rate variability data”, however it appears it should read --the heart rate variability data-- (emphasis added).
Claim Interpretation - 35 USC § 112(f) - Withdrawn and Newly Applied Necessitated by Applicant’s Amendments
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 1: The claim limitation “a local brain wave collection device for detecting a brain wave and a heart rate variability data … local brain wave collection device includes a plurality of electrodes … each of the electrodes has an output unit, a wireless communication unit … wireless communication is established between the wireless communication unit and the dongle to transmit a biological database of the subject” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses a generic placeholder “device” and “unit” coupled with functional language “for detecting a brain wave and a heart rate variability data …” and “transmit a biological database of the subject …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier that has a known structural meaning before the phrase “device” and “unit”.
Claim 11: The claim limitation “a local brain wave collection device to detect a brain wave and a heart rate variability data …” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses a generic placeholder “device” coupled with functional language “to detect a brain wave and a heart rate variability data …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier that has a known structural meaning before the phrase “device”.
Claim 22: The claim limitation “local brain wave collection device includes a plurality of electrodes … each of the electrodes has an output unit, a wireless communication unit … wireless communication is established between the wireless communication unit and the dongle to transmit a biological database of the subject” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses a generic placeholder “unit” coupled with functional language “transmit a biological database of the subject …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier that has a known structural meaning before the phrase “unit”.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation:
Regarding a and c, the specification does not provide adequate structure, material or acts to support the claimed function. The specification recites in para. [0023], “the local brain wave collection device 10 includes a plurality of electrodes … each of the electrodes has an output unit, a wireless communication unit …”. The specification recites the local brain wave collection device includes electrodes, however, the claims further recite the elements of “an output unit” and “a wireless communication unit”, which is not provided with adequate structure, material or acts within the specification. For the purposes of examination, “an output unit” and “a wireless communication unit” are being interpreted as any element capable of performing the claimed functions.
Regarding b, “the local brain wave collection device 10 includes a plurality of electrodes for detecting brain waves of a subject … the local brain wave collection device 10 further includes: ear electrodes … detect a heart rate variability data (HRV) …”, or equivalents thereof, as described in para. [0023] of the disclosure filed on 10/06/2021.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-10 of Remarks, filed 02/19/2026, with respect to the 112(f) interpretation of “a docking device” and “a feedback interface” have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicants have amended the claims to recite sufficient structure, specifically a computer or mobile phone, to perform the claimed functions of “a docking device” and “a feedback interface”. The 112(f) interpretation of “a docking device” and “a feedback interface” has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 02/19/2026 with respect to “a local brain wave collection device” have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants have amended to claims to recite “the local brain wave collection device … includes a plurality of electrodes for detecting brain wave waves of the subject, each of the electrodes has an output unit, a wireless communication unit, a primary amplifier, a storage unit, and an accelerator, wireless communication is established between the wireless communication unit and the dongle to transmit a biological database of the subject …”, which has necessitated new 112(f) claim interpretations. Additionally, Applicants amendments regarding claim 11 do not introduce sufficient structure for performing the claimed function, as argued.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 - Newly Applied Necessitated by Applicant’s Amendments
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 1-2, 10, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, because the claim purports to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, but fails to provide the structure, material or acts to support the claimed function. As such, the claim recites a function that has no limits and covers every conceivable means for achieving the stated function, while the specification discloses at most only those means known to the inventor. Accordingly, the disclosure is not commensurate with the scope of the claim.
As discussed above, the claim limitations below are interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
Claim 1: “local brain wave collection device includes a plurality of electrodes … each of the electrodes has an output unit, a wireless communication unit … wireless communication is established between the wireless communication unit and the dongle to transmit a biological database of the subject”; and
Claim 22: “local brain wave collection device includes a plurality of electrodes … each of the electrodes has an output unit, a wireless communication unit … wireless communication is established between the wireless communication unit and the dongle to transmit a biological database of the subject”.
The specification merely discloses the functions performed by these limitations. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would not understand the specification, the drawings, and the original claims to disclose any particular structure that achieves the disclosed functionality.
The limitations fail to comply with the written description requirement as the limitations are unbound functional limitations which cover all ways of performing the respective functions and the inventor has not provided sufficient disclosure to show possession of such invention. The limitations therefore fail to comply with the written description requirement. See MPEP 2181.II.A.
The dependent claims of the above rejected claims are rejected due to their dependency.
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.
Regarding claims 1-2, 10, and 21-22, the claim limitations recited in claim 1 and claim 22 “local brain wave collection device includes a plurality of electrodes … each of the electrodes has an output unit, a wireless communication unit … wireless communication is established between the wireless communication unit and the dongle to transmit a biological database of the subject” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function.
The specification recites in para. [0023], “the local brain wave collection device 10 includes a plurality of electrodes … each of the electrodes has an output unit, a wireless communication unit …”. The specification recites the local brain wave collection device includes electrodes, however, the claims further recite the elements of “an output unit” and “a wireless communication unit”, which is not provided with adequate structure, material or acts within the specification. For the purposes of examination, “an output unit” and “a wireless communication unit” are being interpreted as any element capable of performing the claimed functions.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
The dependent claims of the above rejected claim are rejected due to their dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 - Newly Applied Necessitated by Applicant’s Amendments
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.
Section 33(a) of the America Invents Act reads as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism.
Claims 1-2, 10, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 and section 33(a) of the America Invents Act as being directed to or encompassing a human organism. See also Animals - Patentability, 1077 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 24 (April 21, 1987) (indicating that human organisms are excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101).
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites “the local brain wave collection device further includes ear electrodes located at both ears”, which is directed to or encompasses a human organism. It is recommended to the Applicant to amend the claim to read long the lines of --the local brain wave collection device further includes ear electrodes configured to be located at both ears-- (emphasis added).
The dependent claims of the above rejected claim are rejected due to their dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 - Newly Applied Necessitated by Applicant’s Amendments
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 2, 10, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Popovic et al. (US 20110105859 A1) (previously cited), hereinafter referred to as Popovic, in view of Banerji et al. (US 20140200432 A1) (previously cited), hereinafter referred to as Banerji, in view of Bordoley et al. (US 20120143020 A1), hereinafter referred to as Bordoley, in view of Chao et al. (US 20190290882 A1), hereinafter referred to as Chao.
The claims are generally directed towards a system for providing real-time biological feedback in brain training through remote transmission comprising: a local brain wave collection device for detecting a brain wave and a heart rate variability data of a subject to generate a biological database, the local brainwave collection device including 19 channels for detecting 19-channel brain waves; a dongle for establishing wireless or wired communication with the local brain wave collection device to receive the biological database; and a docking device electrically connected to the dongle to upload the biological database to a remote cloud system for abnormal brain wave detection, receive a feedback result from the remote cloud system, provide the feedback result through a feedback interface to the subject and allow the subject to adjust physiological signals for recovery, the remote cloud system including a cloud server which converts the 19-channel brain waves into characteristics including amplitude, frequency, brain wave location, and brain wave pattern through calculating frequency spectrum; wherein the remote cloud system includes a brain wave database, the remote cloud system compares the biological database uploaded by the docking device to the brain wave database to generate the feedback result which is visual or aural in real time, the brain wave database includes a health norm and a clinical norm of brainwave patterns in a specific ethnic group for comparison, a difference resulted from the comparison is converted into a standard score representing a degree of brain dysfunction, and the feedback result is generated based on a training threshold of the standard score; wherein the real-time biological feedback in brain training comprises a signal transmission stage, a real-time calculation stage, and a signal feedback stage that complete real-time analysis and feedback within one minute, the feedback interface includes screen synchronization control as a visual feedback interface or speaker synchronization control as an auditory feedback interface, the signal feedback stage allows the use of external computing software and hardware devices on a mobile device to receive the real-time biological feedback; wherein the feedback result is based on site positioning of the 19 channels and a combination of brain wave patterns to infer a brain activity area as a parameter for brain function detection and neurophysiological feedback training, as well as brain wave (EEG) pattern characteristics and heart rate variability (HRV) characteristics to conduct the brain training on a specific brain area; wherein the local brain wave collection device includes a plurality of electrodes for detecting brain waves of the subject, and each of the electrodes has an output unit, a wireless communication unit, a primary amplifier, a storage unit, and an accelerator, wireless communication is established between the wireless communication unit and the dongle to transmit a biological database of the subject; wherein the local brain wave collection device further includes ear electrodes located at both ears; wherein the local brain wave collection device also includes a secondary amplifier which collects and amplifies brain wave signals; and wherein the docking device is a computer or mobile phone.
Regarding claim 1, Popovic discloses a system for providing real-time biological feedback in brain training through remote transmission (Abstract, “adaptive performance training system …”, Fig. 1. Fig. 2) comprising:
a local brain wave collection device for detecting a brain wave and a heart rate variability data of a subject to generate a biological database (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, para. [0018-0019], “receive signal data from various types of sensors that are configured to collect psychophysiological signals from user … EEG …”, para. [0024-0025], “heart rate variability …”, para. [0033], “wearable sensors are available for the acquisition of EEG …”, para. [0035], “signals output by the monitor module can be output to a remote computer system … storage …”);
a dongle for establishing wireless or wired communication with the local brain wave collection device to receive the biological database (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, para. [0035], “wirelessly transmitted to a remote personal computer …”, para. [0056], “adaptive performance trainer can also include a wireless transceiver to connect to a remote computer station …” - portable training module/adaptive performance trainer include a dongle/hardware for establishing wireless communication with remote computers and servers); and
a docking device electrically connected to the dongle (Fig. 1, element 100, Fig. 2, element 200, para. [0017]) to upload the biological database to a remote cloud system for abnormal brain wave detection (para. [0017], para. [0035], “signals output by the monitor module can be output to a remote computer system …”), receive a feedback result from the remote cloud system (para. [0038], “rules can also be used to define the types of feedback to be provided to a user …”, para. [0057], “data in the data store can be used for offline analysis … to provide feedback to the user during a training session …”), provide the feedback result through a feedback interface to the subject (Fig. 2, element 209, para. [0055], para. [0057]), and allow the subject to adjust physiological signals for recovery (para. [0063], “feedback … help users train to control their physiology …”), the remote cloud system including a cloud server (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, para. [0059]) which converts the brain waves into characteristics including amplitude, frequency, brain wave location, and brain wave pattern through calculating frequency spectrum (para. [0022-0023], para. [0025], para. [0028]);
wherein the remote cloud system includes a brain wave database, the remote cloud system compares the biological database uploaded by the docking device to the brain wave database to generate the feedback result which is visual or aural in real time (para. [0031], “comparing the input signals from the monitor module with the desired metrics …”, para. [0032], para. [0055], para. [0073]), the brain wave database includes a health norm and a clinical norm of brainwave patterns in a specific ethnic group for comparison (para. [0021], “compare the extracted metrics to pre-defined indices … one or more goal states that represent a desired psychophysiological state that are typically present in expert level performance …”, para. [0038], para. [0042], “stored profiles module can be configured to extract the basis of expert performance that is common to at least 80% of the population …”, para. [0061], para. [0073]), a difference resulted from the comparison is converted into a standard score representing a degree of brain dysfunction, and the feedback result is generated based on a training threshold of the standard score (para. [0031], “comparing the input signals with the desired metrics …”, para. [0032], “feedback provided can help to steer the user toward one or more goal states …”, para. [0055], para. [0073-0075], “determine a current psychophysiological state … compared with the one or more goal sates … determination can then be made whether the one or more of the goals associated with the selected training profile have been reached … different profiles might be developed for different steps … user has reached a state … user can be provided with positive feedback … not yet reached a state … determine feedback to provide to the user to steer the user toward a desired state);
wherein the real-time biological feedback in brain training comprises a signal transmission stage (para. [0035], para. [0056]), a real-time calculation stage (para. [0031], para. [0073]), and a signal feedback stage (para. [0032], para. [0055]) that complete real-time analysis and feedback within one minute (para. [0016], “continuous real-time feedback”, para. [0030-0032], “provide real-time feedback to the user …”, para. [0036] - the feedback of the analysis is continuously provided to the user in real-time, therefore the analysis and feedback must be completed within one minute to continuously provide feedback), the feedback interface includes screen synchronization control as a visual feedback interface or speaker synchronization control as an auditory feedback interface (para. [0006], “multiple environments …”, para. [0055-0057]), the signal feedback stage allows the use of external computing software and hardware devices on a mobile device to receive the real-time biological feedback (Fig. 2, para. [0056-0058]);
wherein the feedback result is based on site positioning of the channels and a combination of brain wave patterns to infer a brain activity area as a parameter for brain function detection and neurophysiological feedback training, as well as brain wave (EEG) pattern characteristics and heart rate variability (HRV) characteristics to conduct the brain training on a specific brain area (para. [0028], para. [0030-0032], para. [0036], para. [0061-0062], para. [0065]);
wherein the docking device is a computer or mobile phone (Fig. 1, element 100, Fig. 2, element 200, para. [0017], para. [0044]).
However, Popovic does not explicitly disclose the local brainwave collection device including 19 channels for detecting 19-channel brain waves, the 19-channel brain waves are converted, and the feedback result is based on the 19 channels; wherein the local brain wave collection device includes a plurality of electrodes for detecting brain waves of the subject, and each of the electrodes has an output unit, a wireless communication unit, a primary amplifier, wireless communication is established between the wireless communication unit and the dongle to transmit a biological database of the subject; and wherein the local brain wave collection device also includes a secondary amplifier which collects and amplifies brain wave signals.
Banerji teaches an analogous system and method for sensing a mind state and generating a mind state indicator/measure for facilitating a subjects functional development (Abstract, Fig. 1, Fig. 2, para. [0078-0085]). Banerji teaches a local brain wave collection device for detecting a brain wave and heart rate data to generate a biological database (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, element 100, para. [0081], “mind signal capture apparatuses or devices 100 includes a number of electrodes configured to detect electroencephalographic (EEG) signals …”, para. [0083]). Banerji further teaches the local brainwave collection device includes 19 channels for detecting and processing 19-chanel brain waves (para. [0160-0161]). Banerji further teaches the local brain wave collection device includes a plurality of electrodes for detecting brain waves of the subject, and each of the electrodes has an output unit, a wireless communication unit, a primary amplifier, wireless communication is established between the wireless communication unit and the dongle to transmit a biological database of the subject; and wherein the local brain wave collection device also includes a secondary amplifier which collects and amplifies brain wave signals (para. [0159], para. [0179]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the local brainwave collection device and system disclosed by Popovic to explicitly include 19 channels for detecting 19-channel brain waves and determining characteristics, and specifically include a plurality of electrodes with different components, as taught by Banerji. This is because Banerji teaches the number of EEG channels and locations of the EEG electrodes depends on the type of subject dysfunction or impairment under consideration, and more channels, such as 19 channels, allows for facilitating sleep disorders or mild cognitive impairment (para. [0160]), and specific components including amplifiers and output and communication units to allow for signal transferring and analysis (para. [0159], para. [0179]).
However, modified Popovic does not explicitly disclose each of the electrodes has a storage unit and an accelerator.
Bordoley teaches an analogous local brain wave collection device including a plurality of electrodes for detecting brain waves of a subject (Abstract, Fig. 3, para. [0009]). Bordoley further teaches each of the electrodes has a storage unit and an accelerator (para. [0053]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the plurality of electrodes taught by modified Popovic to additionally each include a storage unit and an accelerator, as taught by Bordoley. This is because Bordoley teaches storage units and accelerators, such as circuitry and signal processors, allow the brain signals to be processed at the electrodes prior to being transmitted to a remote receiver (para. [0053]).
However, modified Popovic does not explicitly disclose wherein the local brain wave collection device further includes ear electrodes located at both ears.
Chao teaches an analogous local brain wave collection device for detecting a brain wave and a heart rate variability data of a subject (Fig. 2, Fig. 3, para. [0020-0022]). Chao further teaches the local brain wave collection device further includes ear electrodes located at both ears (Fig. 2, Fig. 3, para. [0022]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the local brain wave collection device taught by modified Popovic to additionally include ear electrodes located at both ears, as taught by Chao. This is because Chao teaches electrodes located at both ears allows for multiple lobe regions to be recorded for analysis (para. [0022]).
Regarding claim 2, modified Popovic discloses the system of claim 1, wherein a communication distance of more than 500m is established by the dongle for the signal transmission stage, the real-time calculation stage, and the signal feedback stage (para. [0035], “wirelessly transmitted to a remote personal computer system or laptop …”, para. [0041], “remote processing and storage module via … internet” - a communication distance during the three stages is more than 500m due to the remote processing/storage modules and the use of transmitting via the internet).
Regarding claim 10, modified Popovic discloses system of claim 1, wherein the local brain wave collection device is a brain wave detection cap (para. [0033]).
Regarding claim 21, modified Popovic discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the ear electrodes detect heart rate variability data, an autonomic nerve balance, and a brain function of the subject, and transmit blood flow and heart rate variability data for analysis of autonomic nervous function (para. [0018], para. [0021], para. [0024-0025] - further, see the rejection of claim 1 regarding the ear electrodes).
Claims 11, 20, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Popovic et al. (US 20110105859 A1) (previously cited), hereinafter referred to as Popovic, in view of Banerji et al. (US 20140200432 A1) (previously cited), hereinafter referred to as Banerji, in view of Chao et al. (US 20190290882 A1), hereinafter referred to as Chao.
Regarding claim 11, Popovic discloses a method for providing real-time biological feedback in brain training through remote transmission (Abstract, “adaptive performance training system …”, Fig. 1. Fig. 2, para. [0002]) comprising:
using a local brain wave collection device to detect a brain wave and a heart rate variability data of a subject to generate a biological database (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, para. [0018-0019], “receive signal data from various types of sensors that are configured to collect psychophysiological signals from user … EEG …”, para. [0024-0025], “heart rate variability …”, para. [0033], “wearable sensors are available for the acquisition of EEG …”, para. [0035], “signals output by the monitor module can be output to a remote computer system … storage …”);
using a dongle to establish wireless or wired communication with the local brain wave collection device to receive the biological database (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, para. [0035], “wirelessly transmitted to a remote personal computer …”, para. [0056], “adaptive performance trainer can also include a wireless transceiver to connect to a remote computer station …” - portable training module/adaptive performance trainer include a dongle/hardware for establishing wireless communication with remote computers and servers);
using a docking device electrically connected to the dongle (Fig. 1, element 100, Fig. 2, element 200, para. [0017]) to upload the biological database to a remote cloud system for abnormal brain wave comparison detection (para. [0017], para. [0035], “signals output by the monitor module can be output to a remote computer system …”); and
receiving a feedback result from the remote cloud system (para. [0038], “rules can also be used to define the types of feedback to be provided to a user …”, para. [0057], “data in the data store can be used for offline analysis … to provide feedback to the user during a training session …”) to provide the feedback result through a feedback interface to the subject and allow the subject to adjust physiological signals for recovery according to the feedback result (Fig. 2, element 209, para. [0055], para. [0057]), and allow the subject to adjust physiological signals for recovery (para. [0063], “feedback … help users train to control their physiology …”), the remote cloud system including a cloud server (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, para. [0059]) which converts the brain waves into characteristics including amplitude, frequency, brain wave location, and brain wave pattern through calculating frequency spectrum (para. [0022], para. [0025], para. [0028]);
wherein the remote cloud system includes a brain wave database, the remote cloud system compares the biological database uploaded by the docking device to the brain wave database to generate the feedback result which is visual or aural in real time (para. [0031], “comparing the input signals from the monitor module with the desired metrics …”, para. [0032], para. [0055], para. [0073]), the brain wave database includes a health norm and a clinical norm of brainwave patterns in a specific ethnic group for comparison (para. [0021], “compare the extracted metrics to pre-defined indices … one or more goal states that represent a desired psychophysiological state that are typically present in expert level performance …”, para. [0038], para. [0042], “stored profiles module can be configured to extract the basis of expert performance that is common to at least 80% of the population …”, para. [0061], para. [0073]), a difference resulted from the comparison is converted into a standard score representing a degree of brain dysfunction, and the feedback result is generated based on a training threshold of the standard score (para. [0031], “comparing the input signals with the desired metrics …”, para. [0032], “feedback provided can help to steer the user toward one or more goal states …”, para. [0055], para. [0073-0075], “determine a current psychophysiological state … compared with the one or more goal sates … determination can then be made whether the one or more of the goals associated with the selected training profile have been reached … different profiles might be developed for different steps … user has reached a state … user can be provided with positive feedback … not yet reached a state … determine feedback to provide to the user to steer the user toward a desired state);
wherein the real-time biological feedback in brain training comprises a signal transmission stage (para. [0035], para. [0056]), a real-time calculation stage (para. [0031], para. [0073]), and a signal feedback stage (para. [0032], para. [0055]) that complete real-time analysis and feedback within one minute (para. [0016], “continuous real-time feedback”, para. [0030-0032], “provide real-time feedback to the user …”, para. [0036] - the feedback of the analysis is continuously provided to the user in real-time, therefore the analysis and feedback must be completed within one minute to continuously provide feedback), the feedback interface includes screen synchronization control as a visual feedback interface or speaker synchronization control as an auditory feedback interface (para. [0006], “multiple environments …”, para. [0055-0057]), the signal feedback stage allows the use of external computing software and hardware devices on a mobile device to receive the real-time biological feedback (Fig. 2, para. [0056-0058]);
wherein the feedback result is based on site positioning of the channels and a combination of brain wave patterns to infer a brain activity area as a parameter for brain function detection and neurophysiological feedback training, as well as brain wave (EEG) pattern characteristics and heart rate variability (HRV) characteristics to conduct the brain training on a specific brain area (para. [0028], para. [0030-0032], para. [0036], para. [0061-0062], para. [0065]); and
wherein the docking device is a computer or mobile phone (Fig. 1, element 100, Fig. 2, element 200, para. [0017], para. [0044]).
However, Popovic does not explicitly disclose the local brainwave collection device including 19 channels for detecting 19-channel brain waves, the 19-channel brain waves are converted, and the feedback result is based on the 19 channels; and wherein the local brain wave collection device also includes a secondary amplifier which collects and amplifies brain wave signals.
Banerji teaches an analogous system and method for sensing a mind state and generating a mind state indicator/measure for facilitating a subjects functional development (Abstract, Fig. 1, Fig. 2, para. [0078-0085]). Banerji teaches a local brain wave collection device for detecting a brain wave and heart rate data to generate a biological database (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, element 100, para. [0081], “mind signal capture apparatuses or devices 100 includes a number of electrodes configured to detect electroencephalographic (EEG) signals …”, para. [0083]). Banerji further teaches the local brainwave collection device includes 19 channels for detecting and processing 19-chanel brain waves (para. [0160-0161]). Banerji further teaches the local brain wave collection device also includes a secondary amplifier which collects and amplifies brain wave signals (para. [0159], para. [0179]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the local brainwave collection device and method disclosed by Popovic to explicitly include 19 channels for detecting 19-channel brain waves and determining characteristics, and include a secondary amplifier which collects and amplifies brain wave signals, as taught by Banerji. This is because Banerji teaches the number of EEG channels and locations of the EEG electrodes depends on the type of subject dysfunction or impairment under consideration, and more channels, such as 19 channels, allows for facilitating sleep disorders or mild cognitive impairment (para. [0160]), and amplifiers allow for signal amplification to occur at the electrodes (para. [0159], para. [0179]).
However, modified Popovic does not explicitly disclose wherein the local brain wave collection device further includes ear electrodes located at both ears.
Chao teaches an analogous local brain wave collection device for detecting a brain wave and a heart rate variability data of a subject (Fig. 2, Fig. 3, para. [0020-0022]). Chao further teaches the local brain wave collection device further includes ear electrodes located at both ears (Fig. 2, Fig. 3, para. [0022]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the local brain wave collection device taught by modified Popovic to additionally include ear electrodes located at both ears, as taught by Chao. This is because Chao teaches electrodes located at both ears allows for multiple lobe regions to be recorded for analysis (para. [0022]).
Regarding claim 20, modified Popovic discloses the method of claim 11, wherein a communication distance of more than 500m is established by the dongle for the signal transmission stage, the real-time calculation stage, and the signal feedback stage (para. [0035], “wirelessly transmitted to a remote personal computer system or laptop …”, para. [0041], “remote processing and storage module via … internet” - a communication distance during the three stages is more than 500m due to the remote processing/storage modules and the use of transmitting via the internet).
Regarding claim 23, modified Popovic discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the ear electrodes detect heart rate variability data, an autonomic nerve balance, and a brain function of the subject, and transmit blood flow and heart rate variability data for analysis of autonomic nervous function (para. [0018], para. [0021], para. [0024-0025] - further, see the rejection of claim 1 regarding the ear electrodes).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Popovic et al. (US 20110105859 A1) (previously cited), hereinafter referred to as Popovic, in view of Banerji et al. (US 20140200432 A1) (previously cited), hereinafter referred to as Banerji, in view of Chao et al. (US 20190290882 A1), hereinafter referred to as Chao as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Bordoley et al. (US 20120143020 A1), hereinafter referred to as Bordoley.
Regarding claim 22, modified Popovic discloses the method of claim 11.
However, modified Popovic does not explicitly disclose wherein the local brain wave collection device includes a plurality of electrodes for detecting brain waves of the subject, and each of the electrodes has an output unit, a wireless communication unit, a primary amplifier, wireless communication is established between the wireless communication unit and the dongle to transmit a biological database of the subject.
Banerji further teaches the local brain wave collection device includes a plurality of electrodes for detecting brain waves of the subject, and each of the electrodes has an output unit, a wireless communication unit, a primary amplifier, wireless communication is established between the wireless communication unit and the dongle to transmit a biological database of the subject; and wherein the local brain wave collection device also includes a secondary amplifier which collects and amplifies brain wave signals (para. [0159], para. [0179]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the local brain wave collection device taught by modified Popovic to additionally include the plurality of components, as taught by Banerji. This is because Banerji teaches the plurality of components, including amplifiers and output and communication units allow for signal transferring and analysis (para. [0159], para. [0179]).
However, modified Popovic does not explicitly disclose each of the electrodes has a storage unit and an accelerator.
Bordoley teaches an analogous local brain wave collection device including a plurality of electrodes for detecting brain waves of a subject (Abstract, Fig. 3, para. [0009]). Bordoley further teaches each of the electrodes has a storage unit and an accelerator (para. [0053]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the plurality of electrodes taught by modified Popovic to additionally each include a storage unit and an accelerator, as taught by Bordoley. This is because Bordoley teaches storage units and accelerators, such as circuitry and signal processors, allow the brain signals to be processed at the electrodes prior to being transmitted to a remote receiver (para. [0053]).
Response to Arguments
First, Applicants amendments have necessitated new grounds of rejection.
Further, Applicant's arguments regarding Popovic and Banerji, filed 02/19/2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants have argued on pages 12-13 of Remarks filed 02/19/2026, that “Popovic is merely a sports training logic, fundamentally different from the medical diagnostic logic in the present invention”.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As recited above, the combined references teach utilization of health norm and clinical norm data for a specific ethnic group for comparison, and converting the comparison into a standard score representing a degree of brain dysfunction, as claimed. Further, Applicants arguments regarding the difference between “medical diagnostic logic” and “sports training logic” are not commensurate in scope with the claimed invention.
Applicants have argued on pages 13-17 of Remarks, filed 02/19/2026, a plurality of arguments regarding what the standard score of the degree of brain dysfunction is based on.
Applicants arguments are not commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. The claims do not require the argued specifics of how the standardized brain function score is calculated.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE W KRETZER whose telephone number is (571)272-1907. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:30 AM to 5:30 PM.
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 M Sims can be reached at (571)272-7540. 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.
/K.W.K./ Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/JASON M SIMS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights