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 .
Status of Claims
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on 8/12/2025. As directed by the
amendment claims 1, 2, 4, 6, and 7 have been amended, and claims 8-19 have been added. Thus, claims 1-19 remain pending.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/12/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuji et al. (US20100106060A1; hereinafter known as “Tsuji”; previously cited) in view of Tafazzoli et al. (US20160089073A1; hereinafter known as “Tafazzoli”) further in view of Friedman et al. (US20130060166A1; hereinafter known as “Friedman”; previously cited). Regarding claim 1, 4, 6, and 7, Tsuji teaches a detecting apparatus detecting anomalies in motor function using periodic time series data obtained by measuring finger movements using a sensor (See Tsuji [0011], detecting movement of finger tapping) comprising: processor (See abstract a processor unit 121); a display coupled to the processor (See Tsuji [0038], a display unit 124); and a memory coupled to the processor, the memory storing instructions that when executed by the processor (See Tsuji [0043], a memory), configures the processor to: acquire an entire periodic time series data of a predetermined period of time obtained by the measuring of the finger movements by using the sensor (See Tsuji Figure 4A- 4C are time series data measuring finger movements), calculate a first feature amount of the entire periodic time series of the predetermined period of time (See Tsuji Figure 4B), detect an anomaly of the entire periodic time series data of the predetermined period of time based on the calculated first feature amount (See Tsuji Figure 4B and see [0057-0058], the finger-tip displacement is determined overtime), generate an anomaly rate based on a result of the detection of the anomaly (See Tsuji [0057], obtains a time differential of the two fingertips), generate partial time series data by dividing the entire periodic time series data of the predetermined period of time, the partial time series data being a portion of the entire periodic time series data of the predetermined amount of time (See Tsuji Figure 6 the data is separated to determine partial time series from the entire time segment), calculate a second feature amount of the partial time series data (See Tsuji Figure 4A the distance is determined, further see Figure 6 the fingertip distance is determined from the partial time series data), detect an anomaly of the partial time series data, based on the calculated second feature amount while referring to the partial time series data by using the anomaly rate of the entire periodic time series data of the predetermined period of time (See Tsuji [0070, fingertips' distance d(t) can be measured by using the magnetic sensors 101 and 102. As shown in FIG. 6, the finger-tapping force is produced at the moment at which d(t) becomes equal to or lower than 0 (zero) [10.sup.-3 m].]), and
display, on the display, a waveform (See Tsuji [0039][0045]). Tsuji is silent with respect to determining a level of the anomaly of the partial time series data and the display waveform of the entire periodic time series data, a portion of the waveform corresponding to the partial time series data having the anomaly being highlighted, the second feature amount and the level of the anomaly above the portion of the waveform being highlighted. Tafazzoli teaches a level of the anomaly of the partial time series data (See Tafazzoli [0013], extracting maximums and minimums over time from the generated projections), and the display waveform of the entire periodic time series data (See Tafazzoli [0053], and Figure 13 the entire periodic time is on the x axis), a portion of the waveform corresponding to the partial time series data having the anomaly being highlighted (See Tafazzoli Figure 13 window 1302, is a partial time series data), the second feature amount and the level of the anomaly above the portion of the waveform being highlighted. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to provide Tsuji with a level of the anomaly of the partial time series data and the display waveform of the entire periodic time series data, a portion of the waveform corresponding to the partial time series data having the anomaly being highlighted, the second feature amount and the level of the anomaly above the portion of the waveform being highlighted as taught by Tafazzoli to modify Tsuji with a level of the anomaly of the partial time series data and the display waveform of the entire periodic time series data, a portion of the waveform corresponding to the partial time series data having the anomaly being highlighted, the second feature amount and the level of the anomaly above the portion of the waveform being highlighted to determine the extreme points so as to evaluate the task and patient’s status (See Tsuji [0053-0054]). Tsuji in view of Tafazzoli is silent with respect to the information further including instructions for finger movements to improve the data. Friedman teaches a device for providing rehabilitation and assessing function from a portion of the human body (See Friedman abstract) and further teaches instructions for finger movements to improve the anomaly of the data (See Friedman [0028][0030][0044]).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to provide Tsuji with the information further including instructions for finger movements to improve the data as taught by Friedman so as to aid a user in their functional movements (See Friedman [0026]). Regarding claim 2, Tsuji teaches wherein the processor is configured to: generate information indicating whether the partial time series data is anomalous (See Tsuji [0041], estimating unit 1212 uses information from the displacement unit 1211 to calculate force), and determine information indicating an anomaly feature amount that is a feature amount to be cause of the detection of the anomaly feature amount that is a feature amount to be a cause of the detection of the anomaly of the partial time series data (See Figure 7 and 8 also see [0056-00058][0077], capable of determining differences). Regarding claim 3, Tsuji teaches the processor (See abstract a processor unit 121) and anomaly feature (See Tsuji Figure 4A the first feature amount is the distance)). Tsuji is silent with respect to the processor being configured to: determine a practice menu for improving the anomaly feature amount, and display the practice menu.
Friedman teaches the determination of a practice menu for improving the anomaly feature amount, and the display of the practice menu (See Friedman Figure 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to provide Tsuji with the determination of a practice menu for improving the anomaly feature amount, and the display of the practice menu as taught by Friedman to aid a user in their functional movements (See Friedman [0026]). Regarding claim 5, Tsuji teaches wherein the processor is configured to display simultaneously, on one screen the information based on the result of the detection of the anomaly of the partial time series data and the result of the detection of the anomaly of the entire periodic time series data (See [0039], displays results of the analyzed signal).
Claims 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuji in view of Tafazzoli further in view of Friedman in view of Kandori et al. (US20060244744A1; hereinafter known as “Kandori”).
Regarding claim 8, 10,12 and 14, Tsuji teaches a display (See Tsuji [0039][0045]), and teaches the first and second feature (See Tsuji Figure 4B and 4A). Tsuji in view of Tafazzoli in view of Friedman is silent with respect to one of a first sign and a second sign, in conjunction with the second feature amount, the first sign indicating the second feature amount is too large and the second sign indicating the second feature amount is too small. Kandori teaches one of a first sign and a second sign, in conjunction with the second feature amount, the first sign indicating the second feature amount is too large and the second sign indicating the second feature amount is too small (See Kandori Figure 7, positive or negative velocities depicted negative is highlighted). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to provide Tsuji in view of Tafazzoli in view of Friedman with one of a first sign and a second sign, in conjunction with the second feature amount, the first sign indicating the second feature amount is too large and the second sign indicating the second feature amount is too small as taught by Kandori to modify the Tsuji apparatus so as to determine the direction of movement in a Parkinson’s patient (See Kandori [0107]). Regarding claim 16, 17 18 and 19, Tsuji in view of Tafazzoli in view of Friedman does not teach the displaying of evaluation comments related to the second feature amount. Kandori teaches the displaying of evaluation comments related to the second feature amount (See Kandori Figure 8, comments on subject, comments on measurement and [0112]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to provide Tsuji in view of Tafazzoli in view of Friedman with the displaying of evaluation comments related to the second feature amount as taught by Kandori so as to further manage the information collected for the subject and to evaluate the severity of the patient with the brain disorder (See [0108-0112]).
Claims 9, 11, 13, and 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuji in view of Tafazzoli further in view of Friedman in view of Kandori in view of Anantha et al. (US20190311643A1; hereinafter known as “Anantha”). Regarding claim 9, 11, 13, and 15, Tsuji in view of Tafazzoli in view of Friedman does not teach the processor being configured to: determine a practice menu based on the second feature amount, and display the practice menu. Kandori teaches the processor is configured to: determine a practice menu based on the second feature amount, and display the practice menu.Anantha teaches a system may select tasks and task content for a user (See Anantha abstract) and further teaches processor is configured to: determine a practice menu based on the second feature amount, and display the practice menu (See Anantha Figure 2, based on task data and task criteria determines new task data, also see Figure 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to provide Tsuji in view of Tafazzoli in view of Friedman with the determination of a practice menu based on the second feature amount, and the display of the practice menu. Kandori teaches the processor is configured to: determine a practice menu based on the second feature amount, and display the practice menu as taught by Anantha to modify the Tsuji’s device so as to adapt the selection of tasks and task content based on the user’s performance when user is not supervised (See Anantha abstract).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s argument with respect to rejection regarding claims 1-7 under 35 U.S.C. 103 specifically regarding “The combination of Tsuji and Friedman does not render claim 1 obvious. Tsuji discloses a detecting apparatus detecting an anomaly by using cyclic information indicating a biological body state… With respect to Fig 6 also merely discloses “the Finger-tapping force is produced at the moment at which d(t) become equal to or lower than 0.” However, describing the finger-tapping force as being produced at the moment at which d(t) becomes equal to or lower than 0 is not at all an anomaly or indicate detection of anomaly of the partial time series data, as set forth in claim 1. Tsuji is completely silent about “detect an anomaly of the partial time series data based on (1) the calculated second feature amount while referring to the partial time series data (2) by using anomaly rate of the entire periodic series data of the predetermined period of time. Tsuji merely discloses an enlarged partial view of a waveform of fingertip distance over time and does not detect an anomaly set forth in claim 1.” has been fully considered and is not persuasive. The applicant states “However, describing the finger-tapping force as being produced at the moment at which d(t) becomes equal to or lower than 0 is not at all an anomaly or indicate detection of anomaly of partial time series data.” An anomaly refers to the deviation of the normal. Tsuji teaches the obtaining of information indicative of the displacement of two fingers in a deformed state. The information indicative of the displacement is correlated to distance, velocity, and acceleration data (See Tsuji abstract and [0011]; Figures 6-8). Therefore, Tsuji is teaching an anomaly by determining displacement of two fingers. The applicant states “Tsuji is completely silent about “detect an anomaly of the partial time series data based on (1) the calculated second feature amount while referring to the partial time series data (2) by using anomaly rate of the entire periodic series data of the predetermined period of time. Tsuji merely discloses an enlarged partial view of a waveform of fingertip distance over time and does not detect an anomaly set forth in claim 1.” Tsuji teaches an anomaly of partial time series data (See Tsuji Figure 4A-4C, where time is on the x axis), further teaches a second feature which is distance (See 4A, the time is a second feature) and an anomaly rate of the entire periodic series data of the predetermine period time (See Figure 4B represents a predetermine period of time, 10 secs, and obtains a time differential of the two finger-tips during that period to determine a waveform of the entire period series data). The claims do not recite what the first and second features are and further does not recite how an anomaly rate is determined. Applicant’s argument with respect to rejection regarding claims 1-7 under 35 U.S.C. 103 specifically regarding “however, Friedman does not disclose "display, on the display, a waveform of the entire periodic time series data, a portion of the waveform corresponding to the partial time series data having the anomaly being highlighted, the second feature amount and the level of the anomaly above the portion of the waveform being highlighted, and instructions for finger movements to improve the anomaly of the partial time series data” has been fully considered and is persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, after further consideration a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Tsuji in view of Tafazzoli further in view of Friedman.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Meghan R Kumar whose telephone number is (571)272-7125. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8a.m - 5p.m.
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, Charles Marmor can be reached at 571-272-4730. 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.
/M.R.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/MATTHEW KREMER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights