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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moghaddam (US 2018/0279900) in view of Sato et al (US 2020/0288986).
Re claim 1, Moghaddam discloses a playback device comprising: a biological information acquisition part for acquiring biological information of a user (fig. 1, 112); and a control part for setting a psychological state corresponding to a situation of content during playback as a targeted psychological state (par. [0053], contextual neurofeedback system 400 is used to analyze environmental and neural information related to a user to detect mental and intellectual states of the user, and [0054], where the system utilizes a modeling portion to build a model personalize the functions of electronic devices based on the contextual neurofeedback model), specifying a psychological state of the user from the biological information acquired by the biological information acquisition part ([0078], real time brain waves determines that the user is frustrated and bored, a psychological state), and changing a mode of the content during playback ([0086], the device determines during any given moment the user’s psychological state and music selection, therefore any changes that are made can be made during playback) so that the psychological state specified from the biological information matches the targeted psychological state ([0074], [0079], the device has a targeted state, such as excited, happy, or focused, and the system modifies the devices in order to modify the brain state of the user to match the targeted state, [0081]),
wherein the control part does not change the mode of the content during playback when the psychological state specified from the biological information matches the targeted psychological state (see [0089], the system attempts to change the state of the user from one to another, therefore once the desired state is reached, no further change will be made).
While Moghaddam discloses brain waves associated with excitement, there is no explicit disclosure of gamma waves and when the excited state continues for a predetermined period or longer, instructing the user to interrupt playback of the content. Sato teaches a biometric system which measures gamma waves which indicate the user is unstable and excited ([0052]). Furthermore, if the user’s state indicates a level of elevated concentration for a length of time, the system prompts the user to take a rest ([0069]). It would have been obvious to track gamma waves and instructing users to take a break if they are at an elevated state for a long period of time in order to promote healthy habits and preventing stress by limiting the amount of time a person continuously works ([0070]).
Re claim 2, Moghaddam discloses wherein under the condition that the targeted psychological state is a state in which a sympathetic nerve is dominant, when the psychological state specified from the biological state is a state in which a parasympathetic nerve is dominant, the control part changes the mode of the content during playback so as to enhance the sympathetic nerve ([0086] and [0089], when the user is bored, i.e. the parasympathetic nerve is dominant, the system generates rules to excite the user, i.e. enhance the sympathetic nerve), and wherein under the condition that the targeted psychological state is a state in which the parasympathetic nerve is dominant, when the psychological state specified from the biological information is a state in which the sympathetic nerve is dominant, the control part changes the mode of the content so as to suppress the sympathetic nerve ([0089], the system can relax a user in an agitated state).
Re claim 4, Moghaddam discloses the control part sets a base line for determining which one of the sympathetic and parasympathetic nerve is dominant in the psychological state of the user based on the biological information acquired by the biological information acquisition part before the playback of the content ([0088], the device learns how the user mentally and physically reacts to environmental contexts).
Re claim 5, Moghaddam discloses when the biological information acquired by the biological information acquisition part during the playback of the content is equal to or greater than the base line, the control part determines that the sympathetic nerve is dominant, and vice versa ([0086] to [0088], the system learns when and how the user becomes certain emotional states, such as by watching facial expressions, measuring brain waves, and learning when the user becomes excited and engaged).
Re claims 8-9, see the above rejections.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moghaddam in view of Sato as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tsang (US 2015/0245156).
Re claim 10, Moghaddam has disclosed a control part for setting a psychological state corresponding to a situation of content during playback as a targeted psychological state (par. [0053], contextual neurofeedback system 400 is used to analyze environmental and neural information related to a user to detect mental and intellectual states of the user, and [0054], where the system utilizes a modeling portion to build a model personalize the functions of electronic devices based on the contextual neurofeedback model); wherein when a brain wave of the user is a theta wave, the control part specifies that the psychological state of the user is a bored state ([0086]), and when under the condition that the targeted psychological state is a relaxed state, when the psychological state specified from the biological information is the bored state, the control part changes a mode of the content such that the brain wave of the user becomes a different wave ([0089], the device generates rules to achieve results that change the state of a user). While Moghaddam does not explicitly list boredom to relaxation as one of the state changes, Moghaddam lists several state changes (e.g. agitated to relaxed, bored to excited, relaxed to more relaxed, see [0089]), and it would have been obvious to make a state change from bored to relaxed as it would have been obvious to try, as it leads to predictable solutions yielding predictable results (i.e. it is advantageous to change the emotional state of the user from any state to any other state).
While Moghaddam discloses brain waves associated with excitement, there is no explicit disclosure of gamma waves and when the excited state continues for a predetermined period or longer, instructing the user to interrupt playback of the content. Sato teaches a biometric system which measures gamma waves which indicate the user is unstable and excited ([0052]). Furthermore, if the user’s state indicates a level of elevated concentration for a length of time, the system prompts the user to take a rest ([0069]). It would have been obvious to track gamma waves and instructing users to take a break if they are at an elevated state for a long period of time in order to promote healthy habits and preventing stress by limiting the amount of time a person continuously works ([0070]).
Moghaddam does not explicitly disclose alpha waves being associated with relaxation, Tsang teaches a similar system that measures brain waves and associates alpha waves with relaxation ([0051]). As Moghaddam has already disclosed measuring alpha waves, and also acknowledges a brain state of relaxation ([0055], delta waves being a very relaxed state), it would have been obvious to additionally detect a relaxed state as taught by Tsang in order to accurately measure the emotional state of the user and thus allow the system to make changes to the system accordingly.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “measure the duration of an excited state in which gamma waves appear” and “encourage the user to take a break when the excited state continues for a predetermined period”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Regarding Moghaddam, while Applicant alleges that Moghaddam does not change the mode of the content being played back, again, Applicant relies upon elements not recited in the rejected claims. The claims do not recite increasing the tempo or equalization of the music during playback. Therefore, without any explicit definition of what a “mode of the content” entails, any change at all will be considered a change in the mode of the content, as the definition of mode is a way or manner in which something occurs or is experienced, expressed, or done. Any perceivable change is therefore a change in mode and anticipates the limitation.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Kevin Y Kim whose telephone number is (571)270-3215. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Xuan Thai can be reached at (571) 272-7147. 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.
/KEVIN Y KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715