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 Objections
Claims 31-33 are objected to because of the following informalities: “and a medical institution” should be amended to say “or a medical institution”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 28 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 28 recites a step of " specifying a motion pattern of the acquired motion information in the computer; and the reference motion information is derived for each motion pattern and extracted motion information including identical motion patterns". It is unclear what is meant by extracted motion information including identical motion patterns. Furthermore, the term "extracted motion information including identical motion patterns" is lacking antecedent basis. For purposes of examination the claim is being interpreted as "specifying a motion pattern of the acquired motion information in the computer; and deriving the reference motion information based on the motion pattern". The same issue is present in claim 29.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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, 3, 9-10, 12, 16, 19-21, 23-24, 26-27, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee’723 (20150018723 – Previously cited ) in view of Kostic (US 20170007167 A1- Previously cited) in view of Tzvieli (US 20200221956 A1– Previously cited) in view of Ericson (US 20220061738 A1– Previously cited) in view of Davis (US 20170311904 A1).
In regards to claim 1 Lee’723 teaches an information processing method that is executed by a computer, the method comprising:
acquiring motion information with a motion sensor, the motion sensor device configured to detect a motion of a subject (Lee’723 [0038]);
storing the acquired motion information in a computer ([0061], In order to process data over a 30 minute period, the data from that 30 minute period needs to be stored somewhere on the computer);
deriving by the computer, reference motion information on a left half of a body of the subject and reference motion information on a right half of the body of the subject based on the motion information in a predetermined period (Lee’723 [0038] and [0046], reference value is inherently derived from reference left and right limb data);
determining whether an abnormal state in which there is a possibility of cerebral infarction in the subject is present based on the derived reference motion information and motion information on the left half of the body of the subject and motion information on the right half of the body of the subject at a detection time subsequent to the predetermined period (Lee’723 [0044] and [0046]);
and wherein the acquired motion information includes first motion information in which a motion in the left half of the body of the subject is detected and second motion information in which a motion in the right half of the body of the subject is detected (Lee’723 [0044] and [0046]);
and wherein the computer determines that the abnormal state is present if the computer has determined that an abnormality is present in one of half of the body of the subject and no abnormality is present in the other half of the body of the subject ([0056] “Here, since the patient encountering a stroke becomes paralyzed at one side of the upper and lower limbs, the fact that motion of the distal ends at one side of the patient is significantly slowed down is used for detection of a stroke at an early stage”, Difference in limb movement is caused by paralysis of one side).
Lee’723 fails to teach a method wherein the information processing method further comprises: acquiring, by the computer, living body information detected by a detection sensor configured to detect the living body information on the subject; storing, in the computer, the acquired living body information; deriving, by the computer, reference living body information from the stored living body information on the left half of the body of the subject and reference living body information on the right half of the body of the subject in the predetermined period; determining, by respectively comparing the first motion information on the left half of the body of the subject in the reference motion information with the first motion information on the left half of the body of the subject at the detection time, and the second motion information on the right half of the body of the subject in the reference motion information with the second motion information on the right half of the body of the subject at the detection time, whether the abnormal state is present; and determining, by the computer, when the abnormal state is present, whether the abnormal state is a false abnormal state based on the reference motion information and the reference living body information, the false abnormal state being defined by the reference motion information and the reference living body information and comparing the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time to the reference living body information, and when the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time is within predetermined values, determining that the acquired motion information subsequent to the predetermined time on the subject corresponds to the false abnormal state.
Kostic teaches a facial test, arm test, and speech test in order to detect a stroke ([0040]). The arm test includes a step of determining, by respectively comparing the first motion information on the left half of the body of the subject in the reference motion information with the first motion information on the left half of the body of the subject at the detection time, and the second motion information on the right half of the body of the subject in the reference motion information with the second motion information on the right half of the body of the subject at the detection time, whether the abnormal state is present ([0103-0104]). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Lee’723 to include the tests of Kostic in order to more comprehensively detect a stroke at an early stage. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of detecting a stroke more comprehensively.
Kostic also teaches outputting, by the computer, one or more of a notification to a display when it has been determined that the abnormal state is present, the notification including messages for prompting for a check of the determination and notifying the subject of support information such as a recommendation of medical check or consultation ([0116] “If the grading suggests that a stroke may have occurred, the user is notified at step 106 and urged to seek prompt medical attention”). would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Lee’723 to include alerting the user to seek medical help like the method of Kostic. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of treating the stroke when it occurs.
Lee’723 in view of Kostic fails to teach a method wherein the information processing method further comprises: acquiring, by the computer, living body information detected by a detection sensor configured to detect the living body information on the subject; storing, in the computer, the acquired living body information; deriving, by the computer, reference living body information from the stored living body information on the left half of the body of the subject and reference living body information on the right half of the body of the subject in the predetermined period; and determining, by the computer, when the abnormal state is present, whether the abnormal state is a false abnormal state based on the reference motion information and the reference living body information, the false abnormal state being defined by the reference motion information and the reference living body information and comparing the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time to the reference living body information, and when the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time is within predetermined values, determining that the acquired motion information subsequent to the predetermined time on the subject corresponds to the false abnormal state.
Tzvieli teaches acquiring, by a computer, living body information detected by a detection sensor configured to detect the living body information on the subject; storing, in the computer, the acquired living body information; deriving, by the computer, reference living body information from the stored living body information on the left half of the body of the subject and reference living body information on the right half of the body of the subject ([0194] [0252] Thermal asymmetry is living body information, a baseline is previously found which would inherently include a reference information of a left and right half of a body), which is used to determine stroke. It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Lee’723 in view of Kostic to include the living body information gathering and stroke detection of Tzvieli. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of detecting a stroke more comprehensively.
Lee’723 in view of Kostic in view of Tzvieli fails to teach a method wherein the information processing method further comprises: determining, by the computer, when the abnormal state is present, whether the abnormal state is a false abnormal state based on the reference motion information and the reference living body information, the false abnormal state being defined by the reference motion information and the reference living body information and comparing the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time to the reference living body information, and when the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time is within predetermined values, determining that the acquired motion information subsequent to the predetermined time on the subject corresponds to the false abnormal state.
Ericson teaches performing a second test if a first test indicates a user is having a stroke in order to determine a false positive abnormal state, which is present in only one of half of the body of the subject, due to a factor other than the cerebral infarction ([0053]). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Lee’723 in view of Kostic in view of Tzvieli to use a second test to determine the results from the first test are a false positive like the method of Ericson. Lee’723 in view of Kostic in view of Tzvieli in view of Ericson would perform the motion test first and then determine if the stroke indication from the motion test is a false positive by performing the thermal asymmetry test (described by Tzvieli), and if the thermal asymmetry test if negative for stroke (under a threshold Tzvieli [0252]) then the stroke determined by the first test is a false positive. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of determining false positives.
Modified Lee’723 fails to teach receiving the subject's operation of the check. Davis teaches receiving the subject's acknowledgement of an alert ([0117] “The user could be prompted to acknowledge the alert by depressing a button selected from a convenient and easy-to-understand user interface”;[0121] “In this case, if an alert is not acknowledged or a lack of movement continues, smart alert functionality may be configured to send an alert to a follower or to another caregiver associated with the user”. It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Lee’723 to have the user acknowledge the notification and alert a caregiver if the user fails to acknowledge the alert and seek out medical care. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of providing help to the user if they are unable to seek it out themselves due to the stroke.
In regards to claim 3 modified Lee’723 teaches the information processing method according to claim 1, further comprising: determining, by the computer, whether the abnormal state continues for a predetermined time (Lee’723 [0072]).
In regards to claim 9 Lee’723 teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the motion detection device includes a plurality of motion sensors, and the information processing method further comprises: acquiring a plurality of motion information on the subject from the plurality of motion sensors (Lee’723 [0036]).
In regards to claim 10 Lee’723 teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a computer program that causes a computer to execute a process comprising:
acquiring motion information detected by a motion detection device, the motion detection device configured to detect a motion of a subject (Lee’723 [0038]);
storing the acquired motion information (Lee’723 [0038], Lee’723 stores the motion information in order to extract an electrical signal from the motion characteristic value);
deriving reference motion information on a left half of a body of the subject and reference motion information on a right half of the body of the subject based on the motion information in a predetermined period (Lee’723 [0038] and [0046], derives a reference value from reference left and right limb data);
determining whether an abnormal state in which there is a possibility of cerebral infarction in the subject is present based on the derived reference motion information on the left half of the body of the subject and the right half of the body of the subject and motion information on the left half of the body of the subject and motion information on the right half of the body of the subject at a detection time subsequent to the predetermined period (Lee’723 [0044] and [0046]);
and wherein the acquired motion information includes first motion information in which a motion in the left half of the body of the subject is detected and second motion information in which a motion in the right half of the body of the subject is detected (Lee’723 [0044] and [0046]).
Lee’723 fails to teach a process wherein the information processing method further comprises: acquiring, living body information detected by a detection sensor configured to detect the living body information on the subject; storing, in the computer, the acquired living body information; deriving reference living body information from the stored living body information on the left half of the body of the subject and reference living body information on the right half of the body of the subject in the predetermined period; determining, by respectively comparing the first motion information on the left half of the body of the subject in the reference motion information with the first motion information on the left half of the body of the subject at the detection time, and the second motion information on the right half of the body of the subject in the reference motion information with the second motion information on the right half of the body of the subject at the detection time, whether the abnormal state is present; and determining, when the abnormal state is present, whether the abnormal state is a false abnormal state based on the reference motion information and the reference living body information, the false abnormal state being defined by the reference motion information and the reference living body information and comparing the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time to the reference living body information, and when the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time is within predetermined values, determining that the acquired motion information subsequent to the predetermined time on the subject corresponds to the false abnormal state.
Kostic teaches a facial test, arm test, and speech test in order to detect a stroke ([0040]). The arm test includes a step of determining, by respectively comparing the first motion information on the left half of the body of the subject in the reference motion information with the first motion information on the left half of the body of the subject at the detection time, and the second motion information on the right half of the body of the subject in the reference motion information with the second motion information on the right half of the body of the subject at the detection time, whether the abnormal state is present ([0103-0104]). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of Lee’723 to include the tests of Kostic in order to more comprehensively detect a stroke at an early stage. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of detecting a stroke more comprehensively.
Kostic also teaches outputting, by the computer, one or more of a notification to a display when it has been determined that the abnormal state is present, the notification including messages for prompting for a check of the determination and notifying the subject of support information such as a recommendation of medical check or consultation ([0116] “If the grading suggests that a stroke may have occurred, the user is notified at step 106 and urged to seek prompt medical attention”). would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Lee’723 to include alerting the user to seek medical help like the method of Kostic. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of treating the stroke when it occurs.
Lee’723 in view of Kostic fails to teach a method wherein the information processing method further comprises: acquiring, by the computer, living body information detected by a detection sensor configured to detect the living body information on the subject; storing, in the computer, the acquired living body information; deriving, by the computer, reference living body information from the stored living body information on the left half of the body of the subject and reference living body information on the right half of the body of the subject in the predetermined period; and determining, by the computer, when the abnormal state is present, whether the abnormal state is a false abnormal state based on the reference motion information and the reference living body information, the false abnormal state being defined by the reference motion information and the reference living body information and comparing the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time to the reference living body information, and when the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time is within predetermined values, determining that the acquired motion information subsequent to the predetermined time on the subject corresponds to the false abnormal state.
Tzvieli teaches acquiring, by a computer, living body information detected by a detection sensor configured to detect the living body information on the subject; storing, in the computer, the acquired living body information; deriving, by the computer, reference living body information from the stored living body information on the left half of the body of the subject and reference living body information on the right half of the body of the subject ([0194] [0252] Thermal asymmetry is living body information, a baseline is previously found which would inherently include a reference information of a left and right half of a body), which is used to determine stroke. It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Lee’723 in view of Kostic to include the living body information gathering and stroke detection of Tzvieli. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of detecting a stroke more comprehensively.
Lee’723 in view of Kostic in view of Tzvieli fails to teach a method wherein the information processing method further comprises: determining, by the computer, when the abnormal state is present, whether the abnormal state is a false abnormal state based on the reference motion information and the reference living body information, the false abnormal state being defined by the reference motion information and the reference living body information and comparing the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time to the reference living body information, and when the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time is within predetermined values, determining that the acquired motion information subsequent to the predetermined time on the subject corresponds to the false abnormal state.
Ericson teaches performing a second test if a first test indicates a user is having a stroke in order to determine a false positive ([0053]). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Lee’723 in view of Kostic in view of Tzvieli to use a second test to determine the results from the first test are a false positive like the method of Ericson. Lee’723 in view of Kostic in view of Tzvieli in view of Ericson would perform the motion test first and then determine if the stroke indication from the motion test is a false positive by performing the thermal asymmetry test (described by Tzvieli), and if the thermal asymmetry test if negative for stroke (under a threshold Tzvieli [0252]) then the stroke determined by the first test is a false positive. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of determining false positives.
Modified Lee’723 fails to teach receiving the subject's operation of the check. Davis teaches receiving the subject's acknowledgement of an alert ([0117] “The user could be prompted to acknowledge the alert by depressing a button selected from a convenient and easy-to-understand user interface”;[0121] “In this case, if an alert is not acknowledged or a lack of movement continues, smart alert functionality may be configured to send an alert to a follower or to another caregiver associated with the user”. It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Lee’723 to have the user acknowledge the notification and alert a caregiver if the user fails to acknowledge the alert and seek out medical care. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of providing help to the user if they are unable to seek it out themselves due to the stroke.
In regards to claim 12 Lee’723 teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium according to claim 10, wherein the process further comprises: determining whether the abnormal state continues for a predetermined time (Lee’723 [0072]).
In regards to claim 16 Lee’723 teaches an information processing device, comprising:
a motion information acquisition unit configured to acquire motion information detected by a motion detection device configured to detect a motion of a subject ((Lee’723 [0038], FIG.1 Sensing unit 100 acquires motion data from sensors within the unit);
a storage unit configured to store the motion information acquired by the motion information acquisition unit (Lee’723 [0038], FIG.1 Motion Disorder Determination Unit 200 stores the motion information in order to extract an electrical signal from the motion characteristic value);
a derivation unit configured to derive reference motion information on a left half of a body of the subject and reference motion information on a right half of a body of the subject based on the motion information in a predetermined period stored by the storage unit (Lee’723 [0038] and [0046], FIG.1 Motion Disorder Determination Unit 200 contains a sensing unit derives a reference value from stored left and right limb data from left and right limb data when paralysis is not occurring);
and a determination unit configured to determine whether an abnormal state in which there is a possibility of cerebral infarction in the subject is present based on the reference motion information derived by the derivation unit and motion information on the left half of the body of the subject and motion information on the right half of the body of the subject at a detection time subsequent to the predetermined period (Lee’723 [0044] and [0046], FIG.1 Motion Disorder Determination Unit 200);
and wherein the acquired motion information includes first motion information in which a motion in the left half of the body of the subject is detected and second motion information in which a motion in the right half of the body of the subject is detected (Lee’723 [0044] and [0046]).
Lee’723 fails to teach a process wherein the information processing method further comprises: acquiring, living body information detected by a detection sensor configured to detect the living body information on the subject; storing, in the computer, the acquired living body information; deriving reference living body information from the stored living body information on the left half of the body of the subject and reference living body information on the right half of the body of the subject in the predetermined period; determining, by respectively comparing the first motion information on the left half of the body of the subject in the reference motion information with the first motion information on the left half of the body of the subject at the detection time, and the second motion information on the right half of the body of the subject in the reference motion information with the second motion information on the right half of the body of the subject at the detection time, whether the abnormal state is present; and determining, when the abnormal state is present, whether the abnormal state is a false abnormal state based on the reference motion information and the reference living body information, the false abnormal state being defined by the reference motion information and the reference living body information and comparing the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time to the reference living body information, and when the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time is within predetermined values, determining that the acquired motion information subsequent to the predetermined time on the subject corresponds to the false abnormal state.
Kostic teaches a facial test, arm test, and speech test in order to detect a stroke ([0040]). The arm test includes a step of determining, by respectively comparing the first motion information on the left half of the body of the subject in the reference motion information with the first motion information on the left half of the body of the subject at the detection time, and the second motion information on the right half of the body of the subject in the reference motion information with the second motion information on the right half of the body of the subject at the detection time, whether the abnormal state is present ([0103-0104]). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee’723 to include the tests of Kostic in order to more comprehensively detect a stroke at an early stage. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of detecting a stroke more comprehensively.
Kostic also teaches outputting, by the computer, one or more of a notification to a display when it has been determined that the abnormal state is present, the notification including messages for prompting for a check of the determination and notifying the subject of support information such as a recommendation of medical check or consultation ([0116] “If the grading suggests that a stroke may have occurred, the user is notified at step 106 and urged to seek prompt medical attention”). would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee’723 to include alerting the user to seek medical help like the method of Kostic. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of treating the stroke when it occurs.
Lee’723 in view of Kostic fails to teach a device wherein the information processing method further comprises: acquiring, by the computer, living body information detected by a detection sensor configured to detect the living body information on the subject; storing, in the computer, the acquired living body information; deriving, by the computer, reference living body information from the stored living body information on the left half of the body of the subject and reference living body information on the right half of the body of the subject in the predetermined period; and determining, by the computer, when the abnormal state is present, whether the abnormal state is a false abnormal state based on the reference motion information and the reference living body information, the false abnormal state being defined by the reference motion information and the reference living body information and comparing the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time to the reference living body information, and when the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time is within predetermined values, determining that the acquired motion information subsequent to the predetermined time on the subject corresponds to the false abnormal state.
Tzvieli teaches acquiring, by a computer, living body information detected by a detection sensor configured to detect the living body information on the subject; storing, in the computer, the acquired living body information; deriving, by the computer, reference living body information from the stored living body information on the left half of the body of the subject and reference living body information on the right half of the body of the subject ([0194] [0252] Thermal asymmetry is living body information, a baseline is previously found which would inherently include a reference information of a left and right half of a body), which is used to determine stroke. It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee’723 in view of Kostic to include the living body information gathering and stroke detection of Tzvieli. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of detecting a stroke more comprehensively.
Lee’723 in view of Kostic in view of Tzvieli fails to teach a device wherein the information processing method further comprises: determining, by the computer, when the abnormal state is present, whether the abnormal state is a false abnormal state based on the reference motion information and the reference living body information, the false abnormal state being defined by the reference motion information and the reference living body information and comparing the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time to the reference living body information, and when the acquired living body information subsequent to the predetermined time is within predetermined values, determining that the acquired motion information subsequent to the predetermined time on the subject corresponds to the false abnormal state.
Ericson teaches performing a second test if a first test indicates a user is having a stroke in order to determine a false positive ([0053]). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee’723 in view of Kostic in view of Tzvieli to use a second test to determine the results from the first test are a false positive like the method of Ericson. Lee’723 in view of Kostic in view of Tzvieli in view of Ericson would perform the motion test first and then determine if the stroke indication from the motion test is a false positive by performing the thermal asymmetry test (described by Tzvieli), and if the thermal asymmetry test if negative for stroke (under a threshold Tzvieli [0252]) then the stroke determined by the first test is a false positive. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of determining false positives.
Modified Lee’723 fails to teach receiving the subject's operation of the check. Davis teaches receiving the subject's acknowledgement of an alert ([0117] “The user could be prompted to acknowledge the alert by depressing a button selected from a convenient and easy-to-understand user interface”;[0121] “In this case, if an alert is not acknowledged or a lack of movement continues, smart alert functionality may be configured to send an alert to a follower or to another caregiver associated with the user”. It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of modified Lee’723 to have the user acknowledge the notification and alert a caregiver if the user fails to acknowledge the alert and seek out medical care. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of providing help to the user if they are unable to seek it out themselves due to the stroke.
In regards to claim 19 modified Lee’723 teaches the information processing system according to claim 16, wherein the processor is further configured to: determine, when it has been determined that the abnormal state is present, based on the motion information, whether the false abnormal state is present in which a predetermined change occurs in the left half of the body of the subject or the right half of the body of the subject due to a factor other than the cerebral infarction. (Ericson [0053], see argument for claim 16).
In regards to claim 20 modified Lee’723 teaches the information processing system according to claim 16 wherein the detection sensor comprises one or more sensors or cameras, the one or more sensors or cameras configured to detect one or more of blood flow of the subject, surface temperature of the subject, a body pressure of the subject, a pulse wave of the subject, and a body temperature of the subject (Tzvieli [0194] blood flow sensors).
In regards to claim 21 modified Lee’723 teaches the information processing method according to claim : wherein the detection sensor is one or more sensors or cameras, the one or more sensors or cameras configured to detect one or more of blood flow of the subject, surface temperature of the subject, a body pressure of the subject, a pulse wave of the subject, and a body temperature of the subject (Tzvieli [0194] blood flow sensors).
In regards to claim 23 modified Lee’723 teaches the information processing method according to claim 21, wherein the one or more sensors or cameras include an infrared ray camera configured to detect blood flow and a surface temperature of the subject, a surface pressure sensor configured to detect the body pressure of the subject, and a wearable device configured to detect the pulse wave or the body temperature of the subject (Tzvieli [0017] [0081]).
In regards to claim 24 modified Lee’723 teaches the information processing method according to claim 1, comprising a sound sensor and a camera , the method further comprising: acquiring, by a computer, voice data from a sound sensor (Kostic [0087] microphone)and image data indicating a speech motion of a face of the subject imaged by the camera (Kostic [0074] camera can analyze all expressions, this would inherently include facial motions made when talking); analyzing, by the computer, the voice data from the sound sensor and the analyzed image data; (Kostic [0074] facial pixels are compared to baseline pixels to detect droop [0087]); extracting, by the computer, a word pattern set in advance from the analyzed voice data and the analyzed image data (Kostic [0075] facial movements are classified [0088]); determining, by the computer, a magnitude relationship of a difference value between the voice data corresponding to the extracted word pattern and voice data and the image data serving as the reference motion information, and a threshold value set in advance (Kostic [0074] facial pixels are compared to baseline pixels to detect droop [0088] characteristics are a pattern); and determining, by the computer, that the abnormal state is present when the difference value is equal to or greater than the threshold value (Kostic [0074] facial pixels are compared to baseline pixels to detect droop [0088] “controller compares the current sound samples to the corresponding baseline sound samples and issues an alert if the various characteristics differ by more than an acceptable amount”). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Lee’723 to include the voice test Kostic. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of detecting a stroke more comprehensively.
In regards to claim 26 modified Lee’723 teaches the information processing method according to claim 24. Modified Lee’723 fails to teach a method wherein the detection time subsequent to the predetermined period is on a daily basis. Kostic teaches daily monitoring ([0113]). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of modified Lee’723 to assess the user every day like Kostic. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of monitoring the user every day.
In regards to claim 27 modified Lee’723 teaches the information processing method according to claim 1. Modified Lee’723 fails to teach a method wherein the computer possesses a false abnormal state information database configured to store false abnormal state information in which motion information in a false abnormal state has been defined in advance, the false abnormal state information database stores motion information for defining a false abnormal state to be indicated in a predetermined motion and other conditions; and wherein the second determination step comprises: comparing motion information in the false abnormal state information database with the acquired motion information on the subject to determine whether the abnormal state of the subject is a false abnormal state. Ericson teaches “that in order to minimize false alarms, a short period analysis requires a narrow detection threshold, e.g., an analysis over a shorter time period is more likely to have a degree of noise that might trigger a false positive. Therefore, the range of acceptable positive values needs to be narrow, and a high threshold should be met before a stroke detection signal is generated" ([0062]). It would have been prima facie obvious to modify the method of modified Lee’723 so that it uses a high threshold to determine false positives like Ericson in order to allow for analysis over a short period of time. It would also be obvious to store false abnormal state data in a database to use in determining the threshold for false positives.
In regards to claim 30 modified Lee’723 teaches the information processing system according to claim 16. Modified Lee’723 fails to teach a system further comprising: a false abnormal state information database configured to store false abnormal state information in which motion information in a false abnormal state has been defined in advance, the false abnormal state information database stores motion information for defining a false abnormal state to be indicated in a predetermined motion and other conditions; and the processor is configured to compare motion information in the false abnormal state information database with the acquired motion information on the subject to determine whether the abnormal state of the subject is a false abnormal state. Ericson teaches “that in order to minimize false alarms, a short period analysis requires a narrow detection threshold, e.g., an analysis over a shorter time period is more likely to have a degree of noise that might trigger a false positive. Therefore, the range of acceptable positive values needs to be narrow, and a high threshold should be met before a stroke detection signal is generated" ([0062]). It would have been prima facie obvious to modify the system of modified Lee’723 so that it uses a high threshold to determine false positives like Ericson in order to allow for analysis over a short period of time. It would also be obvious to store false abnormal state data in a database to use in determining the threshold for false positives.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee’723 (20150018723 – Previously cited ) in view of Kostic (US 20170007167 A1- Previously cited) in view of Tzvieli (US 20200221956 A1– Previously cited) in view of Ericson (US 20220061738 A1– Previously cited) in view of Davis (US 20170311904 A1) as applied to claim 1, in view of Larson (US 20170360357 A1- Previously cited).
In regards to claim 8 modified Lee teaches the information processing method according to claim 1, further comprising: comparing the reference motion information with the motion information at the detection time, using a threshold value (Lee’723 [0015]). Modified Lee’723 fails to teach a threshold value that is different in accordance with a detection place of the motion information. Larson teaches location specific thresholds (Larson [0214]) in order to account for measurement differences due to the different locations on a user’s body that the sensors are placed. It would It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of modified Lee’723 to use location specific thresholds in order to account for differencing limb movement activity from location to location.
Claim(s) 28-29 and 31-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee’723 (20150018723 – Previously cited ) in view of Kostic (US 20170007167 A1- Previously cited) in view of Tzvieli (US 20200221956 A1– Previously cited) in view of Ericson (US 20220061738 A1– Previously cited) in view of Davis (US 20170311904 A1) as applied to claims 1, 10, and 116, further in view of Lee’480 (US 20190279480) .
In regards to claim 28 modified Lee’723 teaches the information processing method according to claim 1. Modified Lee’723 fails to teach a method further comprising: specifying a motion pattern of the acquired motion information in the computer; and the reference motion information is derived for each motion pattern and extracted motion information including identical motion patterns. Lee’480 teaches taking into account an activity type when comparing data to a baseline ([0175] “For example, where the computer system 300 identifies the patient is jogging, the computer system 300 will assess vital signs measurements against the baseline for moderate exercise or jogging”). It would have been prima facie obvious to modify the method of modified Lee’723 to use different reference data based on the type of activity the user is performing like the method of Lee’480. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of tailoring the analysis to what the user is doing which would yield more accurate stroke detection.
In regards to claim 29 modified Lee’723 teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium storing a computer program that causes a computer to execute a process according to claim 10. Modified Lee’723 fails to teach specifying a motion pattern of the acquired motion information in the computer; and the reference motion information is derived for each motion pattern and extracted motion information including identical motion patterns. Lee’480 teaches taking into account an activity type when comparing data to a baseline ([0175] “For example, where the computer system 300 identifies the patient is jogging, the computer system 300 will assess vital signs measurements against the baseline for moderate exercise or jogging”). It would have been prima facie obvious to modify the method of modified Lee’723 to use different reference data based on the type of activity the user is performing like the method of Lee’480. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of tailoring the analysis to what the user is doing which would yield more accurate stroke detection.
In regards to claim 31 modified Lee’723 teaches the information processing method according to claim 1. Modified Lee’723 fails to teach outputting, by the computer, an emergency notice to one or more of another subject, a family member, a fire department, and a medical institution based on the subject selecting on the display, an indicator that the emergency notice is required. Lee’480 teaches outputting, by a computer, an emergency notice to one or more of another subject, a family member, a fire department, and a medical institution based on a subject selecting on a display, an indicator that an emergency notice is required ([0121] the patient may voluntarily contact emergency services through the device, by pressing button 328). It would have been prima facie obvious to modify the method of modified Lee’723 to include the emergency contact button of Lee’480. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of allowing the user to receive help if they feel it is needed.
In regards to claim 32 modified Lee’723 teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium according to claim 10. Modified Lee’723 fails to teach outputting an emergency notice to one or more of another subject, a family member, a fire department, and a medical institution based on the subject selecting on the display, an indicator that the emergency notice is required. Lee’480 teaches outputting, by a computer, an emergency notice to one or more of another subject, a family member, a fire department, and a medical institution based on a subject selecting on a display, an indicator that an emergency notice is required ([0121] the patient may voluntarily contact emergency services through the device, by pressing button 328). It would have been prima facie obvious to modify the method of modified Lee’723 to include the emergency contact button of Lee’480. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of allowing the user to receive help if they feel it is needed.
In regards to claim 33 modified Lee’723 teaches the information processing device system to claim 16. Modified Lee’723 fails to teach outputting, by the processor, an emergency notice to one or more of another subject, a family member, a fire department, and a medical institution based on the subject selecting on the display, an indicator that the emergency notice is required. Lee’480 teaches outputting, by a computer, an emergency notice to one or more of another subject, a family member, a fire department, and a medical institution based on a subject selecting on a display, an indicator that an emergency notice is required ([0121] the patient may voluntarily contact emergency services through the device, by pressing button 328). It would have been prima facie obvious to modify the device of modified Lee’723 to include the emergency contact button of Lee’480. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable result of allowing the user to receive help if they feel it is needed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 04/22/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejections of claims 1-4, 6, 8-13, 16-21, and 23-26 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 101 rejections of claims 1-4, 6, 8-13, 16-21, and 23-26 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 04/22/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 1-4, 6, 8-13, 16-21, and 23-26 regarding the prior art not teaching notifying the subject of support information such as a recommendation of medical check or consultation and receiving the subject's operation of the check have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Lee’723 (20150018723 – Previously cited ) in view of Kostic (US 20170007167 A1- Previously cited) in view of Tzvieli (US 20200221956 A1– Previously cited) in view of Ericson (US 20220061738 A1– Previously cited) in view of Davis (US 20170311904 A1). The applicant’s argument that the prior art does not teach a first determination step and second determination step is not persuasive. Ericson teaches performing a second test if a first test determines a stroke, and then using a second test to determine a false positive.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUCY EPPERT whose telephone number is (571)270-0818. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00 EST.
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, Jennifer Robertson can be reached at (571) 272-5001. 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.
/LUCY EPPERT/ Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/ADAM J EISEMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights