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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “oblique angles”, “common longitudinal axis”, and “longitudinal axis transverse to the common longitudinal axis” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because:
-Line 4 recites “configured operate.” Examiner recommends amending to –is configured to operate—
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claim 32 is objected to because of the following informalities:
-Claim 32 recites “the plurality of light sources has four discrete wavelengths” in lines 1-2. Examiner recommends amending to –the plurality of light sources have four discrete wavelengths—
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.
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.
Claims 32, 33, 34, 35 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 32 recites “the plurality of light sources” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
-Claim 33 recites “substantially closed loop” in line 2. It is unclear what is required by this limitation due to the relative language. Further clarification should be provided to define whether the closed loop is completely closed, partially closed or unclosed.
-Claim 34 recites “the discrete wavelengths of light” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is possible this should read –the four discrete wavelengths of light—
-Claim 35 recites “the plurality of light sources” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
Claim(s) 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Berman (U.S. 20160235980).
Regarding Claim 28, Berman teaches an apparatus for promoting sleep, [0014] comprising: a flexible pad [Fig. 13, element 150 (pillow)] including: a first portion having a first plurality of light sources; [0108]—describes the array of emitters, also disclosed as lights in [0004] a second portion having a second plurality of light sources, the second portion being opposite the first portion; and a third portion disposed between the first portion and the second portion, the third portion having a third plurality of light sources. See annotated Fig. 13 below.
PNG
media_image1.png
252
462
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 29, Berman teaches wherein the first portion, second portion, and third portion are discrete portions on the flexible pad [0047]—describes elements 30 as possessing differing features and being capable of emitting different forms of energy. This interpretation also includes the teaching that the 3 arrays shown in Fig. 13 are separate and distinct from one another.
Regarding Claim 30, Berman teaches wherein the first portion, second portion, and third portion are disposed at oblique angles with respect to each other [Fig. 10, elements 30]—shows an embodiment of the device where the arrays are arranged in oblique angles relative to one another.
Regarding Claim 31, Berman teaches wherein the first portion and third portion are intersected by a common longitudinal axis, and wherein the second portion is intersected by a longitudinal axis transverse to the common longitudinal axis. See annotated Fig. 10.
PNG
media_image2.png
346
424
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 32, Berman teaches wherein the plurality of light sources has four discrete wavelengths of light [0010] describes the wavelengths that the portals are capable of emitting and [0011]—includes reference to the portals delivering energy independent of one another.
Regarding Claim 33, Berman teaches wherein the flexible pad defines a substantially closed loop [0094]—references the structure of the device which includes embodiments that are considered substantially closed loops (band, cap, harness, helmet).
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) 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berman (U.S. 20160235980) in view of Marmur (U.S. 20200101310).
Regarding Claim 34, Berman teaches wherein the discrete wavelengths of light are in the range of 630-670nm, 720-760nm, 790-830nm and 820-870nm [0018]-[0019]—includes wavelengths 760, 820, 870. Berman is silent on the range of 630-670nm. Marmur teaches the range of 630-670nm [0012]—reference to wavelengths of 630-660nm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a red-light wavelength as taught by Marmur in addition to the wavelengths presented by Berman, as Berman discusses the use of any wavelengths within the range of 450-1500 nanometers [0010] with Marmur because Marmur teaches the selection of wavelengths to promote better sleep patterns for those with insomnia [0102].
Claim(s) 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berman (U.S. 20160235980) in view of Peeters (U.S. 20210329757).
Regarding Claim 35, Berman is silent on wherein the plurality of light sources is configured to emit light having four wavelengths of light between 300-1300 nanometers. Peeters teaches wherein the plurality of light sources is configured to emit light having four wavelengths of light between 300-1300 nanometers [0112]—details luminescent material luminescing at one or more wavelengths in the range of 300-1500nm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a range of wavelengths as taught by Peeters that include a narrower range of wavelengths as presented by Berman, as Berman discusses the use of any wavelengths within the range of 450-1500 nanometers [0010] with Peeters because Peeters teaches the selection of wavelengths with lower correlated color temperature (CCT) and intensity to avoid sleep disruption [0008].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
-Wang (U.S. 20220054856)—teaches an LED array arranged on a head of a person for means of therapy and improving sleep and memory
-Bicknell (U.S. 20220105361)—includes an array of LEDs on closed-loop that provides microbiome benefits that directly improve sleep
-Williams (U.S. 20190335551)—discloses LED system which discusses using PBT with the system to promote sleep.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BROOKE NICOLE KOHUTKA whose telephone number is (571)272-5583. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:00pm 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, Charles Marmor II 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.
/B.N.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/CHRISTINE H MATTHEWS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791