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 .
Response to Amendment
The Office Action is responsive to the Amendment filed 29 April 2026. Claims 1, 5-9 and 11-19 are now pending. The Examiner acknowledges the amendments to Claims 1, 5-9 and 11-19.
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.
Claims 1, 5-9 and 11-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Shrivastav et al. (US 8784311 B2) (hereon referred as Shrivastav) in view of Malchano et al. (US 20180133507 A1) (hereon referred as Malchano).
Regarding claim 1, Shrivastav teaches a system for patient treatment, comprising a processor (processor 202) having associated non-transient memory including instructions (“computer system within which a set of instructions”, Col. 14, lines 58-59) that when executed cause the processor to perform the steps of:
Receiving sounds vocalized by a patient (“an input to the identification device 200 can include a microphone…speech sample can be recorded into the device 200”, Col. 6, lines 63-66);
Performing frequency analysis to determine, from the vocalized sounds (“evaluating changes in…voice…analysis may also evaluate…frequency…from a speech sample”, Col. 3, line 56 – Col. 4, line 9), an exceptional frequency (“the acoustic measure of the speech sample”, Col. 5, lines 58-61) that is either prominent (“a measure of high frequency”, Col. 5, lines 56-57) or attenuated (“a measure of low frequency”, Col. 5, line 56) with respect to other frequencies of the vocalized sounds;
Deriving a first audio signal from the exceptional frequency (“the analysis may also evaluate…the frequency, the intensity, or other characteristics of cough during a conversation…measures from a speech sample can be taken and analyzed”, Col. 4, lines 4-7)
Shrivastav does not teach the system being able to derive a first audio signal from the exceptional frequency by generating a binaural beat including a first and second tone, as well as a second audio signal from the patient breathing rate and playing the first and second audio signals to the patient.
However, Malchano teaches a system for patient treatment, comprising a processor (processors 721) having associated non-transient memory including instructions that when executed cause the processor to perform the steps of (“non-transient computer readable medium may store instructions”, paragraph [0116]):
Receiving sounds vocalized by a patient (“microphone 1210 can receive voice input from the subject”, paragraph [0458]);
Deriving a first audio signal from the sounds vocalized by a patient (“the neural stimulation system can generate and transmit the identified audio signal”, paragraph [0011], “first audio source that provides an audio signal”, paragraph [0414]) and generating a binaural beat including a first tone and a second tone (“audio signals using binaural beats or binaural pulses…providing a different tone to each ear of the subject…two tones”, paragraph [0413]) having a mean of the exceptional energy frequency and a frequency gap between the first tone and the second tone of 0.1 to 30 Hz (“frequency of the acoustic wave can range from 0 to 50 kHz”, paragraph [0395]);
Measuring one or more physiological characteristics indicative of a patient breathing rate (“the neural stimulation system can receive or detect feedback associated with neural activity, physiological activity”, paragraph [0011]) indicative of a patient breathing rate (“physiological monitor 3120…breathing rate”, paragraph [0762]);
Deriving a second audio signal that can be detected from patient breathing rate (“a second audio source that provides a second audio signal”, paragraph [0414]), wherein the second audio signal is repeated and/or spatially oscillating by the processor which can be configured at a rate no greater than the patient breathing rate (“acoustic wave 1000 can be a longitudinal wave if it oscillates or vibrates in the same direction of travel”, paragraph [0394]); and
Playing the first and second audio signals to the patient for a period of a treatment session, wherein the first and second audio signals are played simultaneously for at least a portion of the treatment session (“audio generation component 910 can select a first tone for the first ear and a different second tone for the second ear”, paragraph [0415]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system for patient treatment of Shrivastav with the processor of Malchano, and implementing a second audio signal derived from the breathing rate of the patient and provide a first and second audio signal simultaneously in order to effectively distribute therapy that helps reduce stress and other stress-related diseases.
Regarding claim 5, Shrivastav in view of Malchano teaches all the limitations of claim 1, but does not teach the first and second audio signals being played at a volume dependent on the patient stress level, and wherein the volume is increased during the treatment session as the patient stress level drops.
However, Malchano teaches the audio signals being able to be adjusted ("the audio adjustment module 915 can increase or decrease the volume or tone of the audio source or auditory stimulation signal", paragraph [0427]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Shrivastav in view of Malchano and configure the processor to adjust the volume of the audio signals depending on the treatment for the patients’ needs.
Regarding claim 6, Shrivastav in view of Malchano teaches all the limitations of claim 1, but does not teach the step of playing the first and second audio signals comprising playing one audio signal by itself for a first period of the treatment session, then playing two audio signals simultaneously for a second period of the treatment session and then playing the one audio signal by itself for a third period of the treatment session.
However, Malchano teaches providing a first sound followed by a second sound based off fixed parameters ("audio generation module may generate an output signal based on the fixed parameter provide the output signal to the speaker audio generation module may generate a second output signal to the speaker", paragraph [0066]). The processor (processors 721) would also be capable of playing the first and second audio signals comprising playing one audio signal by itself for a first period of the treatment session, then playing two audio signals simultaneously for a second period of the treatment session, and then playing the one audio signal by itself for a third period of the treatment session (“the therapy session may include adjusting, responsive to the level attention not satisfying the threshold, the variable parameter to a third value greater than the second value”, paragraph [0080]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Shrivastav in view of Malchano and configure the processor to play one of the audio signals separately, then simultaneously, and finally the one audio signal, as part of the necessary treatment for the patient.
Regarding claim 7, Shrivastav in view of Malchano teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, Malchano teaches the processor (processors 721) capable of playing simultaneously with the first and second audio signals, during at least a portion of the treatment session, and the processor capable of providing a third audio signal comprising binaural 3D nature sounds ("audio pulses generated by the NSS 905 using a sound track nature sounds", paragraph [0422]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Shrivastav in view of Malchano to also play nature sounds with a as a third audio signal alongside the first and second audio signals as part of treatment for the patients and reduce stress.
Regarding claim 8, Shrivastav in view of Malchano teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, Malchano teaches the processor (processors 721) capable of playing simultaneously with the first and second audio signals, during at least a portion of the treatment session ("audio generation component 910 can select a first tone for the first ear and a different second tone for the second ear", paragraph [0415]), a third audio signal comprising the exceptional energy sound frequency ("the audio adjustment module 915 can be designed and constructed to adjust a parameter associated with the audio signal, such as a frequency", paragraph [0426]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Shrivastav in view of Malchano to provide a third source of audio signal which comprises the exceptional energy sound frequency, modifying the frequencies according to the patient simultaneously with the first and second audio signals.
Regarding claim 9, Shrivastav in view of Malchano teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, Malchano teaches the processor (processors 721) capable of playing simultaneously with the first and second audio signals, during at least a portion of the treatment session, a third audio signal comprising the exceptional sound frequency, wherein the third audio signal is spatially varying with an oscillation corresponding to a rate that is similar or lower that a frequency of an EEG signal parameter ("the NSS 905 can receive neural oscillation information from EEG probes 1225, and adjust the auditory stimulation based on the EEG information the NSS 905 can then identify the corresponding undesired frequency", paragraph [0467]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Shrivastav in view of Malchano to have the third audio signal spatially varying with the oscillation of the desired frequency of the EEG signal parameters in order to match a brainwave frequency that reduces stress ("EEG sensor can be used to determine whether brain entrainment is occurring in the subject, for example by determining that the brain exhibits neural oscillations at a desired frequency during the therapy session", paragraph [0727]).
Regarding claim 11, Shrivastav in view of Malchano teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, Malchano teaches characterizing a responsiveness of the patient's vagus nerve to the audio signals ("the nerve stimulus 1805 may be delivered to the vagus nerve", paragraph [0547]) and the processor (processors 721) capable of responsively adjusting a frequency and/or volume of the audio signals ("the stimuli orchestration component feedback information received from one or more feedback components determine or adjust the value frequency, wavelength, color, sound attenuation", paragraph [0603], (“therapy session may include overlaying, responsive to the detection, an audio signal on the output signal based on the second physiological condition”, paragraph [0082]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Shrivastav in view of Malchano to adjust a parameter of the audio signals in order to stimulate the vagus nerve which regulates heart rate, and therefore gaining the ability to reduce stress in a patient.
Regarding claim 12, Shrivastav in view of Malchano teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, Malchano teaches delivering to the patient visual stimulation during the treatment session ("the system may include a light source visual signaling component executed by a visual neural stimulation system", paragraph [0085]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Shrivastav in view of Malchano to provide visual stimulation with the use of lights to the patient for another form of stress treatment.
Regarding claim 13, Shrivastav in view of Malchano teaches adjusting a volume of audio signals to the patient's schedule ("user may produce speech samples that correspond to a scheduled time, day, week, or month further analysis of speech samples can be provided based on potential changes in the speech samples taken at the specified intervals", Col. 8, lines 2-6; Shrivastav).
Furthermore, Malchano teaches adjusting a volume of audio signals to the patient's environment ("the NSS 905 can modify or adjust audio signals provided to one or more of the speakers in system...modify, manipulate or otherwise adjust the audio signal to optimize the auditory stimulation provided to a subject located at a position in the room", paragraph [0474]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Shrivastav in view of Malchano to configure the processor to adjust the volume of the audio signals depending on the patient's schedule and environment in order to adapt to the patient's surroundings and providing treatment.
Regarding claim 14, Shrivstav in view of Malchano teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, Malchano teaches the processor (processors 721) capable of analyzing accumulated data from multiple patients to enhance the derivation of the audio signals (“a subset of patients may undergo EEG monitoring for response to sensory stimulation…for collection of…future study endpoints”, paragraph [0969]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the processor of Shrivastav with Malchano and analyze data from multiple patients in order to enhance the signal generation for the treatment.
Regarding claim 15, Shrivastav in view of Malchano teaches providing a user interface for presenting bio-feedback ("the results may be provided via website interace, or directly on a display screen of the device", Col. 6, lines 50-53), wherein the user interface includes visual and social network features ("the speech sample is uploaded to a server through a network connected to the terminal used by the consumer", Col. 8, lines 20-22).
Regarding claim 16, Shrivastav in view of Malchano teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, Malchano teaches the measured physiological characteristics further comprising EEG signals ("neural oscillations of the brain of the subject may be monitored using brain wave sensors, electroencephalography (EEG)", paragraph [0032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Shrivastav in view of Malchano to retrieve measured physiological characteristics such as a patient's brain activity, in order to determine the current state of the patient in order to better provide visual and audio treatment to help treat stress.
Regarding claim 17, Shrivastav in view of Malchano teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, Malchano teaches scanning a range of frequencies and measuring at each frequency one or more physiological characteristics of the patient indicative of stress reduction ("the feedback monitor may measure, via a feedback sensor, a physiological condition of the subject during a first time interval system may include an audio adjustment module", paragraph [0066]), the processor (processors 721) capable to determine an optimal frequency of a third audio signal to play during the treatment session ("the NSS 905 can be preconfigured to initially transmit acoustic pulses having a lowest setting for the acoustic wave intensity.. and gradually increase the intensity while monitoring feedback until an optimal audio intensity is reached", paragraph [0497]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Shrivastav in view of Malchano to analyze one or more physiological characteristics of a patient and adjust the frequencies of a third audio to play during treatment that will help achieve stress reduction in a patient.
Regarding claim 19, Shrivastav teaches a method for patient treatment, implanted by a processor having associated non-transient memory including instructions that when executed cause the processor to perform the method ("interface 201 then communicates the one or more speech samples to the processor 202 stored in the memory 203", Col. 6 lines 40-44), wherein the method comprises:
Receiving sounds vocalized by a patient ("an input to the identification device 200 can include a microphone speech sample can be recorded into the device 200", Col. 6, lines 63- 66);
Performing frequency analysis to determine, from the vocalized sounds (“evaluating changes in…voice…analysis may also evaluate…frequency…from a speech sample”, Col. 3, line 56 – Col. 4, line 9), an exceptional frequency (“the acoustic measure of the speech sample”, Col. 5, lines 58-61) that is either prominent ("a measure of high frequency", Col. 5, lines 56-57) or attenuated ("a measure of low frequency", Col. 5, line 56) with respect to other frequencies of the vocalized sounds;
Deriving a first audio signal including the exceptional frequency (“the analysis may also evaluate…the frequency, the intensity, or other characteristics of cough during a conversation…measures from a speech sample can be taken and analyzed”, Col. 4, lines 4-7)
Shrivastav does not teach measuring one or more physiological characteristics, and deriving a second audio signal from the breathing rate, as well as the first and second audio signals being played simultaneously during treatment.
However, Malchano teaches a processor having a non-transient memory including instructions that when executed cause the processor to perform the method comprising ("the non- transient computer readable medium may store instructions executed by one or more processors", paragraph [0116]):
Receiving sounds vocalized by a patient (“microphone 1210 can receive voice input from the subject”, paragraph [0458])
Deriving a first audio signal ("the neural stimulation system can generate and transmit the identified audio signal", paragraph [0011], "the audio signaling component 950 can include a first audio source that provides an audio signal", paragraph [0414]) by generating a binaural beat including a first tone and a second tone (“audio signals using binaural beats or binaural pulses…providing a different tone to each ear of the subject…two tones”, paragraph [0413]) having a mean of the exceptional frequency and a frequency gap between the fist tone and a second tone of 0.1 to 30 Hz (“frequency of the acoustic wave can range from 0 to 50 kHz”, paragraph [0395]);
Measuring one or more physiological characteristics ("the neural stimulation system can receive or detect feedback associated with neural activity, physiological activity", paragraph [0011]) indicative of a patient breathing rate ("physiological monitor 3120…breathing rate", paragraph [0762])
Deriving a second audio signal that can be detected from patient breathing rate (“a second audio source that provides a second audio signal”, paragraph [0414]), wherein the second audio signal is repeated and/or spatially oscillating by the processor which can be configured at a rate no greater than the patient breathing rate (“acoustic wave 1000 can be a longitudinal wave if it oscillates or vibrates in the same direction of travel”, paragraph [0394]);
Playing the first and second audio signals to the patient for a period of a treatment session, wherein the first and second audio signals are played simultaneously for at least a portion of the treatment session ("audio generation component 910 can select a first tone for the first ear and a different second tone for the second ear", paragraph [0415]), and wherein the processor is capable to configure the second audio frequency to be slower than the patient breathing rate ("audio generation module 910 can generate down-chirp pulses where the frequency, amplitude, or wavelength of the acoustic wave of the acoustic pulse decreases", paragraph [0410]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method for patient treatment of Shrivastav with the method performed by the processor of Malchano, and implementing a second audio signal derived from the breathing rate of the patient in order to effectively distribute therapy that helps reduce stress and other stress-related diseases.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Shrivastav in view of Malchano and further in view of Eastman (US 20120151319 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Shrivastav in view of Malchano teaches all the limitations of claim 1, but does not teach implementing eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) procedures.
However, Eastman teaches implementing eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) procedures of eye movement monitoring during the treatment session ("self-directed stress assistance system uses a self-directed Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) application stored on a server computing device", paragraph [0020]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of Shrivastav in view of Malchano with the EMDR procedures of Eastman and implementing it into the processor, to perform an EMDR procedure as part of the stress reduction treatment for the patient.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 8, filed 29 April 2026, with respect to the claim objections have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the amendments. The claim objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10, filed 29 April 2026, with respect to 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regards to claim 1, Shrivastav in view of Malchano teaches a system for patient treatment, comprising a processor having associated non-transient memory including instructions that when executed cause the processor to perform the steps of the treatment. The Applicant argues that Shrivastav does not teach the limitation of performing frequency analysis to determine the vocalized sounds that is either prominent or attenuated, however the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The system of Shrivstav teaches a processor (processor 202) that is capable of performing frequency analysis of the vocalized sounds of the patient by measuring a frequency that is either prominent or attenuated, as cited above. The Applicant also states that Shrivastav does not teach selecting a frequency for subsequent signal generation based on its comparative energy level within the vocalized sounds, however that is not positively recited in the claim. It appears that clarification and inclusion of this language would help in overcoming the current rejection.
The Applicant states that Malchano does not disclose generating a binaural beat in which the mean of the two tones is set to a frequency determined from a patient’s vocalized sounds. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees as Malchano also teaches a processor that is capable of generating binaural beats in which it can be the mean of two tones set to a frequency dependent on a patient’s vocalized sounds (“one or more processors to generate each simulated response by maintaining a model for the subject based on historical response data for one or more subjects”, paragraph [0117]). In response to the arguments regarding claim 5, the Applicant argues that Malchano does not teach adjusting the volume of audio signals as a function of a patient’s stress level, nor increasing the volume as the stress level decreases. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees, as Malchano teaches a processor that is capable of performing the steps of adjusting the volume of audio signals as a function of a patient’s stress level (“audio adjustment module 915 can, for example, increase the contrast ratio upon detecting a low level of attention, or lack of satisfactory neural stimulation”, paragraph [0427]).
In response to the arguments regarding claim 6, the Applicant argues that Malchano does not teach the claimed sequence of “playing one audio signal by itself for a first period…then playing two audio signals simultaneously…and then playing the one audio signal by itself for a third period”. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees, as Malchano teaches a processor that is capable of playing the first and second audio signals, playing one audio signal by itself for a first time, and then a second audio simultaneously (“audio generation module may generate a second output signal based on the fixed parameter and a second value of the variable parameter…provide the output signal to the speaker…speaker to provide modified sound to the subject”, paragraph [0066]; modified sound can be the two audio signals being played simultaneously). The processor of Malchano is also capable of providing the one audio signal by itself for a third period of the treatment session (“the therapy session may include adjusting, responsive to the level attention not satisfying the threshold, the variable parameter to a third value greater than the second value”, paragraph [0080]). The Applicant also argues that Malchano does not disclose a “structured temporal protocol involving alternating solo and combined playback of signals across defined treatment phases”, however that is not positively recited in the claim. Nonetheless, the processor of Malchano is also capable of performing said structured temporal protocol.
In response to the arguments regarding claim 7, the Applicant argues that Malchano does not teach binaural 3D nature sounds played simultaneously with other therapeutic signals. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Malchano teaches providing binaural beats (“audio signals using binaural beats or binaural pulses”, paragraph [0413]) and nature sounds (“sound track can include…nature sounds”, paragraph [0422]) to the patient as part of the treatment, therefore the processor of Malchano is also capable of providing a third audio signal comprising any binaural beats or binaural pulses, which can be nature sounds with binaural rendering.
In response to the arguments regarding claim 8, the Applicant argues that Malchano does not teach a third audio signal that specifically comprises the same exceptional energy frequency derived from the patient’s vocalized sounds, nor simultaneously modifying multiple signals based on that same patient-specific frequency. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees, as Malchano does teach the processor capable of deriving an exceptional energy frequency from the patient’s vocalized sounds and modifying multiple signals based on that same patient-specific frequency (“NSS 905 can receive feedback from microphone 1210 and modify, manipulate or otherwise adjust the audio signal to optimize the auditory stimulation provided to a subject”, paragraph [0474]). The processor of Malchano is also capable of providing a third audio with the modified signals with use of the exceptional frequency.
In response to the arguments regarding claim 9, the Applicant argues that Malchano does not teach spatial variation of an audio signal at a rate corresponding to a physiological parameter, or oscillatory spatial movement of sound tied to heart rate variability, EEG frequency, or breathing rate. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees, as Malchano does teach the processor capable of providing spatial variation of an audio signal corresponding to a physiological parameter, such as EEG frequency ("the NSS 905 can receive neural oscillation information from EEG probes 1225, and adjust the auditory stimulation based on the EEG information the NSS 905 can then identify the corresponding undesired frequency", paragraph [0467]). Malchano teaches a processor that is capable of controlling spatial oscillation of an audio signal as a function of the listed parameters.
In response to the arguments regarding claim 11, the Applicant argues that Malchano does not teach characterizing responsiveness of the vagus nerve specifically, nor adjusting audio signal parameters based on such characterization. The Examiner respectfully disagrees, as Malchano does teach the processor capable of characterizing a responsiveness of the patient’s vagus nerve to the audio signals and adjusting a frequency and/or volume of the audio signals (“therapy session may include overlaying, responsive to the detection, an audio signal on the output signal based on the second physiological condition”, paragraph [0082]). The processor of Malchano is capable of identifying vagus nerve responsiveness as the controlled parameter or describing how such responsiveness is measured and used to modify audio signals.
In response to the arguments regarding claim 12, the Applicant argues that Malchano does not teach delivering tactile and/or visual stimulation as part of a coordinated multi-modal therapeutic system in combination with the specific audio signal architecture recited in claim 1. The Examiner respectfully disagrees, as Malchano does teach integrating tactile and/or visual stimulation into the specific audio biofeedback system ("the system may include a light source visual signaling component executed by a visual neural stimulation system", paragraph [0085]). The Examiner also notes that the “coordinated multi-modal therapeutic system in combination with the specific audio signal architecture recited in claim 1”, is not positively recited in claim 12.
In response to the arguments regarding claim 13, the Applicant argues that Malchano does not teach adjusting volume based on a patient’s schedule, nor does it teach a system that adapts audio output to both environmental and scheduling factors of the patient. The Examiner notes that claim 13 is taught by Shrivastav in view of Malchano, wherein Shrivastav teaches a processor that is capable of adjusting a volume of audio signals to the patient’s schedule ("user may produce speech samples that correspond to a scheduled time, day, week, or month further analysis of speech samples can be provided based on potential changes in the speech samples taken at the specified intervals", Col. 8, lines 2-6; Shrivastav). Malchano also teaches a processor that is capable of adjusting a volume of audio signals to the patient’s environment, such as their position in a room ("the NSS 905 can modify or adjust audio signals provided to one or more of the speakers in system...modify, manipulate or otherwise adjust the audio signal to optimize the auditory stimulation provided to a subject located at a position in the room", paragraph [0474]). Therefore, the Examiner respectfully disagrees that the combined references do not teach the claimed feature.
In response to the arguments regarding claim 14, the Applicant argues that Shrivastaav does not teach using the data for enhancing the derivation of therapeutic audio signals. The Examiner acknowledges that Shrivastav uses the data more for classification or diagnosis, however, Shrivastav does teach using aggregated patient data (“comparing the identified acoustic measures with corresponding measures obtained from a set of other speakers”, claim 12). Furthermore, Malchano teaches using patient data for enhancing signal generation.
In response to the arguments regarding claim 15, the Applicant argues that Shrivastav does not teach a user interface displaying results, as it does not teach a biofeedback interface incorporating gaming or social network features, or that it is integrated with a therapeutic audio system. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees, as Shrivastav does teach a user interface ("the results may be provided via website interace, or directly on a display screen of the device", Col. 6, lines 50-53), and it is capable of incorporating gaming or social networking features while integrating the therapeutic audio system.
In response to the arguments regarding claim 16, the Applicant argues that Malchano does not teach using EEG signals in combination with the specific audio signal derivation and playback structure recited in claim 1, including the patient-specific exceptional frequency and breathing-rate-based signal. However, the Examiner notes that that is not positively recited in claim 16. Nonetheless, the processor of Malchano is capable of using the EEG signals in combination with the specific audio signal derivation and playback structure (“processors to generate, based on each first neural stimulus a corresponding first simulated EEG response to the first neural stimulus…processors to compare each first EEG response”, paragraph [0113]) as described in claim 1.
In response to the arguments regarding claim 17, the Applicant argues that Malchano does not teach scanning a range of frequencies in a systematic manner while measuring physiological responses at each frequency to identify an optimal frequency for a third audio signal. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees, as Malchano teaches a processor that is capable of performing a frequency sweep and optimization process in order to measure one or more physiological characteristics of the patient indicative of stress reduction for a third audio signal to play during treatment.
In response to the arguments regarding claim 18, the Applicant argues that neither Shrivastav nor Malchano teaches integrating EMDR procedures with a system that derives patient-specific audio signals based on vocalized sounds and physiological parameters. However, claim 18 is also rejected by a combination with a third reference, Eastman. Eastman teaches a system for patient treatment, comprising a processor that also provides audio signals to the patient, as well as EMDR procedures. Therefore the combination of Shrivastav in view of Malchano and further in view of Eastman teaches the limitations of claim 18.
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 LARA LINH TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3598. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am-5:00pm M-F.
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, Alexander Valvis can be reached at 5712724233. 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.
/L.L.T./Examiner, Art Unit 3791 /ALEX M VALVIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights