DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to the amendment filed 05/26/2026. Claims 1-21 are acknowledged as pending with claims 1-2, 6, 11-12, and 20 being currently amended and claim 21 being new.
The claim objections and rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 103 are withdrawn as having been overcome by the amendment. New rejections necessitated by the amendment are presented below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 103 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-3, 9-14, 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pelkus (WO 2019/027939), in view of Hanbury (US 2018/0250494).
Regarding claim 1, Pelkus teaches a system for adjusting a mood of a subject (Abstract), the system comprising:
a sensory stimulator system configured to apply one or more sensory stimuli to a subject (paragraphs 0008 and 0032; Fig. 2A);
wherein the sensor system further includes a pulse oximetry sensor (para. 0045; Fig. 2A, pulse rate detector 230);
a sensor system (Fig. 3A; para. 0037) configured to obtain one or more biosignals from the subject (paragraphs 0033 and 0038-0046; Fig. 3A), the one or more biosignals being indicative or correlative of a mood of the subject (paragraphs 0032-0033); and
a computer system having one or more processors configured to receive the one or more obtained biosignals, and based thereon, generate a stimuli signal to adjust the sensory stimuli applied to the subject by the sensory stimulator system (Fig. 2A, system controller 200; para. 0016);
wherein the sensory stimulator system adjusts the one or more sensory stimuli applied to the subject based on the generated stimuli signal to obtain a predetermined mood, emotion, feeling, or affective state in the subject (paragraphs 0032 & 0047).
Pelkus fails to specifically teach wherein the sensor system includes one or more sensors configured to obtain from the subject data relating to electrodermal activity (EDA), galvanic skin response (GSR), electrodermal response (EDR), psychogalvanic reflex (PGR), skin conductance response (SCR), sympathetic skin response (SSR), or skin conductance level (SCL).
Hanbury teaches an analogous system wherein the sensor system includes one or more sensors configured to obtain from the subject data relating to electrodermal activity (EDA), galvanic skin response (GSR) (paras. 0016 and 0023; Claim 25), electrodermal response (EDR), psychogalvanic reflex (PGR), skin conductance response (SCR), sympathetic skin response (SSR), or skin conductance level (SCL).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the system of Pelkus with the galvanic skin response sensor of Hanbury. The galvanic skin response sensor may be used as biofeedback to alter, in real time, the stimulus delivered to the user (Hanbury, paras. 0008 and 0054).
Regarding claim 2, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the system according to claim 1 as stated above wherein the sensor system includes a galvanic skin response (GSR) sensor (Hanbury, Claim 25; para. 0023).
Regarding claim 3, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the system according to claim 1 as stated above wherein the sensory stimulator system is configured to apply auditory stimuli, visual stimuli, tactile stimuli, olfactory stimuli to the subject, or taste-based stimuli to the subject (Pelkus, paragraphs 0032 & 0047; Fig. 2A).
Regarding claim 9, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the system according to claim 1 as stated above wherein the sensory stimulator system is a visual system configured to apply visual stimuli that includes providing visual light of varying frequencies, brightness, pulses, or combinations thereof or in varying patterns (Pelkus, paragraphs 0049 & 0068; Fig. 4A, virtual reality screen 403).
Regarding claim 10, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the system according to claim 1 as stated above wherein the sensory stimulator system is a tactile system configured to apply tactile stimuli that includes varying force or pressure, providing vibrations of varying frequencies and varying amplitudes and to different parts of the subject (Pelkus, para. 0073; Fig. 4A), and/or
applying varying temperatures to different parts of the subject (Pelkus, para. 0071).
Regarding claim 11, Pelkus teaches a method for adjusting a mood of a subject (para. 0016), the method comprising:
applying one or more sensory stimuli to a subject (paragraphs 0016 & 0032; Fig. 4A);
obtaining one or more biosignals from the subject, the one or more biosignals being indicative or correlative of a mood of the subject (paragraphs 0032-0033 & 0038-0046; Fig. 3A);
wherein said obtaining the one or more biosignals from the subject further includes obtaining said one or more biosignals by a pulse oximetry sensor (paras. 0045 and 0064);
receiving the one or more obtained biosignals and processing said biosignals by a computer system having one or more processors and based thereon, generating a stimuli signal to adjust the sensory stimuli applied to the subject (Fig. 2B, system controller 200; paras. 0016 and 0060-0064); and
adjusting the one or more sensory stimuli applied to the subject based on the generated stimuli signal to obtain a predetermined mood, emotion, feeling, or affective state in the subject (paragraphs 0032 & 0047).
Pelkus fails to specifically teach wherein said obtaining the one or more biosignals from the subject includes obtaining said one or more biosignals by one or more sensors configured to obtain from the subject data relating to electrodermal activity (EDA), galvanic skin response (GSR), electrodermal response (EDR), psychogalvanic reflex (PGR), skin conductance response (SCR), sympathetic skin response (SSR), or skin conductance level (SCL).
Hanbury teaches an analogous method wherein said obtaining the one or more biosignals from the subject includes obtaining said one or more biosignals by one or more sensors configured to obtain from the subject data relating to electrodermal activity (EDA), galvanic skin response (GSR) (Claim 9; paras. 0008, 0022-0023 and 0046), electrodermal response (EDR), psychogalvanic reflex (PGR), skin conductance response (SCR), sympathetic skin response (SSR), or skin conductance level (SCL).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of Pelkus with the galvanic skin response sensor, configured to obtain biosignals, of Hanbury. The biological signals obtained from the user may be used to determine a state of the user, and subsequently inform the system to alter the applied stimuli, in real time, to achieve a desired state (Hanbury, Abstract; paras. 0005 and 0008).
Regarding claim 12, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the method according to claim 11 as stated above wherein said obtaining the one or more biosignals from the subject includes obtaining said one or more biosignals by a galvanic skin response (GSR) (Hanbury, Claim 9; paras. 0008, 0022-0023 and 0046).
Regarding claim 13, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the method according to claim 11 as stated above wherein the one or more biosignals are obtained by retrieving the biosignals from a data storage having the data of the biosignal previously stored thereon (Pelkus, para. 0033; Fig. 2A, memory 202) or by receiving data of the biosignals.
Regarding claim 14, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the method according to claim 11 as stated above wherein applying the one or more sensory stimuli includes applying auditory stimuli, visual stimuli, tactile stimuli, olfactory stimuli to the subject, or taste-based stimuli to the subject (Pelkus, paragraphs 0032 & 0047; Fig. 2A).
Regarding claim 19, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the method according to claim 11 as stated above wherein the sensory stimulator system is
a visual system configured to apply visual stimuli that includes providing visual light of varying frequencies, brightness, pulses, or combinations thereof or in varying patterns, or
a tactile system configured to apply tactile stimuli that includes varying force or pressure, providing vibrations of varying frequencies and varying amplitudes and to different parts of the subject (Pelkus, para. 0073; Fig. 4A), and/or
applying varying temperatures to different parts of the subject (Pelkus, para. 0071).
Regarding claim 20, Pelkus teaches a hardware storage device having stored thereon computer executable instructions which (Fig. 2A, memory 202), when executed by one or more processors of a computer system, configure the computer system (paragraphs 0058-0059; Fig. 2A, system controller 200) to perform at least the following:
apply one or more sensory stimuli to a subject (paragraphs 0066-0073);
obtain one or more biosignals from the subject, the one or more biosignals being indicative or correlative of a mood of the subject (paragraphs 0060-0064);
wherein said obtaining the one or more biosignals from the subject further includes obtaining said one or more biosignals by a pulse oximetry sensor (paras. 0045 and 0064);
receive the one or more obtained biosignals and processing said biosignals by a computer system having one or more processors and based thereon, generating a stimuli signal to adjust the sensory stimuli applied to the subject (para. 0065); and
adjust the one or more sensory stimuli applied to the subject based on the generated stimuli signal (para. 0074) to obtain a predetermined mood, emotion, feeling, or affective state in the subject (paragraphs 0032 & 0047).
Pelkus fails to specifically teach wherein said obtaining the one or more biosignals from the subject includes obtaining said one or more biosignals by one or more sensors configured to obtain from the subject data relating to electrodermal activity (EDA), galvanic skin response (GSR), electrodermal response (EDR), psychogalvanic reflex (PGR), skin conductance response (SCR), sympathetic skin response (SSR), or skin conductance level (SCL).
Hanbury teaches an analogous hardware storage device (paras. 0047 and 0049) wherein said obtaining the one or more biosignals from the subject includes obtaining said one or more biosignals by one or more sensors configured to obtain from the subject data relating to electrodermal activity (EDA), galvanic skin response (GSR) (Claims 9 and 25; paras. 0008, 0022-0023 and 0046), electrodermal response (EDR), psychogalvanic reflex (PGR), skin conductance response (SCR), sympathetic skin response (SSR), or skin conductance level (SCL).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the hardware storage device of Pelkus with the galvanic skin response sensor, configured to obtain biosignals, of Hanbury. The biological signals obtained from the user may be used to determine a state of the user, and subsequently inform the system to alter the applied stimuli, in real time, to achieve a desired state (Hanbury, Abstract; paras. 0005 and 0008).
Regarding claim 21, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the system according to claim 1 as stated above wherein the sensor system further includes one or more sensors configured to obtain from the subject data relating to electroencephalography (EEG) (Pelkus, para. 0039; Fig. 2A, brainwave detector 205), electromyography (EMG), body movement based on one or more accelerometers or one or more gyroscopes, electrocardiography (ECG), temperature of the subject (Pelkus, para. 0044; Fig. 2A, temperature sensor 225), thermal imaging, respiration, visual images of the subject, prefrontal cortex activity, oxyhemoglobin (oxy-Hb) concentration, cortisol levels including salivary cortisol levels, hair cortisol levels, and/or fingernail cortisol levels, pupil dilation, pupillometry, optical imaging of tissues of the subject including functional near infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), computed tomography (CT), magnetoencephalography (MEG), positron emission tomography (PET), or infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), oxygen saturation, heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (HRV), photoelectric Art Unit: 3791 Attorney No.: 22486.2 12/18 plethysmography (PPG), photoplethysmography imaging (PPGI), pulsimetry, or accelerated plethysmography (APG).
Claim(s) 4-8 and 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pelkus in view of Hanbury, further in view of Holloway et al. (WO 2018/068050).
Regarding claim 4, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the system according to claim 1 as stated above. Pelkus in view of Hanbury fails to teach wherein the sensory stimulator system is an auditory system configured to apply auditory stimuli that includes providing one or more of the following: introductory music, a frequency scan of sound of varying frequencies, heartbeat-mimicking sound, instrumental music, natural sounds, and/or binaural beats.
Holloway et al. teaches an analogous system for inducing a target metal state wherein the sensory stimulator system is an auditory system configured to apply auditory stimuli (Abstract) that includes providing one or more of the following: introductory music, a frequency scan of sound of varying frequencies, heartbeat-mimicking sound, instrumental music, natural sounds, and/or binaural beats (para. 0016, “binaural beats to a person at varying frequencies”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the system of Pelkus in view of Hanbury with the auditory system configured to apply auditory stimuli in the form of binaural beats of Holloway et al. By implementing binaural beats, the listener’s brainwaves can synchronize with the administered binaural beats, ultimately, administered binaural beats may induce a target mental state, such as a relaxed state or sleep state, in a person (Holloway et al., paragraphs 0037-0042).
Regarding claim 5, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the system according to claim 1 as stated above. Pelkus in view of Hanbury fails to teach wherein the sensory stimulator system is an auditory system configured to apply auditory stimuli that includes providing one or more of the following sounds in consecutive sequence: introductory music, a frequency scan of sound of varying frequencies, heartbeat mimicking sound, instrumental music, natural sounds, binaural beats, and/or closing music.
Holloway et al. teaches an analogous system for inducing a target metal state wherein the sensory stimulator system is an auditory system configured to apply auditory stimuli that includes providing one or more of the following sounds in consecutive sequence: introductory music, a frequency scan of sound of varying frequencies, heartbeat mimicking sound, instrumental music, natural sounds, binaural beats, and/or closing music (paragraphs 0045-0047; Fig. 1, depicts biaural beat frequencies plotted over time).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the system of Pelkus in view of Hanbury with the auditory system configured to apply auditory stimuli in the form of biaural beats of Holloway et al. Advantageously, the frequencies of the binaural beats during the continuous administered durations engage the user, prevent the user from becoming acclimatized to the binaural beats, and thereby maintain the effectiveness of auditory stimulus treatment (Holloway et al., para. 0053).
Regarding claim 6, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the system according to claim 1 as stated above. Pelkus in view of Hanbury fails to teach wherein the sensory stimulator system is an auditory system configured to apply auditory stimuli that includes providing one or more of the following sounds concurrently: introductory music, a frequency scan of sound of varying frequencies, heartbeat mimicking sound, instrumental music, natural sounds, binaural beats, and/or closing music.
Holloway et al. teaches an analogous system for inducing a target metal state wherein the sensory stimulator system is an auditory system configured to apply auditory stimuli that includes providing one or more of the following sounds concurrently: introductory music, a frequency scan of sound of varying frequencies, heartbeat mimicking sound, instrumental music, natural sounds, binaural beats, and/or closing music (para. 0018, “durations can be continuous”; paragraphs 0065-0066; Fig. 1, depicts biaural beat frequencies plotted over time).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the system of Pelkus in view of Hanbury with the auditory system configured to apply auditory stimuli in the form of binaural beats of Holloway et al. Advantageously, the frequencies of the binaural beats during the continuous administered durations engage the user, prevent the user from becoming acclimatized to the binaural beats, and thereby maintain the effectiveness of auditory stimulus treatment (Holloway et al., para. 0053).
Regarding claim 7, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the system according to claim 1 as stated above. Pelkus in view of Hanbury fails to teach wherein the sensory stimulator system is an auditory system configured to apply auditory stimuli that includes providing a frequency scan of sound of varying frequencies including at least sound of a first frequency and sound of a second frequency, providing a frequency scan of sound of varying timbres including at least sound of a first timbre and sound of a second timbre, providing a frequency scan of sound of varying harmonies including at least sound of a first harmony and sound of a second harmony, providing a frequency scan of sound of varying loudness including at least sound of a first loudness and sound of a second loudness, a frequency scan of sound of varying pitch including at least sound of a first pitch and sound of a second pitch, providing a frequency scan of sound of varying tones including at least sound of a first tone and sound of a second tone, or providing a frequency scan of sound of varying pure tones including at least sound of a first pure tone and sound of a second pure tone.
Holloway et al. teaches an analogous system for inducing a target metal state wherein the sensory stimulator system is an auditory system configured to apply auditory stimuli (para. 0051, “auditory stimuli delivered to each ear can be selected”) that includes
providing a frequency scan of sound of varying frequencies including at least sound of a first frequency and sound of a second frequency,
providing a frequency scan of sound of varying timbres including at least sound of a first timbre and sound of a second timbre,
providing a frequency scan of sound of varying harmonies including at least sound of a first harmony and sound of a second harmony,
providing a frequency scan of sound of varying loudness including at least sound of a first loudness and sound of a second loudness,
a frequency scan of sound of varying pitch including at least sound of a first pitch and sound of a second pitch (para. 0058),
providing a frequency scan of sound of varying tones including at least sound of a first tone and sound of a second tone, or
providing a frequency scan of sound of varying pure tones including at least sound of a first pure tone and sound of a second pure tone.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the system of Pelkus in view of Hanbury with the auditory system configured to apply auditory stimuli with varying pitch of Holloway et al. Advantageously, auditory stimuli within certain pitch frequencies may result in strong brainwave entrainment (Holloway et al., para. 0058).
Regarding claim 8, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the system according to claim 1 as stated above. Pelkus in view of Hanbury fails to teach wherein the sensory stimulator system is an auditory system configured to apply auditory stimuli that includes introductory music a heartbeat mimicking sound instrumental music natural sounds, or a reproduction of man or machine-made-sounds.
Holloway et al. teaches an analogous system for inducing a target metal state wherein the sensory stimulator system is an auditory system configured to apply auditory stimuli that includes
introductory music
a heartbeat mimicking sound
instrumental music
natural sounds (para. 0021), or
a reproduction of man or machine-made-sounds.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the system of Pelkus in view of Hanbury with the auditory system configured to apply auditory stimuli in the form of natural sounds of Holloway et al. By co-administering rain sounds, wind sounds, or ocean sounds, the displeasing sounds that some users may experience during the administration of binaural beats may be alleviated (Holloway et al., para. 0061).
Regarding claim 15, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the method according to claim 11 as stated above. Pelkus in view of Hanbury fails to teach wherein applying the one or more sensory stimuli includes applying auditory stimuli that includes providing one or more of the following: introductory music, a frequency scan of sound of varying frequencies, heartbeat-mimicking sound, instrumental music, natural sounds, and/or binaural beats.
Holloway et al. teaches an analogous system and method for inducing a target metal state wherein applying the one or more sensory stimuli includes applying auditory stimuli that includes providing one or more of the following: introductory music, a frequency scan of sound of varying frequencies, heartbeat-mimicking sound, instrumental music, natural sounds, and/or binaural beats (para. 0016, “binaural beats to a person at varying frequencies”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of Pelkus in view of Hanbury with the auditory stimuli application in the form of administered binaural beats of Holloway et al. By implementing binaural beats, the listener’s brainwaves can synchronize with the administered binaural beats, ultimately, administered binaural beats may induce a target mental state, such as a relaxed state or sleep state, in a person (Holloway et al., paragraphs 0037-0042).
Regarding claim 16, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the method according to claim 11 as stated above. Pelkus in view of Hanbury fails to teach wherein applying the one or more sensory stimuli includes applying auditory stimuli that includes providing one or more of the following sounds in consecutive sequence or concurrently: introductory music, a frequency scan of sound of varying frequencies, heartbeat mimicking sound, instrumental music, natural sounds, binaural beats, and/or closing music.
Holloway et al. teaches an analogous system and method for inducing a target metal state wherein applying the one or more sensory stimuli includes applying auditory stimuli that includes providing one or more of the following sounds in consecutive sequence or concurrently: introductory music, a frequency scan of sound of varying frequencies, heartbeat mimicking sound, instrumental music, natural sounds, binaural beats, and/or closing music (paragraphs 0045-0047; para. 0018, “durations can be continuous”; paragraphs 0065-0066; Fig. 1, depicts biaural beat frequencies plotted over time).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of Pelkus in view of Hanbury with the auditory stimuli application in the form of administered binaural beats of Holloway et al. Advantageously, the frequencies of the binaural beats during the continuous administered durations engage the user, prevent the user from becoming acclimatized to the binaural beats, and thereby maintain the effectiveness of auditory stimulus treatment (Holloway et al., para. 0053).
Regarding claim 17, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the method according to claim 11 as stated above. Pelkus in view of Hanbury fails to teach wherein applying the one or more sensory stimuli includes applying auditory stimuli that includes providing a frequency scan of sound of varying frequencies including at least sound of a first frequency and sound of a second frequency, providing a frequency scan of sound of varying timbres including at least sound of a first timbre and sound of a second timbre, providing a frequency scan of sound of varying harmonies including at least sound of a first harmony and sound of a second harmony, providing a frequency scan of sound of varying loudness including at least sound of a first loudness and sound of a second loudness, a frequency scan of sound of varying pitch including at least sound of a first pitch and sound of a second pitch, providing a frequency scan of sound of varying tones including at least sound of a first tone and sound of a second tone, or providing a frequency scan of sound of varying pure tones including at least sound of a first pure tone and sound of a second pure tone.
Holloway et al. teaches an analogous system and method for inducing a target metal state wherein applying the one or more sensory stimuli includes applying auditory stimuli (para. 0051, “auditory stimuli delivered to each ear can be selected”) that includes
providing a frequency scan of sound of varying frequencies including at least sound of a first frequency and sound of a second frequency,
providing a frequency scan of sound of varying timbres including at least sound of a first timbre and sound of a second timbre,
providing a frequency scan of sound of varying harmonies including at least sound of a first harmony and sound of a second harmony,
providing a frequency scan of sound of varying loudness including at least sound of a first loudness and sound of a second loudness,
a frequency scan of sound of varying pitch including at least sound of a first pitch and sound of a second pitch (para. 0058),
providing a frequency scan of sound of varying tones including at least sound of a first tone and sound of a second tone, or
providing a frequency scan of sound of varying pure tones including at least sound of a first pure tone and sound of a second pure tone.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of Pelkus in view of Hanbury with the auditory stimuli application configured to be administered with sounds of varying pitch of Holloway et al. Advantageously, auditory stimuli within certain pitch frequencies may result in strong brainwave entrainment (Holloway et al., para. 0058).
Regarding claim 18, Pelkus in view of Hanbury teaches the method according to claim 11 as stated above. Pelkus in view of Hanbury fails to teach wherein applying the one or more sensory stimuli includes applying auditory stimuli that includes introductory music a heartbeat mimicking sound instrumental music natural sounds, a reproduction of man-made-sounds, or a reproduction of man-made-sounds or of machine-made-sounds.
Holloway et al. teaches an analogous system and method for inducing a target metal state wherein applying the one or more sensory stimuli includes applying auditory stimuli that includes
introductory music
a heartbeat mimicking sound
instrumental music
natural sounds (para. 0021),
a reproduction of man-made-sounds, or
a reproduction of man-made-sounds or of machine-made-sounds.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of Pelkus in view of Hanbury with the auditory stimuli application configured to be administered with natural sounds of Holloway et al. By co-administering rain sounds, wind sounds, or ocean sounds, the displeasing sounds that some users may experience during the administration of binaural beats may be alleviated (Holloway et al., para. 0061).
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 BROGAN R LANDEEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1390. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 6:00pm.
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.
/B.R.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/JENNIFER ROBERTSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights