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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 09/02/2026 as been entered.
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, 8-9, 16, 19-21, 23 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicole Elizabeth Samec (US 20170365101 A1; hereinafter Samec) in view of Wesley W.O. Krueger (US 20190167095 A1; hereinafter Krueger).
Regarding Claim 1, Samec discloses a method for dynamic ocular training (see Abstract), comprising: receiving, with an electronic processor, a diagnosis indication of at least one ocular disorder of a patient from a plurality of ocular disorders (“Referring now to FIG. 11, the systems and sensors described above may be used according to method 1700 for detection and/or diagnosis of mental states and/or neurological conditions related to a user's level of alertness” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0553])); selecting, with the electronic processor, a virtual reality therapeutic game from a set of available virtual reality therapeutic games, wherein each available virtual reality therapeutic game of the set of available virtual reality therapeutic games is designed to provide training of at least one ocular motor function related to one or more ocular disorders, the virtual reality therapeutic game being selected based on the diagnosis indication of the at least one ocular disorder, the virtual reality therapeutic game being designed to provide training of at least one ocular motor function related to the at least one ocular disorder (“In one example, the user may be presented with a video game or other interactive activity so as to detect lapses in a user's perceptual capability. At block 1710, a user may be presented with a series of images, such as a group of dots, which may move and/or change in clarity. The user may be asked to follow the dots with their eyes. At block 1720, the user's ability to follow the dots may be detected based on eye gaze tracking by the display system” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0575])); executing, with the electronic processor, within a virtual reality environment, the virtual reality therapeutic game via a display screen (“It will be appreciated that the AR systems may display virtual content to a user, or viewer, while still allowing the user to see the world around them. Preferably, this content is displayed on a head-mounted display, e.g., as part of eyewear, that projects image information to the user's eyes. In addition, the display may also transmit light from the surrounding environment to the user's eyes, to allow a view of that surrounding environment. As used herein, it will be appreciated that a “head-mounted” or “head-mountable” display is a display that may be mounted on the head of a viewer” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0402])), and receiving interactive input data collected during performance of the virtual reality therapeutic game (“a camera assembly 630 (e.g., a digital camera, including visible light and infrared light cameras) may be provided to capture images of the eye 210 and/or tissue around the eye 210 (e.g., to conduct eyelid monitoring, pupil monitoring, eye movement monitoring, movement pattern monitoring, blinking pattern monitoring, eye color monitoring, etc.) to, e.g., detect user inputs and/or to monitor the physiological state of the user. As used herein, a camera may be any image capture device” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0451])), determining, with the electronic processor, a current success level associated with performance of the virtual reality therapeutic game based on the interactive input data, wherein the current success level (“stimulus may be applied and the subsequent measurement of the user reaction may be assessed to test the efficacy of the stimulus for achieving a particular reaction and/or may be implemented to provide a feedback loop to help induce a particular state in the user. Light source goggle VEP may be evaluated for variability between people (inter-individual variability) and within a given person (intra-individual variability), e.g., overtime” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0660])) dynamically adjusting, with the electronic processor, a difficulty level of the virtual reality therapeutic game based on the current success level; and executing, with the electronic processor, within the virtual reality environment, the virtual reality therapeutic game in accordance with the adjusted difficulty level (“using the display systems and methods described herein and through unique content delivery, the user's brain receives tailored stimuli with which the user may interact. The systems described herein may be configured to monitor in real time the user's interactions and responses (physical, emotional, and behavioral, as described herein) and to adjust the training accordingly. For example, the systems described herein may be configured to be adaptive. The system may be configured to increase the difficulty of brain training tasks when the user is doing well and vice versa (decrease the difficulty when the user is performing poorly and/or unable to complete training activities). The system may also be configured to utilize positive and negative reinforcement (positive reinforcement may be more beneficial) to increase user engagement. This may be used to make the training more game-like and enjoyable, thereby increasing the likelihood that the user will continue with a training program” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0792])). Samec briefly discusses input data including head rotation data see ¶434; however, doesn’t further disclose wherein at least a portion of the interactive input data is collected using a motion tracking system that detects head rotations, wherein the interactive input data includes head rotation data. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. In an analogous art to the use of Virtual Reality to diagnose and provide treatment to users, Krueger teaches wherein at least a portion of the interactive input data is collected using a motion tracking system that detects head rotations, wherein the interactive input data includes head rotation data (“The subject is instructed to keep his/her eyes focused on the target visual element as the head moves. The eye sensor (typically a video camera) measures eye movement relative to head movement” (recited in at least: Krueger paragraph [0252])). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included head movement/rotation data into a diagnosis and treatment as taught by Krueger as it helps gather Vestibulo-Ocular response to motion for diagnosis.
Regarding Claim 8, Samec in view of Kreuger teach the claimed subject matter as stated above, and Samec further discloses further comprising performing a vergence capacity measurement, and wherein the vergence capacity measurement comprises: displaying, via the display screen, a virtual target at a first distance away from two eye positions; moving the virtual target from the first distance to a center of the two eye positions at a constant speed; receiving a measurement input when the patient perceives loss of convergence for the virtual target; and producing the diagnosis indication of the ocular disorder based on the measurement input (“evaluated may be displayed on different depth planes, and the accommodation and/or vergence of the user's eyes may be measured (e.g., using eye-tracking cameras on the display device). It will be appreciated that images on different depth planes that are perceived by the viewer will cause the eye to assume different accommodation and/or vergence states. Consequently, the image that is perceived by the user may be inferred by determining: 1) the accommodation and/or vergence states of the user's eyes; and 2) matching that accommodation and/or vergence state with the images or depth planes of the images being displayed. The image corresponding to the measured accommodation and/or vergence states of the user is then interpreted to be the image that is perceived by the user. In some embodiments, the images may be displayed on widely disparate depth planes (e.g., infinity and the closest depth plane outputted by the display system) to increase the expected difference in accommodation and/or vergence states between the images. In some embodiments, the duration of the user's fixation on an image (e.g., the amount of time that the user's eyes assume a particular accommodation and/or vergence state) may also be measured to infer whether the user is actively perceiving a particular image, or whether the change in accommodation and/or vergence states is a result of an involuntary reflex, such as microsaccades” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0416])).
Regarding Claim 9 Samec in view of Kreuger teach the claimed subject matter as stated above, and Samec further discloses, wherein the vergence capacity measurement further comprises: repeating displaying, via the display screen, the virtual target, moving the virtual target (“The display system may be configured to detect impairments in convergence, which refers to the simultaneous inward movement of the user's eyes when viewing an object that is moved closer to the user's eyes. To test convergence, the display system may be configured to present a stimulus to the user at block 1710. The stimulus may comprise an image of an object that is projected by the display system (e.g., through a particular depth plane of the waveguide stacks 2005, 2006 of the display system 2010, FIG. 10) such that the image appears to be at a particular distance from the user's eye. The display system may be further configured to project the image on different depth planes such that it appears to move closer to the user's eyes. The display system may sense the user's reaction to the stimulus as shown at block 1720. To sense the user's reaction to the stimulus, some embodiments of the display system may be configured to track the movement of one or both of the user's eye (e.g., using the cameras 24, 28 of the display system 2010) as the user is instructed to follow the projected image as it appears closer to the user's eye” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0735])), and receiving a subsequence input representative of a perceived loss of convergence for the virtual target; and measuring vergence fatigue based on the subsequence input (“For example, alertness qualities such as consciousness, drowsiness, fatigue, unconsciousness, or other quality may be determined based on the user's reaction to a stimulus” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0547]).
Regarding Claim 16 Samec discloses a therapeutic system for treatment of disorders, comprising: a sensor configured to detect head rotations of a human head (“inertial measurement units, accelerometers, compasses, GPS units, radio devices, gyros, and/or other sensors disclosed herein” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0474])); a memory; and a processor communicatively coupled to the memory and the sensor, wherein the memory stores a set of instructions which, when executed by the processor (“the sensor 120 a may be operatively coupled by communications link 120 b, e.g., a wired lead or wireless connectivity, to the local processor and data module 140. The local processing and data module 140 may comprise a hardware processor, as well as digital memory, such as non-volatile memory (e.g., flash memory or hard disk drives), both of which may be utilized to assist in the processing, caching, and storage of data” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0474])), cause the processor to: select a virtual reality therapeutic game among a plurality of therapeutic games based on a diagnosis result, wherein the diagnosis result indicates at least one ocular disorder from a plurality of ocular disorders, wherein the virtual reality therapeutic game is designed to provide training of at least one ocular motor function related to the at least one ocular disorder (“In one example, the user may be presented with a video game or other interactive activity so as to detect lapses in a user's perceptual capability. At block 1710, a user may be presented with a series of images, such as a group of dots, which may move and/or change in clarity. The user may be asked to follow the dots with their eyes. At block 1720, the user's ability to follow the dots may be detected based on eye gaze tracking by the display system” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0575])); execute the virtual reality therapeutic game to receive interactive input data related to the virtual reality therapeutic game, wherein at least a first portion of the interactive input data is detected using the sensor (“It will be appreciated that the AR systems may display virtual content to a user, or viewer, while still allowing the user to see the world around them. Preferably, this content is displayed on a head-mounted display, e.g., as part of eyewear, that projects image information to the user's eyes. In addition, the display may also transmit light from the surrounding environment to the user's eyes, to allow a view of that surrounding environment. As used herein, it will be appreciated that a “head-mounted” or “head-mountable” display is a display that may be mounted on the head of a viewer” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0402]); dynamically adjust a difficulty level of the virtual reality therapeutic game based on a current success level associated with the interactive input data, the current success level being based at least in part on the head rotation data, wherein the virtual reality therapeutic game is further executed in accordance with the adjusted difficulty level; and transmit a game result to a device remote from the therapeutic system, based on the difficulty level of the virtual reality therapeutic game and the interactive input data (“using the display systems and methods described herein and through unique content delivery, the user's brain receives tailored stimuli with which the user may interact. The systems described herein may be configured to monitor in real time the user's interactions and responses (physical, emotional, and behavioral, as described herein) and to adjust the training accordingly. For example, the systems described herein may be configured to be adaptive. The system may be configured to increase the difficulty of brain training tasks when the user is doing well and vice versa (decrease the difficulty when the user is performing poorly and/or unable to complete training activities). The system may also be configured to utilize positive and negative reinforcement (positive reinforcement may be more beneficial) to increase user engagement. This may be used to make the training more game-like and enjoyable, thereby increasing the likelihood that the user will continue with a training program” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0792])). Samec doesn’t explicitly disclose head rotation data, wherein the virtual reality therapeutic game displays an optotype in response to the head rotation data indicating a head rotation speed exceeding a predetermined threshold, and wherein successful game interaction is conditioned on identification of an orientation of the optotype. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. In an analogous art to the use of Virtual Reality to diagnose and provide treatment to users, Krueger teaches head rotation data (“The subject is instructed to keep his/her eyes focused on the target visual element as the head moves. The eye sensor (typically a video camera) measures eye movement relative to head movement” (recited in at least: Krueger paragraph [0252])), wherein the virtual reality therapeutic game displays an optotype in response to the head rotation data indicating a head rotation speed exceeding a predetermined threshold and wherein successful game interaction is conditioned on identification of an orientation of the optotype. (“testing could be performed with lettered optotypes and as the head rotates back and forth, the letters can rotate in position. Alternatively, numbers can be used as well as other familiar images of objects. The images can also be native or natural to the background environment displayed. As the head rotates back and forth, the target or visual element is more difficult to visualize. If there is a VOR abnormality, for example the eyes will not be able to focus on the target or visual element of interest and will subsequently have less fixation and more errors in identifying a visual element” (recited in at least: Kreuger paragraph [0299]); “A better method for evaluating the VOR response would be to measure vestibulo-ocular performance on a continuous scale, just like we measure the speed of an athlete” (recited in Krueger paragraph [0484])). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included optotype tests in a diagnosis and treatment system for ocular disorders as taught by Krueger into the system of Samec since eye care professionals use this to test and measure visual acuity.
Regarding Claim 19 Samec in view of Kreuger teach the claimed subject matter as stated above, and Samec further discloses a virtual reality headset for display of the virtual reality therapeutic game, wherein the virtual reality headset includes the sensor and outputs a virtual reality environment in which the virtual reality therapeutic game is performed (“a head-mountable, augmented reality display configured to output light with variable wavefront divergence to display virtual content one or more inwardly-directed sensors; one or more outwardly-directed sensors; one or more processors” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0332])); and an input device configured to receive at least a second portion of the interactive input data (“the display system may be configured to receive inputs via real input devices (e.g., physical buttons) and/or virtual input devices (e.g., virtual buttons projected by the display device). Such inputs may include, for example, eye tracking, head pose, and/or gesture” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0590])).
Regarding Claim 20, Samec in view of Krueger teach the claimed subject matter as stated above, and Samec further discloses automatically transmit a notification to the device based on the interactive input data (“The display system may generate an alert to send to the user, or other system or person, to provide notification” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0493])).
Regarding Claim 21, Samec in view of Krueger teach the claimed subject matter as stated above, and Krueger further teaches wherein the virtual reality therapeutic game provides therapy for a vestibular disorder (“Embodiments of the present invention also provide unique methods to rehabilitate persons with vestibular system disorders, particularly those with peripheral vestibular disorders and especially those persons with vestibulo-ocular reflex abnormalities and/or abnormalities of the dynamic visual acuity” (recited in at least: Krueger paragraph [0421])).
Regarding Claim 23 Samec in view of Kreuger teach the claimed subject matter as stated above, and Samec further discloses wherein the virtual reality therapeutic game provides therapy for a disorder in a binocular vision (“Based on the slightly different views of a virtual object in the images presented to the eyes 210, 220, respectively, the eyes may naturally rotate such that an image of the object falls on corresponding points on the retinas of each of the eyes, to maintain single binocular vision. This rotation may cause the lines of sight of each of the eyes 210, 220 to converge onto a point in space at which the virtual object is perceived to be present. As a result, providing three-dimensional imagery conventionally involves providing binocular cues that may manipulate the vergence of the user's eyes 210, 220, and that the human visual system interprets to provide a perception of depth” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0419])).
Regarding Claim 25, Samec in view of Krueger teach the claimed subject matter as stated above, and Samec further discloses wherein the current success level is further based on a comparison with one or more previous success levels, the one or more previous success levels being determined based on previous interactive input data collected during one or more previous sessions (“the display system can compare a user's current results with the user's previous results. Such comparison may be applied to determine the presence of a neurological condition or to determine the progression of a condition” (recited in at least: Samec paragraph [0601])).
Claims 2-3, 5-7, 17-20, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Samec in view of Krueger as applied to claims 1 and 16 above, and further in view of Tara Lynn Alvarez (US 20180214338 A1; hereinafter Alvarez).
Regarding Claim 2, Samec in view of Kreuger teach the claimed subject matter as stated above; however, they do not explicitly disclose automatically increasing or decreasing the difficulty level based on the current success level compared to one or more previous success levels, the one or more previous success levels being determined based on previous interactive input data. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. In an analogous art to the use of Virtual Reality to diagnose and provide treatment to users, Alvarez teaches automatically increasing or decreasing the difficulty level based on the current success level compared to one or more previous success levels, the one or more previous success levels being determined based on previous interactive input data (“Each “level” of the game can be broken down into sub-components. There is the “WARNING: INCOMING ENEMY SHIP APPROACHING” scene which serves to build anticipation, excitement, and set the mood for the coming battle” (recited in at least: Alvarez paragraph [0083])) Alvarez teaches in ¶82 as stated above that there are levels a user/patient can progress naturally through- the switches between levels have the warning screen so that the user can pace their therapy. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter to have modified the system of Samec to include increasing or decreasing the difficulty level based on succession as taught by Alvarez for the added benefit of allowing users to continue with treatment without interruption.
Regarding Claim 3 Samec in view of Kreuger teach the claimed subject matter as stated above; however, they do not explicitly disclose wherein the difficulty level of the virtual reality therapeutic game is adjusted further based on a therapist input of a therapist. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. In an analogous art to the use of Virtual Reality to diagnose and provide treatment to users, Alvarez teaches(“In addition to tacking a users' eye to advance in the game being played, the head mounted display can track and/or monitor a position of the of the user's eyes relative to an expected and/or desired position of the user's eyes to capture vergence parameters which can be output to the computing system 270 (and transmitted from the computing system to a remote computing system) to facilitate quantitative and/or qualitative assessment by a clinician (see at least: Alvarez paragraph [0047]); Alvarez also discloses that the games executed by the visual therapy system 100, the games can have four settings: beginner, intermediate, advanced and custom. Three settings (beginner, intermediate, and advanced) can be preprogrammed settings that can be used for a majority of users with binocular dysfunctions. The custom setting will allow for adjustment to the angular vergence demand (e.g., by a clinician), e.g., to adjust the amount of time needed for fusion and the type of visual stimuli presented during the game)” (recited in at least: Alvarez paragraph [0050])). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter to have modified the system of Samec to include input from a therapist so that a user can check in with a medical professional on the care that they are receiving.
Regarding Claim 5 Samec in view of Kreuger teach the claimed subject matter as stated above; however, they do not explicitly disclose automatically selecting another virtual reality therapeutic game from the set of available virtual reality therapeutic games, the another virtual reality therapeutic game being different from the virtual reality therapeutic game, the another virtual reality therapeutic game being designed to provide therapy specific to the at least one ocular disorder. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. In an analogous art to the use of Virtual Reality to diagnose and provide treatment to users, Alvarez teaches automatically selecting another virtual reality therapeutic game from the set of available virtual reality therapeutic games, the another virtual reality therapeutic game being different from the virtual reality therapeutic game, the another virtual reality therapeutic game being designed to provide therapy specific to the at least one ocular disorder (Alvarez discloses that there are different virtual reality games that are available within the disclosed art: “Non-limiting examples of various games are described herein to illustrate embodiments of the present disclosure” (recited in at least: Alvarez paragraph [0047]) the games are described in at least paragraphs 74-151. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter to have modified the system of Samec to include automatically selecting a virtual reality therapeutic treatment game as taught by Alvarez for the added benefit of allowing users to continue with treatment without interruption.
Regarding Claim 6 Samec in view of Kreuger teach the claimed subject matter as stated above; however, they do not explicitly disclose automatically transmitting a notification to a remote computing device based on the current success level. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. In an analogous art to the use of Virtual Reality to diagnose and provide treatment to users, Alvarez teaches automatically transmitting a notification to a remote computing device based on the current success level (“In addition to tacking a users' eye to advance in the game being played, the head mounted display can track and/or monitor a position of the of the user's eyes relative to an expected and/or desired position of the user's eyes to capture vergence parameters which can be output to the computing system 270 (and transmitted from the computing system to a remote computing system) to facilitate quantitative and/or qualitative assessment by a clinician” (recited in at least: Alvarez paragraph [0047])). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter to have modified the system of Samec to include automatically transmit notification of success levels of treatments as taught by Alvarez for the added benefit of allowing users to track level successions as they continue treatment.
Regarding Claim 7 Samec in view of Kreuger teach the claimed subject matter as stated above; however, they do not explicitly disclose displaying a series of horizontal and vertical virtual target locations on the display screen to create a calibration map; detecting eye positions for the series of horizontal and vertical virtual target locations; mapping the eye positions to the series of horizontal and vertical virtual target locations to produce a calibration scale parameter; and calibrating the display screen based on the calibration scale parameter, wherein the eye positions for the series of horizontal and vertical virtual target locations comprise: right eye positions corresponding to the series of horizontal and vertical virtual target locations, left eye positions corresponding to the series of horizontal and vertical virtual target locations, and binocular positions corresponding to the series of horizontal and vertical virtual target locations. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. In an analogous art to the use of Virtual Reality to diagnose and provide treatment to users, Alvarez teaches displaying a series of horizontal and vertical virtual target locations on the display screen to create a calibration map; detecting eye positions for the series of horizontal and vertical virtual target locations; mapping the eye positions to the series of horizontal and vertical virtual target locations to produce a calibration scale parameter; and calibrating the display screen based on the calibration scale parameter, wherein the eye positions for the series of horizontal and vertical virtual target locations comprise: right eye positions corresponding to the series of horizontal and vertical virtual target locations, left eye positions corresponding to the series of horizontal and vertical virtual target locations, and binocular positions corresponding to the series of horizontal and vertical virtual target locations (“The head mounted display can include a left eye (or first) display a right eye (or second) display configured to render the virtual reality video game and can include a right eye image capturing device disposed proximate to the right eye display and a left eye image capturing device disposed proximate to the left eye image capturing device, and the method can further include determining the asymmetrical peak velocity difference between the left and right eyes based in images of the left and right eyes captured by the left and right image capturing devices and the left and right eyes move in response to viewing the left and right eye displays. A focal length between the right eye and the right eye display when the head mounted display is fitted to the user's head. The method can also include dynamically adjusting a magnitude of the asymmetrical stimulation in the virtual reality video game to limit visual suppression” (recited in at least: Alvarez paragraph [0014])). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter to have facilitated calibrating an eye therapy virtual game so that the program knows each of the eyes as well is binocular positions so that the treatment can begin. It would have been obvious to try many methods of positioning the game with the eyes for the treatment of the disorders to begin.
Regarding Claim 17, Samec in view of Kreuger teach the claimed subject matter as stated above; however, they do not explicitly disclose receive an updated setting from the device, and wherein the virtual reality therapeutic game is selected further based on the updated setting. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. In an analogous art to the use of Virtual Reality to diagnose and provide treatment to users, Alvarez teaches receive an updated setting from the device, and wherein the virtual reality therapeutic game is selected further based on the updated setting (“In addition to tacking a users' eye to advance in the game being played, the head mounted display can track and/or monitor a position of the of the user's eyes relative to an expected and/or desired position of the user's eyes to capture vergence parameters which can be output to the computing system 270 (and transmitted from the computing system to a remote computing system) to facilitate quantitative and/or qualitative assessment by a clinician” (recited in at least: Alvarez paragraph [0047])). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter to have modified the system of Samec to include updating the settings of the virtual reality therapeutic game selection as taught by Alvarez for the added benefit of allowing users continue treatment without having to input or update their own settings as the settings will update according to treatment plans preset for their diagnosis.
Regarding Claim 18 Samec in view of Kreuger teach the claimed subject matter as stated above; however, they do not explicitly disclose receive an updated setting from the device, and wherein the difficulty level of the virtual reality therapeutic game is determined further based on the updated setting. Nevertheless, such modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. In an analogous art to the use of Virtual Reality to diagnose and provide treatment to users, Alvarez teaches receive an updated setting from the device, and wherein the difficulty level of the virtual reality therapeutic game is determined further based on the updated setting (“that the computer systems are able to be updated and the databases can also store/delete all the databases” (recited in at least: Alvarez paragraph [0058]); “that there are three settings (beginner, intermediate, and advanced) can be preprogrammed settings that can be used for a majority of users with binocular dysfunctions. The custom setting will allow for adjustment to the angular vergence demand (e.g., by a clinician), e.g., to adjust the amount of time needed for fusion and the type of visual stimuli presented during the game)” (recited in at least: Alvarez paragraph [0050]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter to have modified the system of Samec to include updating the difficulty level of the virtual reality therapeutic game based on the settings of the therapy as taught by Alvarez for the added benefit of allowing users continue treatment without having to input or update their own settings as the settings will update according to treatment plans preset for their diagnosis and progression.
Claims Not Rejected by Prior Art
Claims 10-15, and 24 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
35 U.S.C. § 101:
Applicant’s amendments and arguments have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection set forth under 35 U.S.C. § 101 has been withdrawn.
35 U.S.C. § 103:
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims in pages 12-15 of the remarks filed on 09/02/2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any Samec for teaching of matter specifically challenged in the argument including a system that can track the head movements as Krueger is relied on to teach tracking head movements/rotations (see at least: Krueger ¶119, and 252). Furthermore, Krueger is relied on to teach the newly added claim limitations to independent claim 16 in regard to “displays an optotype in response to the head rotation data…” (see at least: Krueger ¶ 299).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jamie Saez Finat (WO 2018069555 A1; hereinafter Finat):
Finat teaches a virtual reality headset that is used for neurorehabilitation, both diagnosis and rehabilitation. The headset tracks a user through stimulation with visual field testing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SELWA A ALSOMAIRY whose telephone number is (703)756-5323. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30AM to 5PM 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, Peter Vasat can be reached at (571) 270-7625. 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.
/SELWA A ALSOMAIRY/Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/Jay Trent Liddle/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights