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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant's arguments, filed 11/03/2025, have been fully considered. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application.
Applicants have amended their claims, filed 11/03/2025, and therefore rejections newly made in the instant office action have been necessitated by amendment.
Applicants have amended claims 1, 5-6, 10, 12-13, 19, and 21.
Applicants have left claims 2-4, 7-8, 11, 14, 17-18, 20, 23-26, and 28 as originally filed/previously presented.
Applicants have canceled/previously canceled claims 9, 15-16, 22, and 27.
Applicants have introduced new claims 29-30.
Claims 1-8, 10-14, 17-21, 23-26, and 28-30 are the current claims hereby under examination.
Claim Objections - Withdrawn and Newly Applied Necessitated by Applicant’s Amendments
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 19, line 2 recites “an array”, however it appears it should read --the array-- (emphasis added).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 8 of Remarks, filed 11/03/2025, with respect to the objections of claims 5-6 and 21 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicants have amended the claims, rendering the objections moot. The objections of claims 5-6, and 21 have been withdrawn. However, there are new grounds for objections.
Claim Interpretation - 35 USC § 112(f) - Withdrawn
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 8 of Remarks, filed 11/03/2025, with respect to the 112(f) claim interpretation of “an imaging device configured to generate a virtual image” in claim 22 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicants have canceled claim 22, rendering the interpretation moot. The claim interpretation of “an imaging device configured to generate a virtual image” in claim 22 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a) - Withdrawn
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 8 of Remarks, filed 11/03/2025, with respect to the 112(f) claim interpretation, and resulting 112(a) rejection of “an imaging device configured to generate a virtual image” in claim 22 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicants have canceled claim 22, rendering the interpretation and rejection moot. The claim interpretation, and resulting 112(a) rejection of “an imaging device configured to generate a virtual image” in claim 22 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b) - Withdrawn
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 8 of Remarks, filed 11/03/2025, with respect to the 112(f) claim interpretation, and resulting 112(b) rejection of “an imaging device configured to generate a virtual image” in claim 22 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicants have canceled claim 22, rendering the interpretation and rejection moot. The claim interpretation, and resulting 112(b) rejection of “an imaging device configured to generate a virtual image” in claim 22 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 - Withdrawn
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-16 of Remarks, filed 11/03/2025, with respect to the 101 rejection of claims 1-28 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicants have amended the claims, rendering the rejections moot. Further, Applicants arguments are considered persuasive. The 101 rejection of claims 1-28 have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 - Withdrawn
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 16-17 of Remarks, filed 11/03/2025, with respect to the 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1-28 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1-28 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 - Newly Applied Necessitated by Applicant’s Amendments
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-8, 10, 13-14, 17, 19-21, 23-26, and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bouton et al. (US 20180178013 A1) (previously cited), hereinafter referred to as Bouton, in view of Nierenberg et al. (US 20140194768 A1) (previously cited), hereinafter referred to as Nierenberg, in view of Liu et al. (“Decoding ECoG High Gama Power from Cellular Calcium Response using Transparent Graphene Microelectrodes”) (previously cited), hereinafter referred to as Liu2.
The claims are generally directed towards a method comprising: simultaneously obtaining, by a processor, a plurality of electrical signals from an array of optically transparent graphene electrodes implanted on a plurality of first cortical local regions of a brain at a plurality of frequency bands during a first time interval, the array of optically transparent graphene electrodes configured to permit concurrent data acquisition corresponding to a plurality of modalities including optical imaging and electrical recordings; determining, by the processor, based on the plurality of electrical signals, an average brain activity for individual cortical local regions corresponding to the plurality of first cortical local regions and a plurality of second cortical local regions different from the plurality of first cortical local regions; and reconstructing, by the processor based on data obtained using a combination of at least two of the plurality of modalities, a cortex-wide brain activity with pixel-level spatial resolution including a brain activity for the first and second cortical local regions at a first point in time during the first time interval using weighting scores of a plurality of independent components.
Regarding claim 1, Bouton discloses a method (Abstract) comprising:
simultaneously obtaining, by a processor, a plurality of electrical signals from an array of electrodes implanted on a plurality of first cortical local regions of a brain at a plurality of frequency bands during a first time interval (Fig. 1, element 112, para. [0023], “neural activity of the user/patient is measured to obtain measured neural signals from sensing electrodes”, para. [0024-0026], “sensing electrodes may be placed upon the scalp of the user, for example, an electrocorticography … sensing electrodes can measure one or more different neural signals … signal power across at least one frequency band …”, para. [0041-0042], “electronic data processing device … microprocessor or microcontroller …”);
determining, by the processor, based on the plurality of electrical signals, an average brain activity for individual cortical local regions corresponding to the plurality of first cortical local regions and a plurality of second cortical local regions different from the plurality of first cortical local regions (Fig. 1, element 150, para. [0023], “brain network observer contains a brain network model which is used to estimate neural signals that were not directly measured …”, para. [0030], para. [0038]).
However, Bouton does not explicitly disclose reconstructing, by the processor based on data obtained using a combination of at least two of the plurality of modalities, a cortex-wide brain activity with pixel-level spatial resolution including a brain activity for the first and second cortical local regions at a first point in time during the first time interval using weighting scores of a plurality of independent components.
Nierenberg discloses an analogous system and method for analyzing EEG signals (Abstract, para. [0046]). Nierenberg teaches obtaining a plurality of electrical signals from an array of electrodes (para. [0066]). Nierenberg further teaches reconstructing, by the processor based on data obtained using a combination of at least two of the plurality of modalities, a cortex-wide brain activity with pixel-level spatial resolution including a brain activity for the first and second cortical local regions at a first point in time during the first time interval using weighting scores of a plurality of independent components (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 11, para. [0037], para. [0064], para. [0066], para. [0078]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Bouton to additionally reconstruct, by the processor based on data obtained using a combination of at least two of the plurality of modalities, a cortex-wide brain activity with pixel-level spatial resolution including a brain activity for the first and second cortical local regions at a first point in time during the first time interval using weighting scores of a plurality of independent components, as taught by Nierenberg. This is because Nierenberg teaches reconstructing a cortex-wide brain activity with pixel-level spatial resolution with different frequencies allows for the EEG brain activity data to be displayed and visualized on a display for a user (para. [0064], para. [0071-0075]).
However, Bouton does not explicitly disclose the array of electrodes are an array of optically transparent graphene electrodes, the array of optically transparent graphene electrodes configured to permit concurrent data acquisition corresponding to a plurality of modalities including optical imaging and electrical recordings.
Liu2 discloses an analogous method of analyzing ECoG signals, and further calcium imaging (Abstract, pg. 710, I. Introduction). Liu2 further teaches the method uses an array of optically transparent graphene electrodes, the array of optically transparent graphene electrodes configured to permit concurrent data acquisition corresponding to a plurality of modalities including optical imaging and electrical recordings (pg. 710, I. Introduction, pg. 711-712, A. Simultaneous ECoG and Calcium Imaging, pg. 712-713, B. Decoding ECoG High Gamma Power). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by modified Bouton to explicitly use an array of optically transparent graphene electrodes, the array of optically transparent graphene electrodes configured to permit concurrent data acquisition corresponding to a plurality of modalities including optical imaging and electrical recordings, as taught by Liu2. This is because Liu2 teaches averaging changes in fluorescence in combination with measuring ECoG signals allows for observed ECoG potentials to be decoded from calcium activities (pg. 710 , I. Introduction).
Regarding claim 2, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 1.
However, modified Bouton does not explicitly disclose further comprising generating a virtual image of the cortex-wide brain activity using the reconstructed cortex-wide brain activity.
Nierenberg further teaches generating a virtual image of the cortex-wide brain activity using the reconstructed cortex-wide brain activity (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 11, para. [0037], para. [0064], para. [0078]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by modified Bouton to additionally generate a virtual image of the cortex-wide brain activity using the reconstructed cortex-wide brain activity, as taught by Nierenberg. This is because Nierenberg teaches generating a virtual image of the brain activity allows for the EEG brain activity data to be displayed and visualized on a display for a user (para. [0064], para. [0071-0075]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 1.
However, modified Bouton does not explicitly disclose wherein the average brain activity for individual cortical local regions is determined by averaging changes in fluorescence intensity from a plurality of image pixels within each cortical local region.
Liu2 further teaches determining the average brain activity for individual cortical local regions by averaging changes in fluorescence intensity from a plurality of image pixels within each cortical local region (pg. 710, I. Introduction, pg. 711-712, A. Simultaneous ECoG and Calcium Imaging, pg. 712-713, B. Decoding ECoG High Gamma Power). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by modified Bouton to additionally average changes in fluorescence intensity from a plurality of image pixels within each cortical local region, as taught by Liu2. This is because Liu2 teaches averaging changes in fluorescence in combination with measuring ECoG signals allows for observed ECoG potentials to be decoded from calcium activities (pg. 710 , I. Introduction).
Regarding claim 4, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of electrical signals includes electrocorticography (ECoG) signals (para. [0025], “sensing electrodes … electrocorticography (ECoG)”).
Regarding claim 5, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 4, wherein determining the average brain activity for individual cortical local regions is based on an ECoG power of the plurality of frequency bands from a plurality of electrical signal channels (para. [0026], “signal power across at least one frequency band”, para. [0029], “average”).
Regarding claim 7, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first time interval starts earlier than the first point in time and ends later than the first point in time (para. [0023], “repeats … continuous real-time …”).
Regarding claim 8, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of first cortical local regions includes at least one of: secondary motor cortex; primary motor cortex; primary somatosensory cortex; posterior parietal cortex; retrosplenial cortex; or visual cortex (para. [0025], “sensing electrodes may sense electrical signals from different parents of the brain … motor cortex”).
Regarding claim 10, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 1.
However, modified Bouton does not explicitly disclose wherein obtaining the plurality of electrical signals includes performing a wide-field calcium imaging.
Liu2 further teaches performing a wide-field calcium imaging (pg. 710, I. Introduction, pg. 711-712, A. Simultaneous ECoG and Calcium Imaging, pg. 712-713, B. Decoding ECoG High Gamma Power). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by modified Bouton to additionally perform wide-field calcium imaging, as taught by Liu2. This is because Liu2 teaches performing calcium imaging in combination with measuring ECoG signals allows for observed ECoG potentials to be decoded from calcium activities (pg. 710 , I. Introduction).
Regarding claim 13, Bouton discloses a method (Abstract) comprising:
simultaneously obtaining, by a processor, a plurality of locally recorded surface potentials from a plurality of first cortical areas of a brain surface using an array of electrodes implanted on the plurality of first cortical areas at a plurality of frequency bands during a first time interval (Fig. 1, element 112, para. [0023], “neural activity of the user/patient is measured to obtain measured neural signals from sensing electrodes”, para. [0024-0026], “sensing electrodes may be placed upon the scalp of the user, for example, an electrocorticography … sensing electrodes can measure one or more different neural signals … signal power across at least one frequency band …”, para. [0041-0042], “electronic data processing device … microprocessor or microcontroller …”).
However, Bouton does not explicitly disclose performing, by the processor, a virtual reconstruction of an average brain activity for individual cortical areas and a pixel-level cortex-wide brain activity for a plurality of cortical areas of the brain surface including the plurality of first cortical areas based on the plurality of locally recorded surface potentials.
Nierenberg discloses an analogous system and method for analyzing EEG signals (Abstract, para. [0046]). Nierenberg teaches obtaining a plurality of electrical signals from an array of electrodes (para. [0066]). Nierenberg further teaches performing a virtual reconstruction of an average brain activity for individual cortical areas and a pixel-level cortex-wide brain activity for a plurality of cortical areas of the brain surface including the plurality of first cortical areas based on the plurality of locally recorded surface potentials (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 11, para. [0037], para. [0064], para. [0066], para. [0078]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Bouton to additionally perform a virtual reconstruction of an average brain activity for individual cortical areas and a pixel-level cortex-wide brain activity for a plurality of cortical areas of the brain surface including the plurality of first cortical areas based on the plurality of locally recorded surface potentials, as taught by Nierenberg. This is because Nierenberg teaches performing reconstruction of an average brain activity and a pixel-level cortex-wide brain activity allows for the EEG brain activity data to be displayed and visualized on a display for a user (para. [0064], para. [0071-0075]).
However, modified Bouton does not explicitly disclose the array of electrodes is an array of optically transparent graphene electrodes, the array of optically transparent graphene electrodes configured to permit concurrent data acquisition corresponding to a plurality of modalities including optical imaging and electrical recordings.
Liu2 discloses an analogous method of analyzing ECoG signals, and further calcium imaging (Abstract, pg. 710, I. Introduction). Liu2 further teaches the method uses an array of optically transparent graphene electrodes, the array of optically transparent graphene electrodes configured to permit concurrent data acquisition corresponding to a plurality of modalities including optical imaging and electrical recordings (pg. 710, I. Introduction, pg. 711-712, A. Simultaneous ECoG and Calcium Imaging, pg. 712-713, B. Decoding ECoG High Gamma Power). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by modified Bouton to explicitly use an array of optically transparent graphene electrodes, the array of optically transparent graphene electrodes configured to permit concurrent data acquisition corresponding to a plurality of modalities including optical imaging and electrical recordings, as taught by Liu2. This is because Liu2 teaches averaging changes in fluorescence in combination with measuring ECoG signals allows for observed ECoG potentials to be decoded from calcium activities (pg. 710 , I. Introduction).
Regarding claim 14, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 13, wherein the plurality of locally recorded surface potentials includes electrocorticography (ECoG) signals (para. [0025], “sensing electrodes … electrocorticography (ECoG)”).
Regarding claim 17, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 13.
However, modified Bouton does not explicitly disclose wherein performing the virtual reconstruction includes virtual imaging of an averaged spontaneous activity from the plurality of first cortical areas of the brain surface.
Nierenberg further teaches performing the virtual reconstruction includes virtual imaging of an averaged spontaneous activity from the plurality of first cortical areas of the brain surface (para. [0038]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by modified Bouton to additionally perform the virtual reconstruction by averaging spontaneous activity from the plurality of first cortical areas of the brain surface, as taught by Nierenberg. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that performing an average reduces outliers, producing more accurate results.
Regarding claim 19, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 13, wherein obtaining the plurality of locally recorded surface potentials includes locally recording surface potentials from an array of optically transparent graphene electrodes implanted on the plurality of cortical areas of the brain surface at a plurality of time frames (Fig. 1, element 112, para. [0023], “neural activity of the user/patient is measured to obtain measured neural signals from sensing electrodes … continuous”, para. [0024-0026], “sensing electrodes may be placed upon the scale of the user, for example, an electrocorticography … signal power across at least one frequency band …”; Further, see the rejection of claim 13 regarding “an array of optically transparent graphene electrodes”)
Regarding claim 20, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 13, wherein the plurality of first cortical areas includes at least one of: secondary motor cortex; primary motor cortex; primary somatosensory cortex; posterior parietal cortex; retrosplenial cortex; or visual cortex (para. [0025], “sensing electrodes may sense electrical signals from different parents of the brain … motor cortex”).
Regarding claim 21, Bouton discloses a device (Abstract) comprising:
an array of electrodes configured to be implanted on a plurality of first cortical local regions of a brain (Fig. 1, element 112, para. [0023], “neural activity of the user/patient is measured to obtain measured neural signals from sensing electrodes”, para. [0024-0026], “sensing electrodes may be placed upon the scale of the user, for example, an electrocorticography … signal power across at least one frequency band …”);
a memory to store instructions for performing a virtual reconstruction of an activity of the brain (para. [0042]); and
a processor in communication with the memory (para. [0042]), wherein the instructions upon execution by the processor cause the processor to:
simultaneously obtain a plurality of electrical signals from the array of electrodes implanted on the plurality of first cortical local regions of the brain at a plurality of frequency bands during a first time interval (Fig. 1, element 112, para. [0023], “neural activity of the user/patient is measured to obtain measured neural signals from sensing electrodes”, para. [0024-0026], “sensing electrodes may be placed upon the scale of the user, for example, an electrocorticography … signal power across at least one frequency band …”);
determine, based on the plurality of electrical signals, an average brain activity for individual cortical local regions corresponding to the plurality of first cortical local regions and a plurality of second cortical local regions different from the plurality of first cortical local regions (Fig. 1, element 150, para. [0023], “brain network observer contains a brain network model which is used to estimate neural signals that were not directly measured …”, para. [0030], para. [0038]).
However, Bouton does not explicitly disclose the processor is configured to reconstruct, based on data obtained using a combination of at least two of the plurality of modalities, a cortex-wide brain activity with pixel-level spatial resolution including a brain activity for the first and second cortical local regions at a first point in time during the first time interval using weighting scores of a plurality of independent components.
Nierenberg discloses an analogous system and method for analyzing EEG signals (Abstract, para. [0046]). Nierenberg teaches simultaneously obtaining a plurality of electrical signals from an array of electrodes (para. [0066]). Nierenberg further teaches reconstructing, based on data obtained using a combination of at least two of the plurality of modalities, a cortex-wide brain activity with pixel-level spatial resolution including a brain activity for the first and second cortical local regions at a first point in time during the first time interval using weighting scores of a plurality of independent components (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 11, para. [0037], para. [0064], para. [0066], para. [0078]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the processor disclosed by Bouton to additionally be configured to reconstruct, based on data obtained using a combination of at least two of the plurality of modalities, a cortex-wide brain activity with pixel-level spatial resolution including a brain activity for the first and second cortical local regions at a first point in time during the first time interval using weighting scores of a plurality of independent components, as taught by Nierenberg. This is because Nierenberg teaches reconstructing a cortex-wide brain activity with pixel-level spatial resolution with different frequencies allows for the EEG brain activity data to be displayed and visualized on a display for a user (para. [0064], para. [0071-0075]).
However, modified Bouton does not explicitly disclose the array of electrodes is an array of optically transparent graphene electrodes, the array of optically transparent graphene electrodes configured to permit concurrent data acquisition corresponding to a plurality of modalities including optical imaging and electrical recordings.
Liu2 discloses an analogous method and device for analyzing ECoG signals, and further calcium imaging (Abstract, pg. 710, I. Introduction). Liu2 further teaches using an array of optically transparent graphene electrodes, the array of optically transparent graphene electrodes configured to permit concurrent data acquisition corresponding to a plurality of modalities including optical imaging and electrical recordings (pg. 710, I. Introduction, pg. 711-712, A. Simultaneous ECoG and Calcium Imaging, pg. 712-713, B. Decoding ECoG High Gamma Power). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by modified Bouton to explicitly use an array of optically transparent graphene electrodes, the array of optically transparent graphene electrodes configured to permit concurrent data acquisition corresponding to a plurality of modalities including optical imaging and electrical recordings, as taught by Liu2. This is because Liu2 teaches averaging changes in fluorescence in combination with measuring ECoG signals allows for observed ECoG potentials to be decoded from calcium activities (pg. 710 , I. Introduction).
Regarding claim 23, modified Bouton discloses the device of claim 21.
However, modified Bouton does not explicitly disclose wherein the average brain activity for individual cortical local regions is determined by averaging changes in fluorescence intensity from a plurality of image pixels within each cortical local region.
Liu2 further teaches determining the average brain activity for individual cortical local regions by averaging changes in fluorescence intensity from a plurality of image pixels within each cortical local region (pg. 710, I. Introduction, pg. 711-712, A. Simultaneous ECoG and Calcium Imaging, pg. 712-713, B. Decoding ECoG High Gamma Power). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the processor taught by modified Bouton to additionally average changes in fluorescence intensity from a plurality of image pixels within each cortical local region, as taught by Liu2. This is because Liu2 teaches averaging changes in fluorescence in combination with measuring ECoG signals allows for observed ECoG potentials to be decoded from calcium activities (pg. 710 , I. Introduction).
Regarding claim 24, modified Bouton discloses the device of claim 21, wherein the plurality of electrical signals includes electrocorticography (ECoG) signals (para. [0025], “sensing electrodes … electrocorticography (ECoG)”).
Regarding claim 25, modified Bouton discloses the device of claim 21, wherein the first time interval starts earlier than the first point in time and ends later than the first point in time (para. [0023], “repeats … continuous real-time …”).
Regarding claim 26, modified Bouton discloses the device of claim 21, wherein the plurality of first cortical local regions includes at least one of: secondary motor cortex; primary motor cortex; primary somatosensory cortex; posterior parietal cortex; retrosplenial cortex; or visual cortex (para. [0025], “sensing electrodes may sense electrical signals from different parents of the brain … motor cortex”).
Regarding claim 29, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 1.
However, modified Bouton does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of independent components are derived, by the processor, based on data obtained from concurrently acquired electrical recordings and optical imaging of the plurality of first cortical local regions of the brain, wherein the electrical recordings and optical imaging data provide complementary information for reconstructing brain activity.
Liu2 further teaches independent components can be derived, based on data obtained from concurrently acquired electrical recordings and optical imaging of the plurality of first cortical local regions of the brain, wherein the electrical recordings and optical imaging data provide complementary information for reconstructing brain activity (pg. 711-712, A. Simultaneous ECoG and Calcium Imaging, pg. 712-713, B. Decoding ECoG High Gamma Power, pg. 713, IV. Conclusion). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the processor taught by modified Bouton to additionally derive, based on data obtained from concurrently acquired electrical recordings and optical imaging of the plurality of first cortical local regions of the brain, wherein the electrical recordings and optical imaging data provide complementary information for reconstructing brain activity, as taught by Liu2. This is because Liu2 teaches simultaneously recording and data extraction from electrical recordings and optical imaging data allows for a more complete analysis of the brain activity (Abstract, pg. 710, I. Introduction, pg. 713, Conclusion).
Regarding claim 30, modified Bouton discloses the device of claim 21.
However, modified Bouton does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of independent components are derived, by the processor, based on data obtained from concurrently acquired electrical recordings and optical imaging of the plurality of first cortical local regions of the brain, wherein the electrical recordings and optical imaging data provide complementary information for reconstructing brain activity.
Liu2 further teaches independent components can be derived, based on data obtained from concurrently acquired electrical recordings and optical imaging of the plurality of first cortical local regions of the brain, wherein the electrical recordings and optical imaging data provide complementary information for reconstructing brain activity (pg. 711-712, A. Simultaneous ECoG and Calcium Imaging, pg. 712-713, B. Decoding ECoG High Gamma Power, pg. 713, IV. Conclusion). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the processor taught by modified Bouton to additionally derive, based on data obtained from concurrently acquired electrical recordings and optical imaging of the plurality of first cortical local regions of the brain, wherein the electrical recordings and optical imaging data provide complementary information for reconstructing brain activity, as taught by Liu2. This is because Liu2 teaches simultaneously recording and data extraction from electrical recordings and optical imaging data allows for a more complete analysis of the brain activity (Abstract, pg. 710, I. Introduction, pg. 713, Conclusion).
Claims 6, 11-12, 18, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bouton et al. (US 20180178013 A1) (previously cited), hereinafter referred to as Bouton, in view of Nierenberg et al. (US 20140194768 A1) (previously cited), hereinafter referred to as Nierenberg, in view of Liu et al. (“Decoding ECoG High Gama Power from Cellular Calcium Response using Transparent Graphene Microelectrodes”) (previously cited), hereinafter referred to as Liu2 as applied to claims 1, 13, and 21 above, and further in view of Al-Saggaf et al. (US 11179089 B1) (previously cited), hereinafter referred to as Al-Saggaf.
Regarding claim 6, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 1.
However, modified Bouton does not explicitly disclose wherein the weighting scores of the plurality of independent components are determined using a spatial independent component analysis.
Al-Saggaf teaches of an analogous method and system for detecting and analyzing EEG signals (Abstract). Al-Saggaf further teaches weighting scores of the plurality of independent components are determined using a spatial independent component analysis (col. 7, lines 11-17). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by modified Bouton to additionally determine the weighting scores using a spatial independent component analysis, as taught by Al-Saggaf. Spatial independent component analysis is a known technique within signal processing, and one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the predictable results of utilizing it as suggested by Al-Saggaf (col. 7, lines 11-17).
Regarding claim 11, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 1.
However, modified Bouton does not explicitly disclose wherein reconstructing the cortex-wide brain activity includes using a neural network algorithm that includes a sequential stacking of a linear hidden layer, a bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) layer, and a linear readout layer.
Al-Saggaf teaches of an analogous method and system for detecting and analyzing EEG signals (Abstract). Al-Saggaf further teaches using a neural network algorithm that includes a sequential stacking of a linear hidden layer, a bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) layer, and a linear readout layer (Fig. 8, col. 13, lines 21-47). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the neural network algorithm taught by modified Bouton to explicitly include a sequential stacking of a linear hidden layer, a bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) layer, and a linear readout layer, as taught by Al-Saggaf. This is because Al-Saggaf teaches sequential stacking, Bi-LSTM layer, and a linear readout layer allows for elements to be both extracted and classified in one neural network (col. 5, lines 17-29).
Regarding claim 12, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 11.
However, modified Bouton does not explicitly disclose wherein the optically transparent graphene electrodes are used to collect training data for the neural network algorithm.
Liu2 further teaches wherein the optically transparent graphene electrodes are used to collect training data for the neural network algorithm (Figure 1. pg. 710, A. Fabrication Process of the Transparent Graphene Array, pg. 711-712, A. Simultaneous ECoG and Calcium Imaging). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrodes taught by modified Bouton to explicitly include optically transparent graphene electrodes. Liu2 teaches transparent graphene electrodes allows for the neurons to be identifiable though the electrodes, allowing for the electrodes to be placed accurately (Figure 2, pg. 711-712, A. Simultaneous ECoG and Calcium Imaging).
Regarding claim 18, modified Bouton discloses the method of claim 13.
However, modified Bouton does not explicitly disclose wherein performing the virtual reconstruction includes using a neural network algorithm that includes a sequential stacking of a linear hidden layer, a bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) layer, and a linear readout layer.
Al-Saggaf teaches of an analogous method and system for detecting and analyzing EEG signals (Abstract). Al-Saggaf further teaches using a neural network algorithm that includes a sequential stacking of a linear hidden layer, a bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) layer, and a linear readout layer (Fig. 8, col. 13, lines 21-47). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the neural network algorithm taught by modified Bouton to explicitly include a sequential stacking of a linear hidden layer, a bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) layer, and a linear readout layer, as taught by Al-Saggaf. This is because Al-Saggaf teaches sequential stacking, Bi-LSTM layer, and a linear readout layer allows for elements to be both extracted and classified in one neural network (col. 5, lines 17-29).
Regarding claim 28, modified Bouton discloses the device of claim 21.
However, modified Bouton does not explicitly disclose wherein reconstructing the cortex-wide brain activity includes using a neural network algorithm that includes a sequential stacking of a linear hidden layer, a bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) layer, and a linear readout layer.
Al-Saggaf teaches of an analogous method and system for detecting and analyzing EEG signals (Abstract). Al-Saggaf further teaches using a neural network algorithm that includes a sequential stacking of a linear hidden layer, a bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) layer, and a linear readout layer (Fig. 8, col. 13, lines 21-47). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the neural network algorithm taught by modified Bouton to explicitly include a sequential stacking of a linear hidden layer, a bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) layer, and a linear readout layer, as taught by Al-Saggaf. This is because Al-Saggaf teaches sequential stacking, Bi-LSTM layer, and a linear readout layer allows for elements to be both extracted and classified in one neural network (col. 5, lines 17-29).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 17-22 of Remarks, filed 11/03/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 7-8, 13-15, 17, 19-22, and 24-26 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicants have amended the claims, rendering the previous rejection moot. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of previously cited Liu et al. (“Decoding ECoG High Gama Power from Cellular Calcium Response using Transparent Graphene Microelectrodes”) (previously cited), hereinafter referred to as Liu2.
Applicant’s arguments (see page 21 of Remarks) did not directly address the combination of Liu2.
Additionally, Applicant's arguments filed 11/03/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants have argued on pages 17-19 of Remarks, filed 11/03/2025, that Bouton and Nierenberg are restricted by the use of opaque, metal-based electrodes.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Bouton explicitly disclose “any suitable electrode array may be used” (para. [0024]).
Applicants have argued on page 20 of Remarks, filed 11/03/2025, that “none of these sections teach or even suggest reconstructing a “cortex-wide” brain activity based on multimodal measurements (optical and electrical) conducted for the first cortical local regions.
Applicants arguments are not commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. While the electrodes are required to be configured to permit concurrent data acquisition corresponding to a plurality of modalities including optical imaging and electrical recordings, the claims do not limit the reconstruction to include optical imaging and electrical recordings. Further, claim 13 does not require the particulars argued by the Applicants in regard to claim 1.
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 KYLE W KRETZER whose telephone number is (571)272-1907. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:30 AM to 5:30 PM.
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, Jason M Sims can be reached at (571)272-7540. 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.
/K.W.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/JASON M SIMS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791