DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on 4/2/25 and remarks and amendments dated 12/16/2025. Claims 18-40 and 42-55 are pending. Claims 18-40 and 42-55 are rejected.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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 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; or
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 18-43, 45-52, and 55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 2020/0178887 to Correa Ramirez et al. (“Correa”).
Claim 18. A system comprising: a controller (Correa, Fig. 1, #102) configured to: receive, from one or more sensors (Correa, Fig. 1, #116), one or more streams of data (Correa, paragraph [0002]), each stream of data representing a sensed phenomenon in an environment of which a first user is sleeping and a second user is sleeping (Correa, paragraph [0058] discloses collecting pressure data, movement data, and temperature data, [0061] discloses collecting heart rate data, etc.); determine, from at least one of the one or more streams of data, whether the first user is experiencing restless sleep (Correa, Fig. 45, #4506); in response to determining that the first user is experiencing restless sleep, monitor at least one of the one or more streams of data to determine whether the second user is snoring (Correa, Fig. 45, #4504); and in response to determining that the second user is snoring after it is determined that the first user is experiencing restless sleep, issue a snore-control command (Correa, Fig. 45, #4508; regarding which of the first or second user is being monitored, paragraph [0176] discusses monitoring either user; therefore, Correa teaches monitoring either one of two users on a bed, and performing a change if the other of the two user’s is found to have disturbed sleep; the terminology of which user’s is the first or the second is merely trivial matter of semantics).
Claim 19. The system of claim 18, wherein the controller is further configured to: determine, from at least one of the one or more streams of data, that the second user is still snoring after the snore-control command is issued; and in response to determining that the second user is still snoring after the snore-control command is issued, issue a second snore-control command (Correa, Fig. 45, loop function at #4510 performs additional snore-control commands as may be necessary; regarding a second snore-control command, paragraph [0128] discloses “sleep monitoring sensor apparatus may also include one or more alarms”).
Claim 20. The system of claim 18, wherein the controller is further configured to: determine, from at least one of the one or more streams of data, whether the second user is experiencing restless sleep; in response to determining that the second user is experiencing restless sleep,, monitoring at least one of the one or more streams of data to determine whether the first user is snoring; and in response to determining that the first user is snoring after it is determined that the second user is experiencing restless sleep, issue a second snore-control command (Correa, Fig. 45; paragraph [0176] discusses monitoring either user; therefore, Correa teaches monitoring either one of two users on a bed, and performing a change if the other of the two user’s is found to have disturbed sleep; the terminology of which user’s is the first or the second is merely trivial matter of semantics; regarding a second snore-control command, paragraph [0128] discloses “sleep monitoring sensor apparatus may also include one or more alarms”).
Claim 21. The system of claim 20, wherein the controller is further configured to: determine, from at least one of the one or more streams of data, that the first user is still snoring after the second snore-control command is issued; and in response to determining that the first user is still snoring after the second snore-control command is issued, issue a third snore-control command (Correa, Fig. 45, loop function at #4510 performs additional snore-control commands as may be necessary; regarding a third snore-control command, paragraph [0128] discloses “sleep monitoring sensor apparatus may also include one or more alarms”).
Claim 22. The system of claim 18, wherein the controller is a component of a bed on which the first user is sleeping and the second user is sleeping (see bed in Correa, Fig. 1).
Claim 23. The system of claim 18, wherein the controller is a home automation hub (Correa, paragraphs [0211]-[0212]).
Claim 24. The system of claim 18, wherein the one or more sensors comprise an acoustic sensor and wherein one of the one or more streams of data is a stream of acoustic data (Correa, paragraph [0175] discloses the use of microphones).
Claim 25. The system of claim 24, wherein to determine, from at least one of the one or more streams of data, whether the second user is snoring, the controller is configured to analyze the acoustic data (Correa, paragraph [0175] discloses the use of microphones; paragraph [0176] discloses analysis of this acoustic data).
Claim 26. The system of claim 18, wherein the one or more sensors comprise a pressure sensor and wherein one of the one or more streams of data is a stream of pressure data (Correa, Figs. 4-5).
Claim 27. The system of claim 26, wherein to determine, from at least one of the one or more streams of data, whether the first user is experiencing restless sleep, the controller is configured to analyze the stream of pressure data.
Claim 28. The system of claim 18, wherein to determine, from at least one of the one or more streams of data, whether the first user is experiencing restless sleep, the controller is configured to: analyze at least one of the one or more streams of data at a first time; determine, at the first time, that the first user is not experiencing restless sleep; analyze at least one of the one or more streams of data at a second time; and determine, at the second time, that the first user is experiencing restless sleep (Correa paragraphs [0088]-[0089] discuss pressure data, and Fig. 45 discloses analysis of restless sleep).
Claim 29. The system of claim 18, wherein to determine, from at least one of the one or more streams of data, whether the second user is snoring, the controller is configured to: analyze at least one of the one or more streams of data at a first time; determine, at the first time, that the second user is not snoring; analyze at least one of the one or more streams of data at a second time; and determine, at the second time, that the second user is snoring (Correa, Fig. 45, loop function at #4510 performs additional snore-control commands as may be necessary).
Claim 30. The system of claim 18, wherein the snore-control command is not issued when it is determined that the first user is not experiencing restless sleep (Correa, Fig. 45, see step at #4506; a determination of “no” bypasses the issuing of a command).
Claim 31. The system of claim 18, wherein a cloud service is configured to: generate a first state of the first user and a second state of the second user, wherein the first state and the second state includes at least one selected from the following group: (a) bed presence determination; (b) snore determination; (c) restless determination; (d) cardiac activity; (e) respiratory activity; or (f) any combination of (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e); and wherein the snore-control command is based at least in part on the first state and the second state (Correa discloses collecting sleep state data on two users in a bed, the data includes bed presence identification in paragraph [0068], snore and restlessness determination in Fig. 45, cardiac and respiratory activity in paragraph [0089]).
Claim 32. The system of claim 18, the system further comprising a controllable home automation device, wherein the controllable home automation device is configured to: receive the snore-control command; and in response to receiving the snore-control command, alter a feature of at least one of a first user's sleeping environment and a second user's sleeping environment (Correa, paragraphs [0211]-[0212]).
Claim 33. The system of claim 18, the system further comprising a controllable home automation device, wherein the controllable home automation device comprises means for reducing the second user's snoring (Correa, paragraph [0128] discloses audible and haptic alarms for the purpose of waking up a user as well as for other purposes for reducing snoring, as in Fig. 45).
Claim 34. The system of claim 18, wherein the controller is further configured to: determine, from at least one of the one or more streams of data, that that the first user is still experiencing restless sleep after the snore command is issued; and in response to determining that the first user is still experiencing restless sleep, determine whether the second user is still snoring after the snore command is issued (Correa, Fig. 45, loop function at #4510 performs additional snore-control commands as may be necessary).
Claim 35. The system of claim 34, wherein the controller is further configured to: in response to determining that the second user is still snoring while the first user is still experiencing restless sleep, issue a second snore-control command (Correa, Fig. 45, loop function at #4510 performs additional snore-control commands as may be necessary; regarding a second snore-control command, paragraph [0128] discloses “sleep monitoring sensor apparatus may also include one or more alarms”).
Claim 36. A system comprising: a bed for supporting a first user that is sleeping and for supporting a second user that is sleeping (Correa Fig. 1); and a controller (Correa, Fig. 1, #102) comprising a processor (Correa, paragraph [0004]) and computer-readable memory (Correa, paragraph [0004]), the controller configured to: receive, from one or more sensors (Correa, Fig. 1 #16), one or more streams of data (Correa, paragraph [0002]), each stream of data representing a sensed phenomenon in an environment of the bed (Correa, paragraph [0058] discloses collecting pressure data, movement data, and temperature data, [0061] discloses collecting heart rate data, etc.); determine, from at least one of the one or more streams of data, whether the first user is experiencing restless sleep (Correa, Fig. 45, #4506); in response to determining that the first user is experiencing restless sleep, monitor at least one of the one or more streams of data to determine whether the second user is snoring (Correa, Fig. 45, #4504); in response to determining that the second user is snoring after it is determined that the first user is experiencing restless sleep, issue a snore-control command (Correa, Fig. 45, #4508) to a controllable home automation device such that the controllable home automation device alters a feature of a second user's sleeping environment (Correa, paragraphs [0211]-[0212]); determine, from at least one of the one or more streams of data, whether the second user is still snoring after the controllable home automation device alters the feature of the second user's sleep environment; and in response to determining that the second user is still snoring after the controllable home automation device alters the feature of the second user's sleep environment, issue a second snore-control command (Correa, Fig. 45, loop function at #4510 performs additional snore-control commands as may be necessary; regarding a second snore-control command, paragraph [0128] discloses “sleep monitoring sensor apparatus may also include one or more alarms”).
Claim 37. A method comprising: receiving, from one or more sensors in a sleep environment, one or more streams of data, each stream of data representing a sensed phenomenon in the sleep environment; determining, from at least one of the one or more streams of data, that a first user is experiencing restless sleep; in response to determining that the first user is experiencing restless sleep, monitoring at least one of the one or more streams of data to determine that a second user is snoring; and in response to determining that the second user is snoring after it is determined that the first user is experiencing restless sleep, issue a snore-control command (Applicant’s claim limitations are directed toward methods steps; under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device; when the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process; In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir. 1986); the prior art teachings of Correa contain all of the claimed structures of Applicant's invention; furthermore, Applicant’s invention can inherently be used to carry out the claimed method, therefore the prior art, which contains all of the claimed structures, can also inherently be used to carry out the claimed method; thus, the prior art would necessarily perform the method claimed, and the prior art teachings of Correa read on the claimed method steps; see MPEP §2112.02; additionally, see rejections of claims 36 and 1, above)
Claim 38. The method of claim 37, the method further comprising: determining, from at least one of the one or more streams of data, that the first user is still experiencing restless sleep after the snore-control command is issued; in response to determining that the first user is still experiencing restless sleep ,monitor the at least one of the one or more streams of data to determine that the second user is still snoring after the snore-control command is issued; and in response to determining that the second user is still snoring after it is determined that the first user is still experiencing restless sleep, issue a second snore-control command (Applicant’s claim limitations are directed toward methods steps; under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device; when the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process; In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir. 1986); the prior art teachings of Correa contain all of the claimed structures of Applicant's invention; furthermore, Applicant’s invention can inherently be used to carry out the claimed method, therefore the prior art, which contains all of the claimed structures, can also inherently be used to carry out the claimed method; thus, the prior art would necessarily perform the method claimed, and the prior art teachings of Correa read on the claimed method steps; see MPEP §2112.02; additionally, see rejections of claims 36 and 1, above).
Claim 39. The system of claim 18, wherein restless sleep comprises trouble falling or staying asleep (Correa discusses assisting a user in falling asleep in at least paragraph [0177]).
Claim 40. The system of claim 18, wherein determining whether the first user is experiencing restless sleep comprises determining whether the first user is sleeping (Correa, Figs. 44-45 and paragraphs [0173]-[0175]).
Claim 41. The system of claim 18, wherein determining whether the first user is experiencing restless sleep comprises determining whether the first user is experiencing both restless sleep and not snoring (Correa paragraphs [0172]-[0176] discuss determining if a user has degraded sleep and/or is snoring; Correa paragraph [0173] specifically discusses that either or both users can be identified as having restless sleep, and it is determined which user is causing the disturbance by which user first began to have restless sleep; therefore, as Correa explicitly detects snoring in paragraph [0175], Correa also anticipates detection of a user that is both snoring or not snoring, and restless or not restless).
Claim 42. The system of claim 18, wherein determining whether the first user is experiencing restless sleep comprises: comparing the one or more streams of data related to the first user to historical norms for the first user; and based on a result of the comparison, determining when one or more streams of data are outside of historical norms for the first user (Correa discusses using historical data in paragraph [0089] and in Figs. 4-5).
Claim 43. The system of claim 18, wherein determining whether the first user is experiencing restless sleep comprises: comparing the one or more streams of data related to the first user to preferred bounds for the first user; and based on a result of the comparison, determining when one or more streams of data are outside of preferred bounds for the first user (see Correa paragraph [0089] and in Figs. 4-5; also see paragraph [0107] and Fig. 15).
Claim 45. The system of claim 18, wherein determining whether the first user is experiencing restless sleep comprises performing a motion analysis on the one or more streams of data related to the first user (see at least Correa paragraph [0069]).
Claim 46. The system of claim 45, wherein performing the motion analysis on the one or more streams of data related to the first user comprises determining whether the first user is moving or immobile (see at least Correa paragraphs [0069] and [0173], and Fig. 44; “a determination may be made as to whether data from a sleep monitoring system indicates that a first person in the bed is restless, e.g., moving frequently”)
Claim 47. The system of claim 45, wherein performing the motion analysis on the one or more streams of data related to the first user comprises: receiving pressure data for the first user from the one or more sensors; comparing the pressure data to one or both of preferred bounds or historical norms for the pressure data of the first user; and based on a result of the comparison indicating that the pressure data of the first user is outside either or both of the preferred bounds or historical norms for the pressure data of the first user, determining the first user is moving or immobile (Correra paragraph [0173] discusses the use of pressure data to determine movement, and also discusses a comparison to “the sleep history of each sleeper”).
Claim 48. The system of claim 45, wherein performing the motion analysis on the one or more streams of data related to the first user comprises: receiving pressure data for the first user from the one or more sensors; comparing the pressure data to one or both of preferred bounds or historical norms for the pressure data of the first user; and based on a result of the comparison indicating that the pressure data of the first user is outside either or both of the preferred bounds or historical norms for the pressure data of the first user, determining the first user is beginning to thrash or roll (Correra paragraph [0173] discusses the use of pressure data to determine movement, and also discusses a comparison to “the sleep history of each sleeper”; regarding Applicant’s terminology of “thrash or roll,” Correra paragraph [0174] anticipates that a restless sleeper may be “tossing” which reads on Applicant’s claim language).
Claim 49. The system of claim 18, wherein determining whether the first user is experiencing restless sleep comprises performing a cardiac analysis on the one or more streams of data related to the first user, wherein performing the cardiac analysis comprises: determining a heart rate of the first user; comparing the heart rate of the first user to one or both of preferred bounds or historical norms for the heart rate of the first user; and based on a result of the comparison indicating that the heart rate of the first user is outside either or both of the preferred bounds or historical norms for the heart rate of the first user, determining the first user is experiencing restless sleep (Correa discusses the use of heart rate in determining sleep state in at least paragraph [0061]).
Claim 50. The system of claim 18, wherein determining whether the first user is experiencing restless sleep comprises performing a sleep stage analysis on the one or more streams of data related to the first user, wherein performing the sleep stage analysis comprises determining whether the first user is in an awake state, a light sleep state, or a deep sleep state (Correa discusses determining sleep stages in in at least paragraph [0061]).
Claim 51. The system of claim 18, wherein determining whether the first user is experiencing restless sleep comprises performing a respiratory analysis on the one or more streams of data related to the first user, wherein performing the respiratory analysis comprises: determining a breaths per minute of the first user; comparing the breaths per minute of the first user to one or both of preferred bounds or historical norms for breaths per minute of the first user; and based on a result of the comparison indicating that the breaths per minute of the first user are outside either or both of the preferred bounds or historical norms for breaths per minute of the first user, determining the first user is experiencing restless sleep (Correa discusses using breathing rate in sleep determination in in at least paragraph [0061], as well as various other locations throughout the disclosure).
Claim 52. The system of claim 18, wherein determining whether the first user is experiencing restless sleep comprises performing a statistical analysis on the one or more streams of data related to the first user comprises determining a confidence value that the first user is either restless or restful (Applicant does not describe what is considered to be a statistical analysis or a confidence value, and only generally uses these terms; Correa describes data analysis in numerous locations throughout his disclosure and describes, inter alia, “peak-counting analysis” in paragraph [0090], and Fourier transform analysis in paragraph [0192], both of which are considered to be types of statistical analysis; regarding a confidence value, Correa Fig. 44 provides a decision tree in which a “yes” selection is considered to be a confidence of 100% and a “no” is considered to be a confidence of zero; regarding a confidence between zero and 100, see paragraphs [0191] and [0208] which discusses a determination of “likely” sleep stage, or paragraph [0164] which discusses making a determination that a user is most probably a human).
Claim 55. A system comprising: a controller (Correa, Fig. 1, #102) configured to: receive, from one or more sensors (Correa, Fig. 1, #116), one or more streams of data (Correa, paragraph [0002]), each stream of data representing a sensed phenomenon in an environment of which a first user is sleeping and a second user is sleeping (Correa, paragraph [0058] discloses collecting pressure data, movement data, and temperature data, [0061] discloses collecting heart rate data, etc.); determine, from at least one of the one or more streams of data, whether the first user is experiencing thrashing or rolling (Correa, Fig. 45, #4506); in response to determining that the first user is experiencing thrashing or rolling, monitor at least one of the one or more streams of data to determine whether the second user is snoring (Correa, Fig. 45, #4504); and in response to determining that the second user is snoring after it is determined that the first user is experiencing thrashing or rolling, issue a snore-control command (Correa, Fig. 45, #4508; regarding which of the first or second user is being monitored, paragraph [0176] discusses monitoring either user; therefore, Correa teaches monitoring either one of two users on a bed, and performing a change if the other of the two user’s is found to have disturbed sleep; the terminology of which user’s is the first or the second is merely trivial matter of semantics).
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 18-43, 45-52, and 55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2020/0178887 to Correa Ramirez et al. (“Correa”).
Regarding independent claims 18, 36, 37, and 55, Correa Ramirez discloses each of the structures and limitations recited, as is described in rejections above under 35 USC §102, above. To the degree that one might interpret Correa Ramirez to not meet the threshold for anticipation, it would be obvious in view of Correa Ramirez to provide the claimed invention.
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.
In the instant application, the claimed invention is directed toward a bed having snore control based on partner response. The claimed invention requires, inter alia, determining that a first user is experiencing restless sleep, followed by, determining that a second user is snoring, and once both of these criteria are found to be true, issuing a snore-control command in order to perform some action that might mitigate snoring and/or restlessness.
The scope and contents of the prior art of Correa Ramirez provides this same functionality. Correa Ramirez discusses this chain of events in at least paragraphs [0175]-[0176] and Fig. 45.
Specifically, Correa Ramirez determines (Fig. 45) that a first person is generating noise (snoring), and then determines that a second person is experiencing degraded sleep. If both of these criteria are found to be true, Correa Ramirez activates an alarm (which reads on Applicant’s “snore-control command”).
The difference between the prior art and the claims at issue is that Applicant’s claimed invention provides for user 1 having restless sleep followed by user 2 being determined to be snoring, while the flow chart of Correa Ramirez (Fig. 45) provides that user 1 is snoring followed by user 2 being determined to be having degraded sleep. Applicant argues this point on pages 6-11 of Appeal Brief dated 12/16/25. As a preliminary matter, the designation of which user is a first user or a second user is arbitrary, and Correa Ramirez discusses identifying a particular user in at least paragraphs [0214]-[0215]; moreover both the prior art and the claimed invention are able to determine snoring and/or restlessness in each of the two users. The important elements of each system being that there are two users, one of which is snoring and the other of which is restless, not whether we call them user 1 or user 2.
Thus, the difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is whether restless sleep in a user is determined first, then snoring is determined in the other user, or if snoring is determine first followed by determining restless sleep in the other user.
The pertinent question therefore is whether one of ordinary skill would have understood that the two criterion must occur together, or alternatively would have been confused by the prospect of determining that a user is restless, without first knowing that a different user is snoring. In other words, is there criticality to the order in which the steps are determined? Based on the current record, there is not criticality, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to detect the steps in either order. Specifically, as seen in Fig. 45 of Correa Ramirez, the process of determining steps 4505 (snoring) and step 4506 (degraded sleep) occur in a loop. Furthermore, the collection of data is continuous (Correa Ramirez paragraph [0062], “each of these types of sleep data may be determined on a continuous basis”). Therefore, stating that one occurs before the other is an arbitrary designation and Correa Ramirez determines both conditions simultaneously, the logic diagram of Fig. 45 is merely a tool to understand the functionality of the apparatus. Furthermore, because the process is a loop, one can consider step 4506 to be either before or after step 4504. In the same manner as a clock has continuous repeating time, so does this looped flow chart. On a clock does 11 am occur before or after midnight? The answer is both, or either, depending on the perspective of the user. This is also true of the looped system of Correa Ramirez, in which one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that the step of determining snoring could occur before or after the step of determining restless sleep. Moreover, this is seen explicitly in Correa Ramirez Fig. 45. Applicant’s invention requires determining that a first user is experiencing restless sleep, followed by, determining that a second user is snoring. In Correa Ramirez Fig. 45, determining that a first user is experiencing restless sleep occurs in step 4506, followed by, determining that a second user is snoring in step 4504. Because the system loops, if one is at step 4506, and follow flow arrows to “loop” 4510 and to “start” 4502, the next step is determining snoring in step 4504.
Therefore the claimed invention is obvious in view of the prior art teachings of Correa Ramirez.
Regarding dependent claims 19-35, 38-43, and 45-52, Correa Ramirez discloses each of the structures and limitations recited, as is described in rejections above under 35 USC §102,
Claim 44 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2020/0178887 to Correa Ramirez et al. (“Correa”) in view of US Patent Application Publication 2012/0138067 to Rawls-Meehan.
Claim 44. The system of claim 18, wherein determining whether the first user is experiencing restless sleep comprises performing a speech analysis on the one or more streams of data related to the first user, the speech analysis comprising determining whether the first user is silent or talking (Correa detects if a user is snoring, but Correa does not mention detecting whether a user is talking in his/her sleep; however snoring and sleep talking are both art recognized equivalents that indicate sleep quality, as is discussed in Rawls-Meehan paragraph [0481]; therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to also detect sleep talking in the system of Correa since doing so would have simply been combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable and obvious results, and doing so would provide additional corroborating data to make a more accurate determination of restless sleep).
Claims 53-54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2020/0178887 to Correa Ramirez et al. (“Correa”) in view of US Patent Application Publication 2017/0189641 to Moturu et al. (“Moturu”).
Claim 53. The system of claim 18, wherein determining from at least one of the one or more streams of data, whether the first user is experiencing restless comprises: comparing the one or more streams of data of the first user to data samples from known restless sleepers; and based on a result of the comparison indicating that the one or more streams of data of the first user correlates to the data samples from known restless sleepers, determining the first user is experiencing restless sleep (Correa discloses the use of measured data for one or two users who are present on a bed, but does not disclose correlating this data to “to the data samples from known restless sleepers”; however, the use of population data to inform assessments of sleep for a user is a known technique, as is taught by Moturu in paragraphs [0038] and [0044]; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to correlate the data of Correa with data of a larger population since doing so would have simply been applying a known technique to a known device to yield predictable and obvious results).
Claim 54. The system of claim 18, wherein determining from at least one of the one or more streams of data, whether the second user is snoring comprises: comparing the one or more streams of data of the second user to one or more of preferred bounds for the data of the second user, historical norms for the data of the second user, or data samples from known snoring sleepers; and based on a result of the comparison indicating that the one or more streams of data of the second user is outside one or both of the preferred bounds or the historical norms for the data of the second user, or within the bounds of the known snoring sleepers, determining the second user is snoring (Correra paragraph [0173] discusses use of “the sleep history of each sleeper”; Correa discloses the use of measured data for one or two users who are present on a bed, but does not disclose correlating this data to “to the data samples from known restless sleepers”; however, the use of population data to inform assessments of sleep for a user is a known technique, as is taught by Moturu in paragraphs [0038] and [0044]; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to correlate the data of Correa with data of a larger population since doing so would have simply been applying a known technique to a known device to yield predictable and obvious results).
Response to Applicant's remarks and amendments
New rejections have been included in this office action under 35 USC §103.
Regarding prior rejection under 35 USC §112 of claim 41, Applicant has canceled the claim, and the rejection has been withdrawn.
With respect to independent claim 18, Applicant argues on page 14 of Applicant’s remarks dated 4/2/2025 and in remarks dated 12/16/25 that the cited disclosure of Correa-Ramirez does not teach each and every limitation of the claimed invention. Specifically, Applicant makes the general statement that “each and every limitation is not found either expressly or inherently in Correa”. Applicant continues by discussing that while the Office Action has cited paragraph [0175] of Correa, the language of paragraph [0176] contains even more specific language directed toward the limitations that Applicant is reciting. Applicant make a general argument that Examiner’s analogy and use of the word “loop” does not anticipate the claimed invention. However, Applicant’s conclusion that “Correa’s technique is configured to do the exact opposite of the steps recited in claim 18” is flawed. Correa teaches monitoring either one of two users on a bed, and performing a change if the other of the two user’s is found to have disturbed sleep; the terminology of which user’s is the first or the second is merely trivial matter of semantics.
Applicant additionally argues on page 14 of Remarks, that “the noted sequence of steps missing for Correa, but found in claim 18, provide unique advantages. For example, unnecessary adjustments can be avoided because “in cases where snoring is detected but the other user is not bothered, the bed can choose not to engage in a snore-abating action. In this way, the bed can avoid taking action when there is no nuisance to a user.’” However, while this may be a functional benefit discussed in Applicant’s disclosure, this language is not recited in Applicant’s claims, so the argument is moot. Moreover, Correa discloses precisely this functionality in at least Fig. 45, where a decision is made at step 4506, and no action is taken if the second user is not experiencing degraded sleep. The language that Applicant has included in claim 18, is “in response to determining…”. Applicant argues that this decision process is not found in Correa, however this is precisely the decision process that is found in Correa Fig. 45, as is discussed in the above rejections.
It is Examiner’s position that Correa Ramirez discloses and anticipates the claimed sequence of steps in at least Fig. 45, and in the event that it is determined that Correa Ramirez does not anticipate the sequence, then it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to perform the claimed sequence in view of the teachings of Correa Ramirez. See additional discussion in 35 USC §103 rejections above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MYLES A THROOP whose telephone number is (571)270-5006. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew Troutman can be reached on 571-270-3654. 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.
/MYLES A THROOP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3673