Bly do n 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 Objections Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 3, “one of more of the amplitude” should be –one or more of the amplitude--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Regarding claim 5, line 2, “the group of functionalities” lacks antecedent basis. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg , 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman , 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi , 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum , 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington , 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA/25, or PTO/AIA/26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer . Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting a s being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 10,322,295 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims represent an obvious broadening of the scope of the invention . Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting a s being unpatentable over claims 1-13 of U.S. Patent No. 11559697 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims represent an obvious broadening of the scope of the invention . Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting a s being unpatentable over claims 1-13 of U.S. Patent No. 11717697 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims represent an obvious broadening of the scope of the invention . 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 ( i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 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. Claim(s) 1- 10 and 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Geva et al.(WO2016/046830) hereinafter Geva et al . Geva et al. teaches obtaining a reference brain network activity (BNA) pattern, and a BNA pattern describing a neurophysiological state of the subject, each of the BNA patterns having a plurality of nodes and each node representing a brain location and at least one brain wave frequency. The method further comprises comparing the BNA patterns; and configuring the local brain stimulation tool to apply local brain stimulation at a frequency selected based on the comparison. S ensing system 424 processor 433 and controller 450 operate in a closed loop, wherein processor 433 constructs, based on the data from sensing system 442, a post- stimulation BNA pattern which provides indication regarding the effectiveness of the stimulation, and compares between the BNA patterns of the subject before and after the stimulation, and wherein controller 450 adjusts the parameters of the stimulation (e.g. , frequency, location) responsively to the comparison. Such a closed loop can be used to effect many types of changes in brain function. Representative examples include, without limitation, inducing of local neuroplasticity, inhibition of local activity, synchronization among different brain regions (nearby or remote from each other), and the like. The brain stimulation tool is configured based on information pertaining to, e.g. , behavior, condition, brain function, and other characteristics of the subject. In various exemplary embodiments of the invention the information is expressed as one or more data objects. In some embodiments of the present invention the data object is a brain network activity (BNA) pattern, in some embodiments the data object is a spatiotemporal activity region in the brain, and in some embodiments the data object is a BNA pattern corresponding to spatiotemporal activity regions. Regarding claim s 1 , 13, 15 - 20 , Geva et al. teaches receiving measurements comprising, for each of a plurality of neural functions, frequency and amplitude patterns of neural activity measured during one or more attempted stroke patient tasks respectively associated with said neural function; determining, for each of at least one of the frequency and amplitude patterns of neural activity, one or more impaired frequencies associated with deviation from healthy neural activity; and applying electromagnetic energy fields at the one or more impaired frequencies to at least most areas of a brain of the stroke patient. Note fig. 37 and page 3, lines 14-23, page 5, lines 1-8, page 25, lines 14 – 32 , page 26, lines 1-16, page 17, lines 19-27, page 32,. Lines 1-12, generate a treatment protocol for input into an electromagnetic field generator (452) to cause the generator to apply to the patient to treat the indicated impaired functionality an electromagnetic field at each treatment frequency of said one or a plurality of treatment frequencies (page 21 line 9-page 22 line 10). T he stimulation is executed immediately before, during or after the subject performs a task and/or action . T he comparison is node-wise, wherein the selected location corresponds to a node that exists in both the BNA patterns, and wherein the selected frequency exists in the node of the reference BNA and is missing or suppressed in the BNA pattern describing the neurophysiological state of the subject. O btaining a post- stimulation BNA pattern describing a neurophysiological state of the subject following the stimulation, comparing the post-stimulation BNA pattern with the BNA pattern describing the neurophysiological state before the stimulation, and assessing the effect of the stimulation based on the comparison. T he invention the local brain stimulation tool is operated to apply local brain stimulation at a plurality of different brain locations, a plurality of different frequencies and a plurality of different times. Regarding claim s 2 -4 , Geva et al. teaches each of the frequency and amplitude patterns of neural activity is associated with a respective neural network comprising a plurality of components of the nervous system associated with said neural function; a hemorrhagically damaged or ischemic brain region of the stroke patient is a component among the plurality of components; and the at least most areas of the brain include at least a plurality of the plurality of components. The concept of BNA pattern can be better understood with reference to FIG. 2 which is a representative example of a BNA pattern 20 which may be received as input or extracted from neurophysiological data. BNA pattern 20 has a plurality of nodes 22, each representing a particular brain wave frequency band (optionally two or more particular frequency bands) at a particular brain or skull location, and optionally within a particular time-window or latency range, and further optionally with a particular range of amplitudes. Representative examples of brain disorders or conditions treatable by operation 206 include, without limitation, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), stroke . T he stimulation is executed immediately before, during or after the subject performs a task and/or action. In some embodiments of the present invention the stimulation is executed immediately before, during or after the subject conceptualizes a task and/or action but has not actually performed the task. These embodiments are useful when the subject is suffering from some type of physical and/or cognitive deficit that may prevent actual execution of a task and/or action, as for example may be seen in response to various brain injuries such as stroke . Note page 62, lines 14-31. Regarding claim 5 , Geva et al. teaches wherein the first neural network is distinguished from the second neural network by association with one or more of the group of functionalities consisting of memory, planning, activation, control, and feedback. Many task protocols are known in the art, all of which are contemplated by some embodiments of the present invention. For example, a stimulus-response neuropsychological test can be employed. Representative example of such tests include, without limitation, the Stroop task, the Wisconsin card sorting test, and the like; stimulus-only based tests include, without limitation, mismatch negativity, brain-stem- evoked response audiometry (BERA), and the like. Also contemplated are response- only based tests, such as, but not limited to, saccade analysis, movement related potentials (MRP), N-back memory tasks and other working memory tasks, the "serial seven" test (counting back from 100 in jumps of seven), the Posner attention tasks and the like. Note , page 25, lines 14 – 32, page 26, lines 1-16 . Regarding claim 6 , Geva et al. teaches wherein the determining comprises determining one or more of: deviation from frequency and amplitude patterns of neural activity representative of a healthy subject, and similarity to frequency and amplitude patterns of neural activity representative of a defectively functioning neural network. Note fig. 37, abstract: obtaining a reference brain network activity (BNA) pattern, and a BNA pattern describing a neurophysiological state of the subject, each of the BNA patterns having a plurality of nodes and each node representing a brain location and at least one brain wave frequency. The method further comprises comparing the BNA patterns; and configuring the local brain stimulation tool to apply local brain stimulation at a frequency selected based on the comparison. Regarding claim 7 , Geva et al. teaches wherein the frequency and amplitude patterns of neural activity are spatially mapped. select one or a plurality of neural network frequencies that correspond to an indicated neural network related to impaired functionality of the patient; for each neural network frequency of the selected one or a plurality of neural network frequencies, generate a spatial map of neural activity for the array of sensors (page 17, line 19-27;page 32 line 1-12); compare each of the generated spatial maps with one or a plurality of retrieved spatial maps that correspond to said each neural network frequency to identify one or a plurality of treatment frequencies from among said one or a plurality of neural network frequencies (page 3, line 14-23); and generate a treatment protocol for input into an electromagnetic field generator (452) to cause the generator to apply to the patient to treat the indicated impaired functionality an electromagnetic field at each treatment frequency of said one or a plurality of treatment frequencies (page 21 line 9-page 22 line 10). Regarding claim s 8 and 9 , Geva et al. teaches wherein the spatial mapping is to positions of sensors used for the measurements. a system comprising array of electroencephalography (EEG) or of magnetoencephalography (MEG) sensors (page 29, lines 8-14). Regarding claim 10 , Geva et al. teaches selecting the plurality of neural functions to be measured based on computer-stored clinical data. Note page 52, lines 7-31, 73, lines 1-4. A BNA Analysis System generates according to some embodiments of the present invention quantitative scores from EEG data by comparing EEG activity of a group of normative subjects to a set of reference brain network models (Layer 1). These score can then be used to construct a normative database which typically constitutes at least these scores. The database can be utilized to determine statistical deviations (Layer 2). BNA score of individual subjects can then be compared to this database, to provide a tool for the assessment of trend analysis of electrophysiological changes over time (Layer 3) (page 97, lines 4-20. Regarding claim 1 4 , Geva et al. teaches wherein the re-measuring is performed during the applying . T he stimulation is executed immediately before, during or after the subject performs a task and/or action. In some embodiments of the present invention the stimulation is executed immediately before, during or after the subject conceptualizes a task and/or action but has not actually performed the task. These embodiments are useful when the subject is suffering from some type of physical and/or cognitive deficit that may prevent actual execution of a task and/or action, as for example may be seen in response to various brain injuries such as stroke. T he data collection is on-going such that neurophysiological data are collected continuously before, during and after performance or conceptualization of the task and/or action. Note page 29, lines 24-31. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis ( i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim (s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geva et al.(WO2016/046830) hereinafter Geva et al. Geva et al. teaches sensing system 424 processor 433 and controller 450 operate in a closed loop, wherein processor 433 constructs, based on the data from sensing system 442, a post- stimulation BNA pattern which provides indication regarding the effectiveness of the stimulation, and compares between the BNA patterns of the subject before and after the stimulation, and wherein controller 450 adjusts the parameters of the stimulation (e.g. , frequency, location) responsively to the comparison. Such a closed loop can be used to effect many types of changes in brain function. Representative examples include, without limitation, inducing of local neuroplasticity, inhibition of local activity, synchronization among different brain regions (nearby or remote from each other) . Gev a et al. further teaches to apply local brain stimulation at a plurality of different brain locations, a plurality of different frequencies and a plurality of different times and to apply local brain stimulation at a plurality of different brain locations, at the same frequency but at a plurality of different times. The selected frequency correlates with the frequency band associated with one or more nodes of the BNA patterns, preferably the reference BNA pattern. Thus, for example, suppose that a particular node n in the reference BNA pattern is associated with a particular brain location x, say a particular location within the occipital lobe of the brain, and is also associated with a particular frequency band /, say the characteristic frequency band of a Delta waves. Suppose further that the current-state BNA pattern also has that particular node n (namely a node that is associated with the same location x) except that in the current-state BNA pattern the frequency / is missing or suppressed in the node n. In this case, the tool is configured to apply frequency /. Suppose alternatively that node n (associated with location x and frequency f) exists in the reference BNA pattern but is missing in the current-state BNA pattern. Note fig. 37, page 4, lines 1-28, page 13, lines 30-32 . Geva et al. does not specifically teach applying the frequencies or applying the frequencies concurrently. However it is noted there is a limited number of choices available to a person of ordinary skill in the art for applying stimulation frequencies to treat various neural conditions and locations in the brain and Geva et al. recognizes applying the stimulation at various frequencies and times and synchronizations. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to choo se from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions and apply the frequencies sequentially or concurrently with a reasonable expectation of successfully treating the impaired brain region. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct . 1727, 1742, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Arendash et al.( US 10765879 ) teaches devices, methods, and systems for helping to prevent (or preventing) or treat brain and/or body disorders. Embodiments of the invention have utility for enhancing cognitive function during aging. The invention utilizes electromagnetic stimulation (EMS) that can provide a range of EMS parameters and modalities. The EMS may be utilized in conjunction with physiologic sensors that can provide feedback for possible EMS modifications. RUOHONEN et al.( EP 2442868 ) teaches non-invasive stimulation of the human brain according to pre-determined pulses for the purpose of inferring information related to the ability of the brain and its descending pathways to conduct neuronal signals. S timulating the brain using a pre-determined pulse sequence and apparatus capable of delivering such stimuli using transcranial magnetic stimulation technique. The method eliminates the need of determining a person's individual stimulation threshold intensity before it is possible to perform other types of measurements. The invention allows for faster determination of selected TMS response values while using less number of stimulus pulses. The invention can comprise an apparatus that can deliver sequences of pulses with pre-set intervals and with irregularly varying intensity. CHOWDHURY et al.( WO 2016115392 ) teaches stimulating the neurovascular system of the cerebral tissue through optimally placed devices, while simultaneously measuring the evoked neuronal and hemodynamic responses, also using optimally placed devices, is disclosed. Systems and methods for iteratively stimulating the neurovascular system and recording neuronal and hemodynamic responses are also disclosed. Further, a method for determining cerebral neurovascular functioning from the combined stimulation and measurement is disclosed, for use in diagnosis of neurovascular disorders. Gliner ( US 20030074032 ) teaches neural stimulation system responsive to collateral neural activity that may arise in association with a neural stimulation procedure includes a stimulation interface configured to deliver stimulation signals to a target neural population, a monitoring interface positioned to receive signals corresponding to a neural activity within the target neural population, a stimulus unit coupled to deliver stimulation singals to the stimulation interface, and a sensing unit coupled to the monitoring device and the stimulus unit. The neural stimulation procedure may be directed toward rehabilitating, restoring, and/or enhancing one or more neural functions by facilitating and/or effectuating a neuroplastic change or reorganization; and/or affecting a neurological condition that exists on a continuous or essentially continuous basis absent the stimulation procedure. The sensing unit determines whether evidence of an collateral neural activity exists, whereupon the stimulus unit attempts to abate the collateral neural activity. METZGER ( 2015066679 ) teaches modulation of the central nervous system and more particularly for modulation of brain oscillatory activity and the brain networks that give rise to it. The methods involve using one or more non-invasive stimuli, either alone or in combination, to increase, decrease, or otherwise modulate neural oscillations, the rhythmic and/or repetitive electrical activity generated spontaneously and in response to stimuli by neural tissue in the central nervous system. Various embodiments concern methods and devices for detecting sub-optimal or pathological neural oscillatory patterns, developing treatment protocols to modify the neural oscillations in a desired manner, introducing a non-invasive stimulus or stimuli through one or more sensory pathways to treat the conditions, and for adjusting the treatment protocol to optimize the therapeutic effect of the stimulus or stimuli. John ( 20110307030 ) teaches methods and systems for treatment of brain disorders using neuromodulation of brain networks. Apparies et al.( 20140058241 ) teaches method and apparatus for neurological assessment are provided. More specifically, the present invention relates to assessing central nervous system (CNS) function or the change in CNS function. The system (10) includes a monitoring device (20) for monitoring the brain activity of a patient (5) in response to one or more stimuli provided to the patient. Data from the monitoring device (20) is analyzed to determine a measure of CNS condition for the patient. The patient data can be compared with similar data obtained for the patient at a different time to aid a medical professional in the diagnosis or treatment of a neurological or neurodegenerative condition. Wingeier et al.( US 9630005 ) teaches providing electrical stimulation to a user as a user performs a set of tasks during a time window, the method comprising: providing an electrical stimulation treatment, characterized by a stimulation parameter and a set of portions, to a brain region of the user in association with the time window; for each task of the set of tasks: receiving a signal stream characterizing a neurological state of the user; from the signal stream, identifying a neurological signature characterizing the neurological state associated with the task; and modulating the electrical stimulation treatment provided to the brain region of the user based upon the neurological signature, wherein modulating comprises delivering a portion of the set of portions of the electrical stimulation treatment to the brain region of the user, while maintaining an aggregate amount of the stimulation parameter of the treatment provided during the time window below a maximum limit. Firlik et al.( 20070179534 ) teaches Systems and methods for patient interactive neural stimulation and/or chemical substance delivery are disclosed. A method in accordance with one embodiment of the invention includes affecting a target neural population of the patient by providing to the patient at least one of an electromagnetic signal and a chemical substance. The method can further include detecting at least one characteristic of the patient, with the characteristic at least correlated with the patient's performance of an adjunctive therapy task that is performed in association with affecting the target neural population. The method can still further include controlling at least one parameter in accordance with which the target neural population is affected, based at least in part on the detected characteristic. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT BRIAN L CASLER whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-4956 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-Th 6:30 to 4:30 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Charles Marmor can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-4730 . 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. /BRIAN L CASLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791