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 § 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. Claim s 1 -8 and 1 2 -20 are rej ected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirzakhalili , E. (December 16, 2020). Biophysics of Temporal Interference Stimulation. Cell Systems, 557-572. “ Mirzahalili ” in view of Fisher et al. (2020/0324113) “Fisher”. Regarding claim s 1 and 18 , Mirzakhalili discloses a method for stimulating asynchronous and stochastic neural activity in a subject (Figs. 4 and6A, pages 563 and 567 disclose stochastic probabilistic randomness and asynchronous time dependent axonal firing rate of temporal interference which is a non-invasive neurostimulation technique utilizing high frequency to stimulate deep neural structures) , comprising: stimulating neurons in the subject by applying, with one or more electrodes of a neurostimulator on the subject (pair of scalp electrodes Fig. 1) , an amplitude-modulated high-frequency (AM-HF) sinusoidal current ( I ) according to: I=la sin(2 π f c t ) + Ib sin(2 π (fc + f)t) wherein Ia and Ib are current values so that the maximum current amplitude is (L + Ib ) and the minimum current amplitude value is | Ib-Ia ||,fc is about 800 Hz to about 20 kHz, fb is about 1 Hz to about 500 Hz, and t is time (Fig. 2, page 560). Mirzakhalili is silent regarding s timulating neurons in the subject by applying, with one or more electrodes of a neurostimulator implanted in the subject and further comprising implanting the neurostimulator in the subject. However, Fisher teaches a similar method directed to neurostimulation (Fig. 1, abstract) by implanting one or more electrodes into the subject (par. 0042 discloses treating phantom limb pain by providing stimulation using electrodes implanted at dorsal rootlets or in the spinal cord) and further comprising implanting the neurostimulator in the subject (par. 0033) . Therefore, 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 in Mirzakhalili to include stimulating neurons in the subject by applying, with one or more electrodes of a neurostimulator implanted in the subject and further comprising implanting the neurostimulator in the subject , as taught and suggested by Fisher, since Mirzakhalili does suggest deep brain and peripheral nerve stimulation (page 560) and modifying Mirzakhalili to include implantable electrodes would allow for deeper targeting and stimulating of neural activity in a subject for reducing phantom limb pain (par. 0042 and abstract of Fisher). Regarding claim 2, Mirzakhalili discloses wherein the AM-HF sinusoidal current (1) is according to I=la sin(2π fct ) + Ib sin(2π (fc + f)t) wherein 2*Ip is the maximum current amplitude, fc is about 1 kHz to about 20 kHz, fb is about 1 Hz to about 500 Hz, and t is time (Fig. 2, page 560 discloses the required high frequency). Regarding claims 3-8, Mirzakhalili in view of Fisher discloses the claimed invention of claim 1 but are silent regarding wherein the stimulation is applied to a peripheral nerve innervating a limb of the subject ; wherein the stimulation is provided to a sensory nerve innervating an amputated limb of the subject, and wherein the stimulation is provided in an amount effective to reduce phantom limb pain in the subject ; wherein the stimulation is provided to a sensory nerve innervating an amputated limb of the subject, and wherein the stimulation is provided in response to activation of a sensor detecting movement and/or position of the amputated limb or movement and/or position of a physical or virtual prosthesis of the amputated limb ; wherein the sensor is any one of a gyroscope, an electrogoniometer , a textile piezoresistive sensor, or a pressure sensor located in or on the limb or the prosthesis of the subject ; wherein the sensor detects pressure at the fingertips of a prosthetic hand or in the sole of a prosthetic foot ; and wherein the sensor detects a position of the limb, the stump of the limb, the prosthesis, or the virtual prosthesis. However, Fisher teaches a similar method directed to neurostimulation (Fig. 1, abstract) by implanting one or more electrodes into the subject (par. 0042 discloses treating phantom limb pain by providing stimulation using electrodes implanted at dorsal rootlets or in the spinal cord) wherein the stimulation is applied to a peripheral nerve innervating a limb of the subject Fig. 1, par. 0044); wherein the stimulation is provided to a sensory nerve innervating an amputated limb of the subject (par. 0044), and wherein the stimulation is provided in an amount effective to reduce phantom limb pain in the subject; wherein the stimulation is provided to a sensory nerve innervating an amputated limb of the subject, and wherein the stimulation is provided in response to activation of a sensor detecting movement and/or position of the amputated limb or movement and/or position of a physical or virtual prosthesis of the amputated limb (par. 0062); wherein the sensor is any one of a gyroscope, an electrogoniometer , a textile piezoresistive sensor, or a pressure sensor located in or on the limb or the prosthesis of the subject; wherein the sensor detects pressure at the fingertips of a prosthetic hand or in the sole of a prosthetic foot (par. 0062); and wherein the sensor detects a position of the limb, the stump of the limb, the prosthesis, or the virtual prosthesis (par. 0044). Therefore, 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 in Mirzakhalili to include the stimulation is applied to a peripheral nerve innervating a limb of the subject; wherein the stimulation is provided to a sensory nerve innervating an amputated limb of the subject, and wherein the stimulation is provided in an amount effective to reduce phantom limb pain in the subject; wherein the stimulation is provided to a sensory nerve innervating an amputated limb of the subject, and wherein the stimulation is provided in response to activation of a sensor detecting movement and/or position of the amputated limb or movement and/or position of a physical or virtual prosthesis of the amputated limb; wherein the sensor is any one of a gyroscope, an electrogoniometer , a textile piezoresistive sensor, or a pressure sensor located in or on the limb or the prosthesis of the subject; wherein the sensor detects pressure at the fingertips of a prosthetic hand or in the sole of a prosthetic foot; and wherein the sensor detects a position of the limb, the stump of the limb, the prosthesis, or the virtual prosthesis, as taught and suggested by Fisher, since Mirzakhalili does suggest deep brain and peripheral nerve stimulation (page 560) and modifying Mirzakhalili to include implantable electrodes would allow for deeper targeting and stimulating of neural activity in a subject for reducing phantom limb pain (par. 0042 and abstract of Fisher). Regarding claims 12-16, Mirzakhalili in view of Fisher discl oses the claimed invention of claims 1 and 3; except for wherein the stimulation is applied to a peripheral nerve innervating a limb of the subject, and the method further comprises calibrating the stimulation to induce sensations of pressure or touch in the limb ; wherein the neurostimulator is implanted at the dorsal rootlets of sensory neurons innervating the limb of the subject ; wherein the neurostimulator is implanted at the lateral spinal cord adjacent to the dorsal rootlets of the sensory neurons innervating the limb of the subject ; wherein the neurostimulator is implanted on peripheral neurons innervating the limb of the subject ; wherein the electrodes of the neurostimulator are in the form of a nerve cuff, a microelectrode array, a deep brain stimulator, or a spinal probe . However, Fisher teaches a similar method directed to neurostimulation (Fig. 1, abstract) by implanting one or more electrodes into the subject (par. 0042 discloses treating phantom limb pain by providing stimulation using electrodes implanted at dorsal rootlets or in the spinal cord) wherein the stimulation is applied to a peripheral nerve innervating a limb of the subject, and the method further comprises calibrating the stimulation to induce sensations of pressure or touch in the limb; wherein the neurostimulator is implanted at the dorsal rootlets of sensory neurons innervating the limb of the subject; wherein the neurostimulator is implanted at the lateral spinal cord adjacent to the dorsal rootlets of the sensory neurons innervating the limb of the subject; wherein the neurostimulator is implanted on peripheral neurons innervating the limb of the subject; wherein the electrodes of the neurostimulator are in the form of a nerve cuff, a microelectrode array, a deep brain stimulator, or a spinal probe (par. 0042 and 0044 of Fisher). Therefore, 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 in Mirzakhalili to include wherein the stimulation is applied to a peripheral nerve innervating a limb of the subject, and the method further comprises calibrating the stimulation to induce sensations of pressure or touch in the limb; wherein the neurostimulator is implanted at the dorsal rootlets of sensory neurons innervating the limb of the subject; wherein the neurostimulator is implanted at the lateral spinal cord adjacent to the dorsal rootlets of the sensory neurons innervating the limb of the subject; wherein the neurostimulator is implanted on peripheral neurons innervating the limb of the subject; wherein the electrodes of the neurostimulator are in the form of a nerve cuff, a microelectrode array, a deep brain stimulator, or a spinal probe, as taught and suggested by Fisher, since Mirzakhalili does suggest deep brain and peripheral nerve stimulation (page 560) and modifying Mirzakhalili to include implantable electrodes would allow for deeper targeting and stimulating of neural activity in a subject for reducing phantom limb pain (par. 0042 and abstract of Fisher). Regarding claim 17, Mirzakhalili discloses wherein the neurostimulator is an external or implanted pulse generator (Figs. 1 and 5) . Regarding claim 19, Mirzakhalili discloses a method for providing asynchronous and stochastic neural activity in a limb of a subject with an amputation of the limb (Figs. 4 and6A, pages 563 and 567 disclose stochastic probabilistic randomness and asynchronous time dependent axonal firing rate of temporal interference which is a non-invasive neurostimulation technique utilizing high frequency to stimulate deep neural structures) ; the stimulation is provided with one or more electrodes (electrodes l1 and l2; Fig. 1) , comprising: wherein the stimulation is amplitude-modulated high-frequency (AM-HF) sinusoidal current (I) according to:1=la sin(2 π fct ) + lb sin(2 π (fc + fb)t) wherein Ia and Ib are current values so that the maximum current amplitude is ( Ia + Ib ) and the minimum current amplitude value is | I"b-Ia fc is about 800 Hz to about 20 kHz, fb is about 1 Hz to about 500 Hz, and t is time (Fig. 2 page 560) . Mirzakhalili is silent regarding providing a therapeutically effective amount of stimulation to peripheral neurons that innervate the limb of the subject and/or dorsal rootlets, or lateral spinal cord adjacent to the dorsal rootlets, of one or more sensory neurons that innervate the limb of the subject, wherein: the stimulation is provided with one or more electrodes of a neurostimulator that are implanted at the peripheral neurons that innervate the limb of the subject and/or dorsal rootlets or the lateral spinal cord adjacent to the dorsal rootlets of the one or more sensory neurons innervating the limb of the subject; the one or more electrodes are activated to provide the stimulation in response to activation of a sensor detecting movement and/or position of the limb or movement and/or position of a physical or virtual prosthesis of the limb . However, Fisher teaches a similar method directed to neurostimulation (Fig. 1, abstract) by implanting one or more electrodes into the subject (par. 0042 discloses treating phantom limb pain by providing stimulation using electrodes implanted at dorsal rootlets or in the spinal cord) and further comprising implanting the neurostimulator in the subject (par. 0033). Fisher further teaches providing a therapeutically effective amount of stimulation to peripheral neurons that innervate the limb of the subject and/or dorsal rootlets, or lateral spinal cord adjacent to the dorsal rootlets, of one or more sensory neurons that innervate the limb of the subject (Fig. 1, abstract, par. 0042), wherein: the stimulation is provided with one or more electrodes of a neurostimulator that are implanted at the peripheral neurons that innervate the limb of the subject and/or dorsal rootlets or the lateral spinal cord adjacent to the dorsal rootlets of the one or more sensory neurons innervating the limb of the subject (par. 0044); the one or more electrodes are activated to provide the stimulation in response to activation of a sensor detecting movement and/or position of the limb or movement and/or position of a physical or virtual prosthesis of the limb (par. 0062). Therefore, 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 in Mirzakhalili to include providing a therapeutically effective amount of stimulation to peripheral neurons that innervate the limb of the subject and/or dorsal rootlets, or lateral spinal cord adjacent to the dorsal rootlets, of one or more sensory neurons that innervate the limb of the subject, wherein: the stimulation is provided with one or more electrodes of a neurostimulator that are implanted at the peripheral neurons that innervate the limb of the subject and/or dorsal rootlets or the lateral spinal cord adjacent to the dorsal rootlets of the one or more sensory neurons innervating the limb of the subject; the one or more electrodes are activated to provide the stimulation in response to activation of a sensor detecting movement and/or position of the limb or movement and/or position of a physical or virtual prosthesis of the limb , as taught and suggested by Fisher, since Mirzakhalili does suggest deep brain and peripheral nerve stimulation (page 560) and modifying Mirzakhalili to include implantable electrodes would allow for deeper targeting and stimulating of neural activity in a subject for reducing phantom limb pain (par. 0042 and abstract of Fisher). Regarding claim 20, Mirzakhalili discloses a method for providing asynchronous and stochastic neural activity in a limb of a subject with an amputation of the limb (Figs. 4 and6A, pages 563 and 567 disclose stochastic probabilistic randomness and asynchronous time dependent axonal firing rate of temporal interference which is a non-invasive neurostimulation technique utilizing high frequency to stimulate deep neural structures); the stimulation is provided with one or more electrodes (electrodes l1 and l2; Fig. 1), comprising: wherein the stimulation is amplitude-modulated high-frequency (AM-HF) sinusoidal current (I) according to:1=la sin(2π fct ) + lb sin(2π(fc + fb)t) wherein Ia and Ib are current values so that the maximum current amplitude is ( Ia + Ib ) and the minimum current amplitude value is | I"b-Ia fc is about 800 Hz to about 20 kHz, fb is about 1 Hz to about 500 Hz, and t is time (Fig. 2 page 560). Mirzakhalili is silent regarding a method for control of a prosthetic limb of a subject, comprising: providing a therapeutically effective amount of stimulation to peripheral neurons that innervate the limb of the subject and/or dorsal rootlets, or lateral spinal cord adjacent to the dorsal rootlets, of sensory neurons innervating an amputated limb of the subject, wherein the subject uses a prosthesis of the amputated limb; and wherein: the stimulation is provided with one or more electrodes of a neurostimulator that are implanted at peripheral neurons that innervate the limb of the subject and/or the dorsal rootlets or the lateral spinal cord adjacent to the dorsal rootlets of the sensory neurons innervating the amputated limb; the one or more electrodes are activated to provide the stimulation in response to activation of a sensor detecting movement and/or position of a stump of the limb or the prosthesis or in response to movement and/or position of a virtual prosthesis of the limb . However, Fisher teaches a similar method directed to neurostimulation (Fig. 1, abstract) by implanting one or more electrodes into the subject (par. 0042 discloses treating phantom limb pain by providing stimulation using electrodes implanted at dorsal rootlets or in the spinal cord) and further comprising implanting the neurostimulator in the subject (par. 0033). Fisher further teaches a method for control of a prosthetic limb of a subject, comprising: providing a therapeutically effective amount of stimulation to peripheral neurons that innervate the limb of the subject and/or dorsal rootlets, or lateral spinal cord adjacent to the dorsal rootlets, of sensory neurons innervating an amputated limb of the subject (par. 0042), wherein the subject uses a prosthesis of the amputated limb; and wherein: the stimulation is provided with one or more electrodes of a neurostimulator that are implanted at peripheral neurons that innervate the limb of the subject and/or the dorsal rootlets or the lateral spinal cord adjacent to the dorsal rootlets of the sensory neurons innervating the amputated limb (par. 0044) ; the one or more electrodes are activated to provide the stimulation in response to activation of a sensor detecting movement and/or position of a stump of the limb or the prosthesis or in response to movement and/or position of a virtual prosthesis of the limb (par. 0028 and par. 0087) . Therefore, 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 in Mirzakhalili to include a method for control of a prosthetic limb of a subject, comprising: providing a therapeutically effective amount of stimulation to peripheral neurons that innervate the limb of the subject and/or dorsal rootlets, or lateral spinal cord adjacent to the dorsal rootlets, of sensory neurons innervating an amputated limb of the subject, wherein the subject uses a prosthesis of the amputated limb; and wherein: the stimulation is provided with one or more electrodes of a neurostimulator that are implanted at peripheral neurons that innervate the limb of the subject and/or the dorsal rootlets or the lateral spinal cord adjacent to the dorsal rootlets of the sensory neurons innervating the amputated limb; the one or more electrodes are activated to provide the stimulation in response to activation of a sensor detecting movement and/or position of a stump of the limb or the prosthesis or in response to movement and/or position of a virtual prosthesis of the limb, as taught and suggested by Fisher, since Mirzakhalili does suggest deep brain and peripheral nerve stimulation (page 560) and modifying Mirzakhalili to include implantable electrodes would allow for deeper targeting and stimulating of neural activity in a subject for reducing phantom limb pain (par. 0042 and abstract of Fisher) and for providing stimulation pattern control to the patient. Claim 9 is rej ected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirzakhalili , E. (December 16, 2020). Biophysics of Temporal Interference Stimulation. Cell Systems, 557-572. “ Mirzahalili ” in view of Fisher et al. (2020/0324113) “Fisher” further in view of Shuster et al. (2018/0133432) “Shuster”. Mirzakhalili in view of Fisher disclosed the claimed invention of claims 1, 5 and 8; except for the virtual prosthesis of the limb is a computer- generated image of the limb and the movement of the computer-generated image of the limb is observed or controlled by the subject. However, Shuster teaches a similar neurostimulation method comprising a virtual prosthesis of the limb is a computer- generated image of the limb and the movement of the computer-generated image of the limb is observed or controlled by the subject (par. 0024). Therefore, 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 in Mirzakhalili in view of Fisher to include the virtual prosthesis of the limb is a computer- generated image of the limb and the movement of the computer-generated image of the limb is observed or controlled by the subject, as taught and suggested by Shuster, for providing the patient control of phantom limb discomfort relief using 3-D virtual image. Claim s 10-11 are rej ected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirzakhalili , E. (December 16, 2020). Biophysics of Temporal Interference Stimulation. Cell Systems, 557- 572. “ Mirzahalili ” in view of Fisher et al. (2020/0324113) “Fisher” further in view of Herr et al. (2015/0173918) “Herr”. Mirzakhalili in view of Fisher disclosed the claimed invention of claim 1; except for wherein the stimulation is provided to a peripheral nerve innervating a limb of the subject with complete or partial paralysis due to spinal cord injury or stroke and wherein the stimulation is provided in an amount effective to cause reflexive muscle contraction in the limb of the subject with complete or partial paralysis due to spinal cord injury or stroke. However, Herr teaches a similar neurostimulation method (abstract) wherein the stimulation is provided to a peripheral nerve innervating a limb of the subject with complete or partial paralysis due to spinal cord injury or stroke and wherein the stimulation is provided in an amount effective to cause reflexive muscle contraction in the limb of the subject with complete or partial paralysis due to spinal cord injury or stroke (par. 0117 and par. 0133). Therefore, 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 in Mirzakhalili in view of Fisher to include the stimulation is provided to a peripheral nerve innervating a limb of the subject with complete or partial paralysis due to spinal cord injury or stroke and wherein the stimulation is provided in an amount effective to cause reflexive muscle contraction in the limb of the subject with complete or partial paralysis due to spinal cord injury or stroke, as taught and suggested by Herr, to evoke limb muscle contractions and activations for movement patterns. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YASHITA SHARMA whose telephone number is (571)270-5417. The examiner can normally be reached on 8am-5pm M-Th; 8am-4pm Fri (MT). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner' s supervisor, Jerrah Edwards , can be reached at 408-918-7557 . The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /YASHITA SHARMA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3774