DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 18 be found allowable, claim 19 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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) 1-2, 5-9, 11-12, and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weisend (PG Pub. 2016/0206871) in view of Cramer et al. (PG Pub. 2017/0055903).
Regarding Claims 1 and 11, Weisend discloses a brain stimulation device, comprising a head mounted device (see Fig. 5) having a sensing electrode system configured for monitoring brain function (see par. 43 and 55), and a stimulation electrode system configured for stimulating a brain (see par. 15 and 44). Weisend does not elaborate on the electrode system’s structure. Cramer discloses a similar head mounted device for sensing and stimulation (see par. 14) having a flexible base (see flexible material 20; par. 34) with an array of flexible pins (see electrodes 60), each flexible pin protruding outwardly from said flexible base (see Fig. 3);
wherein said sensing electrode system and said stimulation electrode system do not require any kind of external conductive wet materials for their performance (see dry electrodes; par. 7). The examiner considers electrodes 60 are flexible because of its spring element (see element 30 and par. 16). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to make Weisend’s device flexible because Cramer teaches it helps to improve the electrode-skin contact which assures better electrical signal quality transfer (see par. 35).
Regarding Claims 2 and 12, Weisend discloses a communication system configured to transfer signals to an external device (see par. 46).
Regarding Claims 5 and 15, Weisend discloses said stimulation electrode system is configured for transmitting electrical stimulation (see par. 15).
Regarding Claims 6 and 16, Weisend discloses said stimulation electrode system is configured for transmitting magnetic stimulation (see par. 11 and 31).
Regarding Claim 7, Weisend discloses a driver circuit (see software means; par. 49) mounted on said head mounted device and being configured to generate brain stimulation waves to be transmitted by said stimulation electrode system (see par. 48).
Regarding Claim 8, Weisend discloses said driver circuit is configured for generating brain stimulation waves according to a sleep improving protocol (see par. 15 and 34).
Regarding Claim 9, Weisend discloses wherein said driver circuit is configured for generating brain stimulation waves to induce a state of deep sleep (see slow wave sleep; par. 34).
Regarding Claims 17-19, Weisend discloses sensing EEG and MEG signals (see par. 13).
Regarding Claim 20, Weisend discloses using said signals for correcting positioning of said systems on a head of a subject (see par. 20).
Claim(s) 3-4, 10, and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weisend (PG Pub. 2016/0206871) in view of Cramer et al. (PG Pub. 2017/0055903), and further in view of Attal et al. (PG Pub. 2016/0157777).
Regarding Claims 3 and 13, Weisend and Cramer do not specifically disclose a cellphone, tablet, or smartwatch as the external device. Attal discloses a similar head mounted device (see Fig. 4), wherein said external device is selected from the group consisting of: a cellphone, a tablet, and a smartwatch (see par. 145). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to send signals to a cellphone because Attal teaches helps provide access to for interpretation and analysis (see par. 137).
Regarding Claims 4 and 14, Attal further discloses a communication system configured to transfer signals to a cloud facility (see par. 119). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to send signals to a cloud because Attal teaches helps provide access to for interpretation and analysis (see par. 137).
Regarding Claim 10, see rejections of similarly worded Claims 1 and 4 above. Weisend discloses a communication system (see claim 21) and local control device (see microprocessor) as well.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATASHA PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-5818. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 M-F Eastern.
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, James Kish can be reached at (571) 272-5554. 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.
/N.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3792
/LYNSEY C Eiseman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796