DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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, 2, 7, 8, 13, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tatte (US 2021/0338152).
Regarding claims 1, 7, 13, Tatte discloses the same invention as recited, including an electronic device comprising a controller that acquires a plurality of first data and plurality of second data different from the plurality of first data in a first period (Paragraph 180: e.g. heart rate and respiration data during an observation period), sets a first threshold based on the acquired first data and a sets a second threshold based on the acquired plurality of second data (Paragraph 182: thresholds are set based on observations over time), and determines a sleep state of a user based on determination data acquired in a second period different from the first period and at least one threshold of the first or second threshold (Paragraphs 182-183; second period is any time after thresholds are set).
Regarding claims 2, 8, 14, Tatte discloses heart rate data (Paragraph 33) and acceleration data (Paragraph 96).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tatte (US 2021/0338152) in view of Raymann (US 2016/0270721).
Regarding claims 3, 9, 15, Tatte discloses determining whether the first data acquired in the first period satisfies a first condition (Paragraphs 175, 177: either HR or respiration data have qualifying conditions). Tatte does not specifically disclose determining sleep state based on the second data if the first condition is not satisfied as recited. However, Raymann teaches ignoring certain data when it is not available (Paragraph 62), in order to continue determining sleep state based on the available data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tatte as taught by Raymann to include continuing to determine sleep state based on the second data if the first condition is not satisfied as recited (i.e. first data not available), in order to continue determining sleep state based on the available data.
Regarding claims 4, 10, 16, Tatte discloses determining whether the first data acquired in the second period satisfies a second condition (Paragraphs 175, 177: qualifying conditions continue to apply to second data collection period), and using the first data acquired in the second period and the first threshold when the first data meets both first and second conditions. Tatte does not disclose what to do when the second condition is not satisfied (i.e. first data during second period is not available). However, the same modification with Raymann described above applies for using second data acquired in the second period and second threshold when first data is not available, in order to continue determining sleep state based on the available data.
Regarding claims 6, 12, 18, Tatte discloses a second condition is that a minimum value within a first window period of the first data acquired in the second period is greater than an abnormal determination threshold (Paragraphs 185, 187: either HR or respiration data have lower bound thresholds).
Claim(s) 5, 11, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tatte (US 2021/0338152) in view of Nakagome (US 2021/0090740).
Regarding claims 5, 11, 17, Tatte discloses heart rate data may be subject to first qualifying conditions (Paragraph 185). Tatte does not disclose using a standard deviation as recited. However, Nakagome teaches determining if a standard deviation of heart rate data in a time period is included in a predetermined range (Paragraph 40), in order to remove outliers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tatte as taught by Nakagome to include using a standard deviation as recited, in order to remove outliers.
Conclusion
The art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nakagome (US 2024/0245880) shows determining sleep state based on heart rate and acceleration thresholds.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eugene T Wu whose telephone number is (571)270-5053. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Carl Layno can be reached at 571-272-4949. 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.
/Eugene T Wu/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796