DETAILED ACTION
In Applicant’s Response dated 9/6/2025, Applicant cancelled claims 1-16 and added claims 17-33; and argued against all rejections previously set forth in the Office action dated 8/11/2025.
Response to Argument
Applicant’s arguments were considered, but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 17-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
With regard to claim 17 applicant claims the limitations of “An abiotic intelligence-rendered networked communication devices for rendering medical and surgical diagnoses of diseases and disorders, linked and related diagnoses and differential diagnoses, causing health complaints and ailments of people (AIR Brain), the AIR Brain comprises the abiotic intelligence for creating: an interactive digital 2D human figure and an interactive digital 3D human figure (interactive 2D & 3D figures), medical imagings and interactive 2D holograms and 3D holograms (interactive 2D & 3D holograms), comprising interactive digital anatomical positioning system (APS) of coordinates for effecting processor units for creating and displaying a plurality of interactive digital scrollable and selectable relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs for transforming physicians' and patients' queries on the health complaints and ailments into individual scrolls-aligned relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs, embodying the health complaints and ailments, as individual consequences of individual touches or individual clicks being applied to individual interactive APS of coordinates by individual physicians and individual patients, wherein the individual scrolls-aligned relational dominant chief complaints, dominant symptoms and dominant signs for effecting processor units for creating and displaying interactive highlighted and accentuated APS of coordinates attaching and associating with interactive medical and surgical diagnoses-specific data including said relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs, according to the APS of coordinates in relational databases, and related diagnoses, linked and related diagnoses and differential diagnoses; and the interactive medical and surgical diagnoses-specific data attaching a plurality of interactive digital display panels for letting the physicians and patients queriers approving or intelligently editing said interactive medical and surgical diagnoses-specific data, thus approved or edited medical and surgical diagnoses, linked and related diagnoses and differential diagnoses, in and shared among viewing screens and touchscreens and ambiences for displaying interactive 2D & 3D holograms, the AIR Brain comprises: the abiotic intelligence comprises the abiotic intelligence-rendered networked servers, mobile communication devices, desktops and holography devices comprise the processor units attaching to storage memories for storing computer programs including thesaurus software for instructing the processor units for creating and expanding the chronologically ordered health and healthcare data relating to the APS coordinates and the processor units, and the viewing screens and touchscreen and the for displaying interactive 2D & 3D holograms.”
These limitations are not specifically taught by the specification or the original claims. Therefore, they are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
With regard to claim 28 applicant claims the limitation of: “In the AIR Brain, a method of the abiotic intelligence-rendered networked communication devices rendering medical and surgical diagnoses of diseases and disorders, linked and related diagnoses and differential diagnoses, causing health complaints and ailments of people, whereby the abiotic intelligence creating: the interactive 2D & 3D figures, medical imagings and interactive 2D & 3D holograms, comprising interactive APS of coordinates attaching and associating with thence displaying the plurality of interactive digital scrollable and selectable relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs, whenever the physicians and patients touched or clicked individual interactive APS of coordinates and then scrolling thence aligning said interactive digital scrollable and selectable relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs, wherefore transforming the health complaints and ailments into the individual scrolls-aligned relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs, embodying the health complaints and ailments;
the individual scrolls-aligned relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs effecting the processor units creating and displaying the interactive highlighted and accentuated APS of coordinates attaching and associating with interactive medical and surgical diagnoses-specific data including said scrolls-aligned relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs, according to the APS coordinates in the relational databases, and related diagnoses, linked and related diagnoses and differential diagnoses; and said interactive medical and surgical diagnoses-specific data attaching a plurality of interactive digital display panels letting the physicians and patients queriers approving or intelligently editing said interactive medical and surgical diagnoses-specific data, wherefore approved or edited said related medical and surgical diagnoses, linked and related diagnoses and differential diagnoses, in and shared among the viewing screens and touchscreens and holography devices displaying the interactive 2D & 3D holograms, the method comprises the process of the abiotic intelligence rendering: the abiotic intelligence-rendered networked servers, mobile communication devices, desktops and holography devices, wherein the processor units attaching to the storage memories storing the computer programs including thesaurus software instructing the processor units creating and expanding the medical and surgical diagnoses-specific data relating to the processor units and the APS of coordinates, in and shared among the storage memories.”
These limitations are not specifically taught by the specification or the original claims. Therefore, they are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 17-33 are 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.
With regard to claim 17, applicant claims the limitation of “AIR Brain comprises the abiotic intelligence for creating: an interactive digital 2D human figure and an interactive digital 3D human figure (interactive 2D & 3D figures), medical imagings and interactive 2D holograms and 3D holograms (interactive 2D & 3D holograms), comprising interactive digital anatomical positioning system (APS).”
It is unclear what comprises the APS. It is unclear whether it is the AIR Brain or 2Dholograms and 3D holograms. For the purpose of a compact prosecution, it is interpreted that the AIR Brain comprises the APS.
Applicant further claims the limitation:
“interactive digital anatomical positioning system (APS) of coordinates for effecting processor units for creating and displaying a plurality of interactive digital scrollable and selectable relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs for transforming physicians' and patients' queries on the health complaints and ailments into individual scrolls-aligned relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs, embodying the health complaints and ailments, as individual consequences of individual touches or individual clicks being applied to individual interactive APS of coordinates by individual physicians and individual patients, wherein the individual scrolls-aligned relational dominant chief complaints, dominant symptoms and dominant signs for effecting processor units for creating and displaying interactive highlighted and accentuated APS of coordinates attaching and associating with interactive medical and surgical diagnoses-specific data including said relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs, according to the APS of coordinates in relational databases, and related diagnoses, linked and related diagnoses and differential diagnoses;”
It is clear what constitutes “embodying the health complaints and ailments, as individual consequences of individual touches or individual clicks being applied to individual interactive APS of coordinates by individual physicians and individual patients”. It is unclear what “individual consequences” here is refereeing it.
It is also unclear what constitutes “wherein the individual scrolls-aligned relational dominant chief complaints, dominant symptoms and dominant signs for effecting processor units for creating and displaying interactive highlighted and accentuated APS of coordinates attaching and associating with interactive medical and surgical diagnoses-specific data including said relational dominant chief complaints.”
The claims 17 to 27 are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current US practice. The claims are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors. The structure and/or functions which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The claim(s) must be in one sentence form only.
With regard claim 28 it is unclear what constitutes “In the AIR Brain, a method of the abiotic intelligence-rendered networked communication devices rendering medical and surgical diagnoses of diseases and disorders, linked and related diagnoses and differential diagnoses, causing health complaints and ailments of people”. It is unclear whether it is the AIR Brian the devices or the diagnoses or the disorder that is causing health complaints and ailments of people.
It is unclear what constitutes: “medical imagings and interactive 2D & 3D holograms, comprising interactive APS of coordinates attaching and associating with thence displaying the plurality of interactive digital scrollable and selectable relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs, whenever the physicians and patients touched or clicked individual interactive APS of coordinates and then scrolling thence aligning said interactive digital scrollable and selectable relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs, wherefore transforming the health complaints and ailments into the individual scrolls-aligned relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs, embodying the health complaints and ailments.”
It is unclear what constitutes “the individual scrolls-aligned relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs effecting the processor units creating and displaying the interactive highlighted and accentuated APS of coordinates attaching and associating with interactive medical and surgical diagnoses-specific data including said scrolls-aligned relational dominant chief complaints, symptoms and signs, according to the APS coordinates in the relational databases, and related diagnoses, linked and related diagnoses and differential diagnoses.”
The claims 28 to 33 are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current US practice. The claims are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors. The structure and/or functions which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The claim(s) must be in one sentence form only.
Claim 17-33 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 112(a) and 112(b).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DI XIAO whose telephone number is (571)270-1758. The examiner can normally be reached 9Am-5Pm est M-F.
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, Stephen Hong can be reached at (571) 272-4124. 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.
/DI XIAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2178