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 .
Response to Amendment
As a result of the Amendment filed on January 23, 2026, claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 7 and 16 are amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 23, 2026 with respect to the art rejections to claims 1-6, 8, and 10 and 13-20 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the secondary reference of Reddy cannot cure the deficiencies of the primary reference Aurongzeb with regard to the amended feature of “nano mechanical system sensors having both electronic and mechanical components that function on the nanoscale”. (Applicant features at pgs. 6-7). Applicant appears to be arguing that Reddy does not disclose both mechanical and electronic components on a nanoscale.
However, the Office respectfully disagrees with the above conclusions, because Reddy clearly and explicitly discloses nano sensors functioning on the nanoscale (See also Detailed Description, [0047][0121-0123], “In at least one embodiment, a sensor module, such as 108, can be an electronic gas sensing device ranging from about 10-100 nanometers to a few micrometers in dimension, and could be installed in any handheld electronic and/or mobile communication device. For example, a sensor module, such as 108, could be integrated in a smart watch or cellular phone.”) that include both electronic (i.e. electrode) and mechanical (i.e. nanocomposites, nanotubules, nanofibers) l components (Detailed Description, [0050-0054], “In at least one embodiment, ketones, such as acetone, can be detected and/or identified by a sensor module, such as 108, which can include a sensor, or sensor component, such as 200 shown in FIG. 2, with one or more nanomaterials. Any type of nanomaterials for detecting ketones, such as acetone, can be used ding nanocomposites, nanotubules, or nanofibers. The sensor component 200 shown in FIG. 2 can include a working electrode 202, a counter electrode 204, and a reference electrode 206.”). Since Aurongzeb and Reddy also disclose very similar types of computing systems dealing with detecting the health conditions of the user through gas sensing, the modification based on simple substitution is easily implemented and would have been pursued by one of ordinary skill, as set forth in the combination rationale in the Non-Final Office Action of November 19, 2025.
For the foregoing reasons, claims 1-6, 8, 10 and 13-20 remain rejected with the combination and rationale of Aurongzeb and Reddy as set forth previously under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 7, 9 and 11-12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the same combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. It is also noted claims 11-12 raise new rejection grounds based on the amendment to claim 7.
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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 11-12 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.
Claims 11-12 recites “wherein the article is selected from a headset, a helmet, a hat, and a mask”. However, claim 11 is dependent off of claim 7, which recites instead “wherein the article is a glove”. Thus, due to the dependency, claim 11 is self-contradictory because the article cannot function simultaneously as a glove and a headset/helmet/hat/mask. The Office is unable to ascertain the metes and bounds of the claim because the article is functioning as two independent items at once.
Solely for purposes of examination, claim 11 is treated as dependent off of claim 1 instead of claim 7 (with claim 12 being still dependent off claim 11), and assumed to be a typographical error, and that the supported embodiments (a glove OR a headset) are mutually exclusive and are adequately supported based on [0025] of the Instant Specification.
Note that if proper correction is not made on this feature, a further rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) may also ensue, because there is no reasonable support within the Specification to enable one of ordinary skill to make or use such an article being both a glove and a headset within the scope of the Invention. The Office is assuming a typographical error at this point, and does not make a rejection also under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) currently.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, 10, 11 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aurongzeb et al., United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2022/0193536 A1 in view of Reddy, United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2020/0337594 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Aurongzeb discloses a system for collecting bioinformatic data (Figs. 1-2, generally, Summary, Abstract), comprising:
an array of electro-mechanical system sensors arranged on an article such that the array of electro-mechanical system sensors are positioned within a range of a gas source of a subject, each electro-mechanical system sensors configured to generate a signal based on a concentration of one or more gaseous biomarkers within a gas emitted from the subject (Figs. 1-2, MOS gas sensor, #242; pressure sensor, #244; See Detailed Description, [0050-0058], “In an embodiment, the biofeedback headset 134 may include a pressure sensor 144. The pressure sensor 144 may be formed on the biofeedback headset printed circuit board (PCB) 138 and operatively coupled to a biofeedback headset controller 136 placed within the biofeedback headset 134. In an embodiment, the pressure sensor may include a microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) capacitive pressure sensor. Although the present specification describes the pressure sensor 144 as a MEMS capacitive pressure sensor...an embodiment, the pressure sensor 144 may be placed within a mouthpiece in order to place the pressure sensor 144 at a location near the user's mouth. This will allow the pressure sensor 144 to detect a change in pressure above a base or threshold air pressure. In an embodiment, the base or threshold air pressure may be maintained through the use of a micro-fan fluidically coupled to the pressure sensor 144 in order to set a base air pressure at the pressure sensor 144. As the user breathes on or near the pressure sensor 144, the air pressure will change and this detected difference in air pressure may be sensed and provided to the biofeedback headset controller 136. The biofeedback headset controller 136 may pass the signals detected by the pressure sensor 144 to the processor 102 and biofeedback headset machine learning system 146 of the information handling system 100”; See also Detailed Description, [0066-0068], “In order to accomplish this, the biofeedback headset 234 includes a MOS gas sensor 242 in an embodiment. The MOS gas sensor 242 may be formed on a biofeedback headset printed circuit board (PCB) 238 and operatively coupled to a biofeedback headset controller 236 placed within the biofeedback headset 234. In an embodiment, the MOS gas sensor 242 is a gas sensor that includes a MEMS MOS gas sensor gas sensor to measure an amount of carbon dioxide (CO.sub.2) at the mouthpiece. In an embodiment, the MOS gas sensor 242 may alternatively or additionally measure the O.sub.2 composition of the air around the MOS gas sensor 242. During operation the MOS gas sensor 242 may be placed next to the user's mouth using, for example a mouthpiece.”);
a preprocessor coupled with the array of electro-mechanical system sensors and configured to generate one or more indicators based on the signal from each of a plurality of the sensors (Figs. 1-2, biofeedback headset controller, #136; Detailed Description, [0050-0058], “In an embodiment, the biofeedback headset 134 includes a MOS gas sensor 142. The MOS gas sensor 142 may be formed on a biofeedback headset printed circuit board (PCB) 138 and operatively coupled to a biofeedback headset controller 136 placed within the biofeedback headset 134... In an embodiment, the biofeedback headset machine learning system 146 may be used to also provide these different and additional warnings related to any changes that the user may have experienced based on the data provided by the biofeedback headset controller 136 and the sensors therein.... The pressure sensor 144 may be formed on the biofeedback headset printed circuit board (PCB) 138 and operatively coupled to a biofeedback headset controller 136 placed within the biofeedback headset 134. In an embodiment, the pressure sensor may include a microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) capacitive pressure sensor...As the user breathes on or near the pressure sensor 144, the air pressure will change and this detected difference in air pressure may be sensed and provided to the biofeedback headset controller 136.”);
a computing device comprising one or more memories storing computer-executable instructions and one or more processors (Figs. 1-2, processor, #102; computer readable medium #122), individually or in combination, configured to:
execute the computer-executable instructions to cause the computing device to apply the one or more indicators to a model to output a health status of the subject (Figs. 1-2, Detailed Description, [0050-0068], “The processor 102 may then execute a biofeedback headset machine learning system 146 and use the data received from the biofeedback headset controller 136 and MOS gas sensor 142 as input to generate, when necessary, any warnings or indications to the user at the video/graphic display device 110 that respiration characteristics need to be changed...The biofeedback headset controller 136 may pass the signals detected by the pressure sensor 144 to the processor 102 and biofeedback headset machine learning system 146 of the information handling system 100. Again, these signals may be used as input to the biofeedback headset machine learning system 146 in order to provide the user with any type of biofeedback warnings or status messages at the video/graphic display device 110.”),
wherein the one or more gaseous biomarkers comprise nitric oxide, ammonia, methanol, hydrogen, hydrogen sulfide, nitrogen dioxide, acetone, isoprene, carbon monoxide (Detailed Description, [0053]m “The MOS gas sensor 142 may detect whether the user is in good or bad conditions that could affect the user's ability to engage in game play or could dramatically affect the user's health. The present specification further contemplates that other types of gas besides or in addition to CO.sub.2 and/or O.sub.2 may be detected. Among these other types of gases may be volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as alcohol or carbon monoxide may be detected for example”), methane, formaldehyde, dimethyl sulfide, acetaldehyde, methanol, butadiene, methanethiol, ethyl acetate, butyl acetate, styrene, 2-methyl heptane, 2,2,4,6,6-pentamethyl heptane, 1-heptene, decane, undecane, propyl benzene, methyl cyclopropane, 1-methyl-2-pentyl cyclopropane, trichlorofluoromethane, benzene, 1,2,4-trimethyl benzene, 3-methyl octane, hexane, heptane, 1,4- dimethyl benzene, 2,4-dimethyl heptane, cyclohexane, or a combination thereof.
Aurongzeb does not explicitly disclose the electro-mechanical system sensors as nano electro-mechanical system sensors having both electronic and mechanical components that function on the nanoscale.
Rather, Aurongzeb discloses micro electro-mechanical system sensors (MEMS) (Figs. 1-2, MOS gas sensor, #242; pressure sensor, #244; See Detailed Description, [0050-0058]).
Reddy, in a similar field of endeavor, discloses a system for collecting informatic data (Figs.1-2 generally) comprising an array of nano electro-mechanical system sensors having both electronic and mechanical components that function on the nanoscale. (Detailed Description, [0050-0054], “In at least one embodiment, ketones, such as acetone, can be detected and/or identified by a sensor module, such as 108, which can include a sensor, or sensor component, such as 200 shown in FIG. 2, with one or more nanomaterials. Any type of nanomaterials for detecting ketones, such as acetone, can be used ding nanocomposites, nanotubules, or nanofibers. The sensor component 200 shown in FIG. 2 can include a working electrode 202, a counter electrode 204, and a reference electrode 206. When the sensor component 200 is assembled with other components to form a sensor 208, the counter electrode 204 can be made from a conducting paint which can be carbon paint. The working electrode 202 can be made from a conducting paint and can be connected to a bed of carbon nanofibers or carbon nanofibers with multi-walled carbon nanotubules. The reference electrode 206 can be made from a conducting paint such as a silver (Ag) material. An electrode cross section 210 can be fabricated from a bed of carbon nanofibers 212, which can be embedded with sensing enhancing nanoparticles. Generally, the signal response generated by a sensor component, such as 200, may be dependent on the electrochemical characteristics of molecules of the substance that are either oxidized or reduced at the working electrode, such as 202, with the opposite occurring at the counter electrode, such as 204.“; See also Detailed Description, [0047][0121-0123], “In at least one embodiment, a sensor module, such as 108, can be an electronic gas sensing device ranging from about 10-100 nanometers to a few micrometers in dimension, and could be installed in any handheld electronic and/or mobile communication device. For example, a sensor module, such as 108, could be integrated in a smart watch or cellular phone.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the sensor system from Aurongzeb from a micro electro-mechanical system to a nano electro-mechanical system having both electronic and mechanical components that function on the nanoscale as taught in Reddy. The motivation to make this modification is based on simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results, the predictable results being obtaining health sensing at a nano particle level rather than a micro level (See inter alia, Reddy, Detailed Description, [0046][0050-0060]) . The fact that Aurongzeb and Reddy also disclose very similar types of computing systems dealing with detecting the health conditions of the user through gas sensing, makes this modification more easily implemented. It is also noted that Reddy discloses micro electro-mechanical system sensors (Reddy, Detailed Description, [0046]), which makes this substitution from micro to nano more easily implemented and known in the art.
Regarding claim 2, Aurongzeb in combination with Reddy discloses wherein the one or more processors, individually or in combination, are configured to cause the computing device to:
prompt the subject to provide a breath input to the array of nano electro-mechanical system sensors (Aurongzeb, Detailed Description, [0032-0058], “The biofeedback headset 134 described herein may be used by a user to provide input to the information handling system 100 in the form of sounds received at a microphone 140 of the biofeedback headset 134. Additional types of input may also be provided to the information handling system 100 through the use of a metal oxide semiconductor (MOS) gas sensor 142 and a pressure sensor 144. In an embodiment, the pressure sensor 144 may measure the rate of breathing by the user as well as the magnitude of breath produced by the user. In an embodiment…As the user breathes on or near the pressure sensor 144, the air pressure will change and this detected difference in air pressure may be sensed and provided to the biofeedback headset controller 136. The biofeedback headset controller 136 may pass the signals detected by the pressure sensor 144 to the processor 102 and biofeedback headset machine learning system 146 of the information handling system 100. Again, these signals may be used as input to the biofeedback headset machine learning system 146 in order to provide the user with any type of biofeedback warnings or status messages at the video/graphic display device 110...In an embodiment, the biofeedback headset 134 may include a microphone 140. In an embodiment, the microphone 140 may be placed on a mouthpiece that is placed close to the user's mouth. In this embodiment, the microphone 140 is used to detect the user's voice and convert the audio into signals to be received at the biofeedback headset controller 136. Again, the biofeedback headset controller 136 may send the signals from the microphone 140 to the processor 102 of the information handling system 100. In an embodiment, the signals from the microphone 140 may be provided to the biofeedback headset machine learning system 146 as input.”); and
control a game based on the breath input, the one or more biomarkers, or the health status (Detailed Description, [0032-0058], “The MOS gas sensor 142 may detect whether the user is in good or bad conditions that could affect the user's ability to engage in game play or could dramatically affect the user's health…Other physiological effects on the user as the user may engage in game play at the information handling system 100 may be presented to the user based on the data retrieved from the MOS gas sensor 142. These other physiological effects are contemplated by the present description. In an embodiment, the biofeedback headset machine learning system 146 may be used to also provide these different and additional warnings related to any changes that the user may have experienced based on the data provided by the biofeedback headset controller 136 and the sensors therein.”).
Thus, it would have remained obvious to have combined Aurongzeb and Reddy in the manner as described in claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, Aurongzeb discloses wherein the one or more processors, individually or in combination, are configured to cause the computing device to:
detect a medical condition of the subject based on the health status (Detailed Description, [0050-0058], “Each of these physiological changes in the user's breathing pattern may indicate that the user risks, for example, hypoxia or hyperventilation. As these conditions could lead to other, relatively more serious conditions such as anxiety, asthma, lung infections, or heart failure, the user may be provided with certain messages on the video/graphic display device 110 to pace their breathing, for example during or after game play.”).
Thus, it would have remained obvious to have combined Aurongzeb and Reddy in the manner as described in claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, Aurongzeb discloses wherein the one or more processors, individually or in combination, are configured to cause the computing device to:
control access to a feature of the article or the computing device based on the health status (Detailed Description, [0040-0058], “Each of these physiological changes in the user's breathing pattern may indicate that the user risks, for example, hypoxia or hyperventilation. As these conditions could lead to other, relatively more serious conditions such as anxiety, asthma, lung infections, or heart failure, the user may be provided with certain messages on the video/graphic display device 110 to pace their breathing, for example during or after game play. Additionally, a paced breathing state may increase the user's ability to accomplish goals during game play thereby increasing the ability of the user to be more effective. Because a more regulated breathing rate leads to better attentional and cognitive performances, the user is provided with the messages on the video/graphic display device 110 in order to increase their gaming abilities. Additionally, the messages presented to the user on the video/graphic display device 110 may relax the user and may more effectively engage the user in the game play while increasing the accessibility of any given user to increase their game play efficiency.”; message affects access of the game).
Thus, it would have remained obvious to have combined Aurongzeb and Reddy in the manner as described in claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, Aurongzeb in combination with Reddy discloses wherein the gas source is a mouth or nose of the subject (Summary, [0019-0021]), and wherein the article is a microphone located on a robotic arm configured to move the microphone and array of nano electro-mechanical system sensors within the range (Aurongzeb, Figs. 5-6, Detailed Description, [0087], “In an embodiment, the mouthpiece 562, 662, MEMS air tube 560, 660, and microphone signal tube 558, 658 may be adjustable by the user. This may be done, for example, with the use of any hinging or rotation devices that allow the user to move these components such that the mouthpiece 562, 662 is placed at the user's mouth during use of the biofeedback headset 534, 634”).
Thus, it would have remained obvious to have combined Aurongzeb and Reddy in the manner as described in claim 1.
Regarding claim 6, Aurongzeb discloses wherein the subject is a group of human subjects and the health status is applicable to the group (Summary, [0018], “In any gaming scenario and especially in online cooperative gaming scenarios, this audio input from the user may be provided to other users who are also engaged in the same gaming environment at, for example, remote locations from the first user. The microphone specifically may relay audio data to the other users in order to coordinate actions in the gaming environment during, for example, a multiplayer online gaming environment.”; Examiner’s note—the health condition of one player is applicable to group in multiplayer gaming environment).
Thus, it would have remained obvious to have combined Aurongzeb and Reddy in the manner as described in claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, Aurongzeb discloses wherein the article is an article of clothing (See Abstract and Summary, generally, on wearable head band of Fig. 3; since a head band is a human wearable, it reads upon an article of clothing).
Thus, it would have remained obvious to have combined Aurongzeb and Reddy in the manner as described in claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, Aurongzeb discloses wherein the gas source is a mouth or nose of the subject (Summary, [0019-0021])
Thus, it would have remained obvious to have combined Aurongzeb and Reddy in the manner as described in claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, Aurongzeb in combination with Reddy discloses or suggests every element of claim 1 and Aurongzeb discloses wherein the article is selected from a headset (See Aurongzeb, Fig. 3, Summary and Abstract), a helmet, a hat, and a mask.
Thus, it would have remained obvious to have combined Aurongzeb and Reddy in the manner as described in claim 1.
Regarding claim 13, Aurongzeb discloses the system further comprising:
a first wireless modem located on the article and coupled with the preprocessor and configured to transmit the one or more indicators (Summary, [0021], “The data signals from the MEMS capacitive pressure sensor, microphone, and MEMS MOS gas sensor may be presented to a controller on the biofeedback headset. This controller may relay these data signals, via a wired or wireless connection for example, to a controller executing a biofeedback headset machine learning system”; See also Detailed Description, [0050-0051]); and
a second wireless modem coupled to the one or more processors and configured to receive the one or more indicators (See Summary, [0021] and See Figs. 1-2, network interface device, #120; Detailed Description, [0040-0054], “Further, the instructions 124 may be transmitted or received over the network 126 via the network interface device 120 or wireless adapter.”).
Thus, it would have remained obvious to have combined Aurongzeb and Reddy in the manner as described in claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, Aurongzeb discloses wherein the health status is one of: a stress level, an anxiety level, inflammation level, glucose level, or toxicity level (Detailed Description, [0050-0058], “Each of these physiological changes in the user's breathing pattern may indicate that the user risks, for example, hypoxia or hyperventilation. As these conditions could lead to other, relatively more serious conditions such as anxiety, asthma, lung infections, or heart failure, the user may be provided with certain messages on the video/graphic display device 110 to pace their breathing, for example during or after game play.”).
Thus, it would have remained obvious to have combined Aurongzeb and Reddy in the manner as described in claim 1.
Regarding claim 15, Aurongzeb discloses wherein the subject is a human (See generally, Summary and Detailed Description, [0098]).
Thus, it would have remained obvious to have combined Aurongzeb and Reddy in the manner as described in claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, Aurongzeb discloses a method of collecting bioinformatic data (Figs. 1-11, generally), comprising:
positioning an array of electro-mechanical system sensors arranged on an article within a range of a gas source of a subject, each electro-mechanical system sensor configured to generate a signal based on a concentration of one or more gaseous biomarkers within a gas emitted from the subject (Figs. 1-2, MOS gas sensor, #242; pressure sensor, #244; See Detailed Description, [0050-0058], “In an embodiment, the biofeedback headset 134 may include a pressure sensor 144. The pressure sensor 144 may be formed on the biofeedback headset printed circuit board (PCB) 138 and operatively coupled to a biofeedback headset controller 136 placed within the biofeedback headset 134. In an embodiment, the pressure sensor may include a microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) capacitive pressure sensor. Although the present specification describes the pressure sensor 144 as a MEMS capacitive pressure sensor...an embodiment, the pressure sensor 144 may be placed within a mouthpiece in order to place the pressure sensor 144 at a location near the user's mouth. This will allow the pressure sensor 144 to detect a change in pressure above a base or threshold air pressure. In an embodiment, the base or threshold air pressure may be maintained through the use of a micro-fan fluidically coupled to the pressure sensor 144 in order to set a base air pressure at the pressure sensor 144. As the user breathes on or near the pressure sensor 144, the air pressure will change and this detected difference in air pressure may be sensed and provided to the biofeedback headset controller 136. The biofeedback headset controller 136 may pass the signals detected by the pressure sensor 144 to the processor 102 and biofeedback headset machine learning system 146 of the information handling system 100”; See also Detailed Description, [0066-0068], “In order to accomplish this, the biofeedback headset 234 includes a MOS gas sensor 242 in an embodiment. The MOS gas sensor 242 may be formed on a biofeedback headset printed circuit board (PCB) 238 and operatively coupled to a biofeedback headset controller 236 placed within the biofeedback headset 234. In an embodiment, the MOS gas sensor 242 is a gas sensor that includes a MEMS MOS gas sensor gas sensor to measure an amount of carbon dioxide (CO.sub.2) at the mouthpiece. In an embodiment, the MOS gas sensor 242 may alternatively or additionally measure the O.sub.2 composition of the air around the MOS gas sensor 242. During operation the MOS gas sensor 242 may be placed next to the user's mouth using, for example a mouthpiece.”);
generating one or more indicators based on the signal from each of a plurality of the electro-mechanical system sensors (Figs. 1-2, biofeedback headset controller, #136; Detailed Description, [0050-0058], “In an embodiment, the biofeedback headset 134 includes a MOS gas sensor 142. The MOS gas sensor 142 may be formed on a biofeedback headset printed circuit board (PCB) 138 and operatively coupled to a biofeedback headset controller 136 placed within the biofeedback headset 134... In an embodiment, the biofeedback headset machine learning system 146 may be used to also provide these different and additional warnings related to any changes that the user may have experienced based on the data provided by the biofeedback headset controller 136 and the sensors therein.... The pressure sensor 144 may be formed on the biofeedback headset printed circuit board (PCB) 138 and operatively coupled to a biofeedback headset controller 136 placed within the biofeedback headset 134. In an embodiment, the pressure sensor may include a microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) capacitive pressure sensor...As the user breathes on or near the pressure sensor 144, the air pressure will change and this detected difference in air pressure may be sensed and provided to the biofeedback headset controller 136.”);
applying the one or more indicators to a model to output a health status of the subject (Figs. 1-2, Detailed Description, [0050-0068], “The processor 102 may then execute a biofeedback headset machine learning system 146 and use the data received from the biofeedback headset controller 136 and MOS gas sensor 142 as input to generate, when necessary, any warnings or indications to the user at the video/graphic display device 110 that respiration characteristics need to be changed...The biofeedback headset controller 136 may pass the signals detected by the pressure sensor 144 to the processor 102 and biofeedback headset machine learning system 146 of the information handling system 100. Again, these signals may be used as input to the biofeedback headset machine learning system 146 in order to provide the user with any type of biofeedback warnings or status messages at the video/graphic display device 110.”),
wherein the one or more gaseous biomarkers comprise nitric oxide, ammonia, methanol, hydrogen, hydrogen sulfide, nitrogen dioxide, acetone, isoprene, carbon monoxide (Detailed Description, [0053]m “The MOS gas sensor 142 may detect whether the user is in good or bad conditions that could affect the user's ability to engage in game play or could dramatically affect the user's health. The present specification further contemplates that other types of gas besides or in addition to CO.sub.2 and/or O.sub.2 may be detected. Among these other types of gases may be volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as alcohol or carbon monoxide may be detected for example”),, methane, formaldehyde, dimethyl sulfide, acetaldehyde, methanol, butadiene, methanethiol, ethyl acetate, butyl acetate, styrene, 2-methyl heptane, 2,2,4,6,6-pentamethyl heptane, 1-heptene, decane, undecane, propyl benzene, methyl cyclopropane, 1-methyl-2-pentyl cyclopropane, trichlorofluoromethane, benzene, 1,2,4-trimethyl benzene, 3-methyl octane, hexane, heptane, 1,4- dimethyl benzene, 2,4-dimethyl heptane, cyclohexane, or a combination thereof.
Aurongzeb does not explicitly disclose the electro-mechanical system sensors as nano electro-mechanical system sensors having both electronic and mechanical components that function on the nanoscale.
Rather, Aurongzeb discloses micro electro-mechanical system sensors (MEMS) (Figs. 1-2, MOS gas sensor, #242; pressure sensor, #244; See Detailed Description, [0050-0058]).
Reddy, in a similar field of endeavor, discloses a system for collecting informatic data (Figs.1-2 generally) comprising an array of nano electro-mechanical system sensors having both electronic and mechanical components that function on the nanoscale. (Detailed Description, [0050-0054], “In at least one embodiment, ketones, such as acetone, can be detected and/or identified by a sensor module, such as 108, which can include a sensor, or sensor component, such as 200 shown in FIG. 2, with one or more nanomaterials. Any type of nanomaterials for detecting ketones, such as acetone, can be used ding nanocomposites, nanotubules, or nanofibers. The sensor component 200 shown in FIG. 2 can include a working electrode 202, a counter electrode 204, and a reference electrode 206. When the sensor component 200 is assembled with other components to form a sensor 208, the counter electrode 204 can be made from a conducting paint which can be carbon paint. The working electrode 202 can be made from a conducting paint and can be connected to a bed of carbon nanofibers or carbon nanofibers with multi-walled carbon nanotubules. The reference electrode 206 can be made from a conducting paint such as a silver (Ag) material. An electrode cross section 210 can be fabricated from a bed of carbon nanofibers 212, which can be embedded with sensing enhancing nanoparticles. Generally, the signal response generated by a sensor component, such as 200, may be dependent on the electrochemical characteristics of molecules of the substance that are either oxidized or reduced at the working electrode, such as 202, with the opposite occurring at the counter electrode, such as 204.“; See also Detailed Description, [0047][0121-0123], “In at least one embodiment, a sensor module, such as 108, can be an electronic gas sensing device ranging from about 10-100 nanometers to a few micrometers in dimension, and could be installed in any handheld electronic and/or mobile communication device. For example, a sensor module, such as 108, could be integrated in a smart watch or cellular phone.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the sensor system from Aurongzeb from a micro electro-mechanical system to a nano electro-mechanical system having both electronic and mechanical components that function on the nanoscale as taught in Reddy. The motivation to make this modification is based on simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results, the predictable results being obtaining health sensing at a nano particle level rather than a micro level (See inter alia, Reddy, Detailed Description, [0046][0050-0060]) . The fact that Aurongzeb and Reddy also disclose very similar types of computing systems dealing with detecting the health conditions of the user through gas sensing, makes this modification more easily implemented. It is also noted that Reddy discloses micro electro-mechanical system sensors (Reddy, Detailed Description, [0046]), which makes this substitution from micro to nano more easily implemented and known in the art.
Regarding claim 17, this is met by the rejection to claim 2 with the combination of Aurogzeb and Reddy.
Regarding claim 18, this is met by the rejection to claim 3 with the combination of Aurogzeb and Reddy.
Regarding claim 19, this is met by the rejection to claim 4 with the combination of Aurogzeb and Reddy.
Regarding claim 20, this is met by the rejection to claim 5 with the combination a of Aurogzeb and Reddy.
Claim(s) 7, 9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aurongzeb in view of Reddy, further in view of Nyberg et al., United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2016/0331235 A1.
Regarding claim 7, Aurongzeb in combination with Reddy discloses every element of claim 1 but do not explicitly disclose wherein the article is a glove, wherein the gas source is skin of the subject, and wherein the one or more gaseous biomarkers comprise ammonia.
However, Aurongzeb does disclose wherein the gas source is the breath of the subject (Summary, [0010-0020], inter alia).
Nyberg in a similar field of endeavor, discloses a system wherein the article is a glove (Detailed Description, [0137], “The present invention is also incorporated into enhanced protective wear such as enhanced helmets, gloves and footwear”), wherein the gas source is skin of the subject, and wherein the one or more gaseous biomarkers comprise ammonia (Detailed Description, [0082-0120], “Other analytes include oxygen, glucose, ammonium, and interleukins…. The preferred embodiment of the system includes an apparatus that intimately adheres to mammalian skin, more specifically to human skin. The sweat from the skin is moved into the apparatus for detection of sweat biomarkers and analytes.”)
It would have been obvious to have modified the system within Aurongzeb-Reddy wherein the article is a glove, wherein the gas source is skin of the subject, and wherein the one or more gaseous biomarkers comprise ammonia, as a substitution or an addition for the breath of the subject (as disclosed in Aurongzeb). The motivation to make this modification is to use a different or additional type of input device to detect contextual data in a different manner or as an additional data source (Nyberg, Detailed Description, [0120-128])). The fact that Nyberg discloses similar types of wearable devices as Aurongzeb to provide similar types of physiological data makes this combination more easily implemented.
Regarding claim 9, Aurongzeb in combination with Reddy and Nyberg discloses every element of claim 7, but do not explicitly disclose wherein the acceptable range is no more than about 5 cm.
However, Nyberg provides the suggestion of taking account the range of the actuator and communication device from the user’s skin, with preference of direct adherence (Nyberg, Detailed Description, [0120-0128]).
Aurongzeb also provides the suggestion of modifying the exact distance of the range of the sensor from the user (Figs. 5-6, Detailed Description, [0087], “In an embodiment, the mouthpiece 562, 662, MEMS air tube 560, 660, and microphone signal tube 558, 658 may be adjustable by the user. This may be done, for example, with the use of any hinging or rotation devices that allow the user to move these components such that the mouthpiece 562, 662 is placed at the user's mouth during use of the biofeedback headset 534, 634”).
It would have been obvious to have modified the acceptable range within the combination of Aurongzeb, Reddy and Nyberg to be provided to be as no more than about 5 cm. The motivation make this modification is to ensure the microphone or sensor is placed closed to the user’s gas source to provide reliable input but also can be adjusted through design choice or user preference (Aurongzeb, Detailed Description, [0057][0069][0087]).
Regarding claim 12, Aurongzeb in combination with Reddy discloses or suggests every element of claim 11, but do not explicitly disclose wherein the acceptable range is no more than about 30 cm.
However, Nyberg provides the suggestion of taking account the range of the actuator and communication device from the user’s skin, with preference of direct adherence (Nyberg, Detailed Description, [0120-0128]).
Aurongzeb also provides the suggestion of modifying the exact distance of the range of the sensor from the user (Figs. 5-6, Detailed Description, [0087], “In an embodiment, the mouthpiece 562, 662, MEMS air tube 560, 660, and microphone signal tube 558, 658 may be adjustable by the user. This may be done, for example, with the use of any hinging or rotation devices that allow the user to move these components such that the mouthpiece 562, 662 is placed at the user's mouth during use of the biofeedback headset 534, 634”).
It would have been obvious to have modified the acceptable range within the combination of Aurongzeb, Reddy with Nyberg to be provided to be as no more than about 30 cm. The motivation make this modification is to ensure the microphone or sensor is placed closed to the user’s mouth or gas source to provide reliable input but also can be adjusted through design choice or user preference (Aurongzeb, Detailed Description, [0057][0069][0087]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 KWIN XIE whose telephone number is (571)272-7812. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Temesghen Ghebretinsae can be reached at (571)272-3017. 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.
/KWIN XIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626