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 .
Claims 1-6,8-19 are pending. Claims 1-6,8-19 are rejected herein.
Amendment
In the amendment received 14 July 2025 the following occurred: claims 13-19 were newly added. Claim 7 was canceled. Claims 1,3,5,6,8-12 were amended.
Priority
This application claims priority to application JP 2021065170 and PCT/IB2022/053270 and so has a priority date equivalent to the effective filing date of 07 April 2021. Applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) was previously acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement received 01 July 2025 has been received and considered by the Examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
determining means
acquiring means
notifying means
judging means
alert determining means
acquiring means
Para. [0054] of the specification describes the determining, acquiring and notifying means as being a computer system. Figure 3 teaches that the means are software modules running on a generic processor. Para. [0047] of the specification teaches the processor loads a program from storage into the memory and executes a series of commands included in the program and as a result functions as a determining means, acquiring means, notifying means, judging means, proxy contacting means, alert threshold determining means, storing means, updating means and outputting means. The various means are interpreted to be software running on a generic processor. The necessary structure is considered disclosed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-6,8-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claims 1,3,11,12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
The claim recites related information processing systems and related information processing methods, which are within a statutory category (or are interpreted to be within a statutory category for subject matter eligibility analysis purposes).
Step 2A1
The limitations of (claim 1 being representative) […] determining a type of monitored information to monitor for a monitored user according to user attributes of the monitored user, wherein the determining […involves..], in response to the user attributes indicating that the monitored user is a over a predefined age, and that the type of monitored information includes information related to glaucoma and cataract; […] acquiring monitored information of the monitored user corresponding to the determined type, wherein the acquiring […involves…], in response to the type of monitored information including information related to glaucoma and cataract, acquiring at least one of images and video of eyes of the monitored user, and eye movements […]; and […] providing notification of acquired monitored user, and eye movement obtained from images and video of the eye; and […] providing notification of acquired monitored user monitored information and/or information for monitoring health according to the determined type a monitoring user associated with the monitored user, as drafted, is a process that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers certain methods of organizing human activity (i.e., managing personal behavior including following rules or instructions) but for recitation of generic computer components. The Examiner analyzed the abstract idea as certain methods of organizing human activity.
That is, other than reciting systems associated with the method consisting of a determining means, acquiring means, and notifying means, interpreted to be software running on a generic processor(s), the claimed invention amounts to managing personal behavior or interaction between people. For example, but for the systems associated with the method consisting of a determining means, acquiring means, and notifying means, this claim encompasses a person determining what type of monitored information to monitor, acquiring information from the monitored individual, and providing notification of acquired monitored user in the manner described in the identified abstract idea, supra. The Examiner notes that “certain method[s] of organizing human activity” includes a person’s interaction with a computer (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal behavior or interactions between people but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A2
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional element of determining means, acquiring means, and notifying means that implements the identified abstract idea. The systems associated with the method consisting of a determining means, acquiring means, and notifying means are not described by the applicant and is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., a generic server performing generic computer functions) such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a determining means, acquiring means, and notifying means, interpreted to be software running on a generic processor, to perform the noted steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept (“significantly more”).
Claims 2,4-6,8-10 are similarly rejected because they either further define/narrow the abstract idea and/or do not further limit the claim to a practical application or provide as inventive concept such that the claims are subject matter eligible even when considered individually or as an ordered combination. Claim(s) 2 merely describe(s) the notifying means provides notification of the determined type to the monitored user and requests this type of information of the monitored user and the acquiring means acquires the information sent according to this request. Claim 3 merely describes wherein the monitored information includes at least one of images and video of eyes of the monitored user, eye movement obtained from the images and video of the eyes, and interaction data indicating behavior of work where eyes are used, judging a health condition of the eyes of the monitored user, including the presence or absence of glaucoma and cataract, using the acquired monitored information including the images and video of the eyes of the monitored user based on judgment criteria; and notifying means to provide notification of the acquired monitored user. Claim 4 merely describes determining means for determining which type of monitored information to monitor for the monitored user according to user attributes of the monitored user corresponding to the determined type. Claim 5 merely describes wherein the judging means determine judgement criteria according to user attributes of the monitored user. Claim(s) 6 merely describe(s) providing a notification of one of various types of information. Claim 8 merely describes an alert threshold, acquiring time and/or frequency of viewing a digital device screen by the monitored user as monitored information, and judging means judges certain viewing conditions. Claim 9 merely describes user attributes are certain types of information. Claim 10 merely describes providing notification information related to user attributes of the monitored user or information related to user attributes of the monitoring user. Claim 11 merely describes a determination step of determining a type of monitored information to monitor for a monitored user according to user attributes of the monitored user and in response to the user attributes indicating that the monitored user is over a predefined age, that the type of monitored information includes information related to glaucoma and cataract; an acquiring step for acquiring monitored information of the monitored user corresponding to the determined type, wherein the acquiring step in response to the type of monitored information including information related to glaucoma and cataract, acquires at least one of images and video of eyes of the monitored user, and eye movements obtained from the images and video of the eyes; and a notifying step to provide notification of acquired monitored user monitored information and/or information for monitoring health according to the determined type a monitoring user associated with the monitored user. Claim 12 merely describes an acquiring step for acquiring monitored information of the monitored user, wherein the monitored information includes at least one of images and video of eyes of the monitored user, eye movement obtained from the images and video of the eyes, and interaction data indicating behavior of work where eyes are used; a judging step for judging a health condition of the eyes of the monitored user, including presence or absence of glaucoma and cataract, using the acquired monitored information including the images and video of the eyes of the monitored user based on judgement criteria; and a notifying step to provide notification of the acquired monitored user monitored information and/or information for monitoring health based on the judgment results to a monitoring user associated with the monitored user. Claim 13 merely describes the notifying step provides notification of the determined type to the monitored user and requests this type of information of the monitored user and the acquiring step acquires the information sent according to this request as monitored information. Claim 14 merely describes a determining step for determining which type of monitored information to monitor for the monitored user according to user attributes of the monitored user, wherein the acquiring step acquires monitored information of the monitored user corresponding to the determined type. Claim 15 merely describes wherein the judging step determines judgment criteria according to user attributes of the monitored user. Claim 16 merely describes information of the acquired monitored information of the monitored user formatted to enable submitting to a medical institution; information enabling monitoring user to communicate with a medical institution on behalf of the monitored user; or information of the monitored user and/or information for monitoring health of the determined type. Claim 17 merely describes an alert threshold determining step for determining time and/or frequency of viewing a digital device screen that is healthy according to user attributes of the monitored user and/or external factors, as an alert threshold, wherein the acquiring step acquires time and/or frequency of viewing a digital device screen by the monitored user as monitored information, and the judging step judges whether or not the time and/or frequency of the monitored user viewing a device exceeds the threshold. Claim 18 merely describes wherein user attributes are information expressing individual attributes of the monitored user and the monitoring user that is information related to health and living environment including age, sex, vision, presence or absence of vision correction, chronic illness, medical history, surgical history, allergies, place of residence, living environment, living with other family members and lifestyle. Claim 19 merely describes the notifying step further provides notification of information related to user attributes of the monitored user or information related to user attributes of the monitoring user.
The dependent claims list the same additional elements as the independent claims and were analyzed as were the additional elements in the independent claim. The dependent claims additionally recite the digital device screen. The digital device screen generally links the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. MPEP 2106.04(d)(I) and MPEP 2106.05(A) indicate that merely “generally linking” the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use cannot provide a practical application or significantly more.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1,2,11,13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as being anticipated by US 2022/0104703 A1 (hereafter Lambrou).
Regarding Claim 1
Lambrou teaches:
An information processing system, comprising: determining means for determining a type of monitored user according to user attributes of the monitored user, wherein the determining means is configured to determine, in response to the user attributes indicating that the monitored user is over a predefined age, that the type of monitored information includes information related to glaucoma and cataract; [Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] in some aspects, the ophthalmic testing system will prompt the user to input additional information about the user before the test is performed. The ophthalmic testing system is the information processing system comprising: determining means. Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] in some implementations, this information will help determine what tests the user may need to take. Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] in some embodiments, the system will simply recommend the specific tests the user may need to be screened for and it may be up to the user’s discretion whether they take the recommended tests or not. Collectively, this teaches determining means for determining a type of monitored user according to user attributes of the monitored user. Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] for example, if a user inputs that they have diabetes, the OTS 100 will suggest screening for diabetic retinopathy, or if a user inputs that they are older than 65, the OTS 100 will suggest screening for glaucoma. Lambrou teaches at para. [0038] the remote server will provide additional recommendations based upon observed data. Lambrou teaches for example, if a significant proportion of ophthalmic testing systems in a geographic region showed that people over the age of 60 were more likely to have glaucoma than people over the age of 60 in other regions, then the remove server may prompt ophthalmic testing to screen for glaucoma. This teaches in response to the user attributes indicating that the monitored user is over a predefined age, that the type of monitored information includes information related to glaucoma. Collectively, this teaches wherein the determining means is configured to determine, in response to the user attributes indicating that the monitored user is over a predefined age, that the type of monitored information includes information related to glaucoma and cataract (see teaching immediately below for cataract). Lambrou teaches at para. [0034] ophthalmic testing system (OTS) as used herein refers to a system for screening for ophthalmic disorders, such as age-related macular degeneration (AMD), glaucoma, cataract, diabetic retinopathy, and system disorders as non-limiting examples. This teaching reinforces that the type of monitored information includes information related to glaucoma and cataract.]
acquiring means for acquiring monitored information of the monitored user corresponding to the determined type, [Lambrou teaches at Figure 4B a camera (Item 431) that is scanning a patient’s eye. Lambrou teaches at para. [0034] in some embodiments, an OTS will capture ophthalmic images of a user’s eye, which will be analyzed using artificial intelligence and machine learning to screen for predefined ophthalmic diseases. The images are interpreted to correspond to the determined type taught by Lambrou in the first art response above.]
wherein the acquiring means is configured to, in response to the type of monitored information including information related to glaucoma and cataract, acquire at least one of images and video of eyes of the monitored user corresponding to the determined type, [Lambrou teaches at para. [0034] in some embodiments, an OTS will capture ophthalmic images of a user’s eye, which will be analyzed using artificial intelligence and machine learning to screen for predefined ophthalmic diseases. The images are interpreted to correspond to the determined type of screen for the predefined ophthalmic diseases.]
and notifying means to provide notification of acquired monitored user monitored information and/or information for monitoring health according to the determined type to a monitoring user associated with the monitored user. [Lambrou teaches displaying a diagnosis on a touchscreen. This is interpreted as a notifying means to provide notification of acquired monitored user monitored information and/or information for monitoring health according to the determined type to a monitoring user associated with the monitored user. The diagnosis is interpreted here as the “determined type.” The viewer of the diagnosis is interpreted here as monitoring user associated with the monitored user.]
Regarding Claim 11
Due to its similarity to Claim 1, Claim 11 is similarly analyzed and rejected in a manner consistent with the rejection of Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 2
Lambrou teaches the information processing system according to claim 1. Lambrou further teaches:
wherein the notifying means provides notification of the determined type to the monitored user and requests this type of information of the monitored user [Lambrou teaches displaying a diagnosis on a touchscreen. This is interpreted as a notifying means to provide notification of acquired monitored user monitored information and/or information for monitoring health according to the determined type to a monitoring user associated with the monitored user. The diagnosis is interpreted as the “determined type.” The viewer of the diagnosis is interpreted here as the monitoring user associated with the monitored user. Note that any user (monitored and monitoring) can view the screen.]
and the acquiring means acquires the information sent according to this request as monitored information. [Lambrou teaches at para. [0041] ophthalmic testing system will further include sensors allowing for the detection of other data relating to the patient. Lambrou teaches at para. [0041] this data will be useful for correlating with data obtained from the patient’s retinal scans. Lambrou teaches at para. [0041] for example, ophthalmic testing system will include a global positioning system (GPS) to allow for geographic coordinates to be appended to the patient’s retinal scan. Lambrou teaches at para. [0041] additionally, ophthalmic testing system will include a scale, a height measurement, a pulse oximeter, a pulse reader, a blood pressure cuff, or any other sensors descriptive of a health condition of the patient.]
Regarding Claim 13
Lambrou teaches the information processing method according to claim 1. Lambrou further teaches:
wherein the notifying step provides notification of the determined type to the monitored user and requests this type of information of the monitored user and the acquiring step acquires the information sent according to this request as monitored information. [Lambrou teaches displaying a diagnosis on a touchscreen. The viewer of the diagnosis is interpreted here as the monitored user. Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] in some aspects, the ophthalmic testing system will prompt the user to input additional information about the user before the test is performed. This teaches requesting this type of information of the monitored user. Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] in some implementations, this information will help determine what tests the user may need to take. This is interpreted as wherein the notifying step provides notification of the determined type to the monitored user and requests this type of information of the monitored user and the acquiring step acquires the information sent according to this request as monitored information.]
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 3-4,6,9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0104703 A1 (hereafter Lambrou) in view of Hashemi (Towards Safer Roads: A Deep Learning-Base Multimodal Fatigue Monitoring System).
Regarding Claim 3
Lambrou teaches:
[…]
judging means for judging a health condition of the eyes of the monitored user, including presence or absence of glaucoma and cataract, [Lambrou teaches at para. [0034] in some embodiments, an OTS will capture ophthalmic images of a user’s eye, which will be analyzed using artificial intelligence and machine learning to screen for predefined ophthalmic diseases. Lambrou teaches at para. [0034] ophthalmic testing system (OTS) as used herein refers to a system for screening for ophthalmic disorders, such as age-related macular degeneration (AMD), glaucoma, cataract, diabetic retinopathy, and system disorders as non-limiting examples. This teaching establishes testing for the presence or absence of glaucoma and cataract.]
[…]
and notifying means to provide notification of the acquired monitored user monitored information and/or information for monitoring health based on the judgement results to a monitoring user associated with the monitored user. [Lambrou teaches displaying a diagnosis on a touchscreen. This is interpreted as a notifying means to provide notification of acquired monitored user monitored information and/or information for monitoring health according to the determined type to a monitoring user associated with the monitored user. The diagnosis is interpreted as the “determined type.” The viewer of the diagnosis is interpreted here as monitoring user associated with the monitored user.]
Lambrou may not explicitly teach:
An information processing system, comprising: acquiring means for acquiring monitored information of the monitored user, wherein the monitored information includes at least one of images and video of eyes of the monitored user, eye movement obtained from the images and video of the eyes, and interaction data indicating behavior of work where eyes are used;
[…]
using the acquired monitored information including the images and video of the eyes of the monitored user based on judgement criteria;
[…].
Hashemi teaches:
An information processing system, comprising: acquiring means for acquiring monitored information of the monitored user, wherein the monitored information includes at least one of images and video of eyes of the monitored user, eye movement obtained from the images and video of the eyes, and interaction data indicating behavior of work where eyes are used; [Hashemi teaches at the Abstract proposing a holistic IoT-based multimodal technique to monitor driver fatigue (interpreted to be the health condition of the eyes) by exploiting the facial and physiological information of the driver and states that a novel deep neural network is designed to classify the eye and mouth states. Hashemi teaches at pg. 2 a preprocessing unit would be utilized in the edge to process and sample the video stream with 10 frames per second rate.]
[…]
using the acquired monitored information including the images and video of the eyes of the monitored user based on judgement criteria; [Hashemi teaches at the Abstract proposing a holistic IoT-based multimodal technique to monitor driver fatigue (interpreted to be the health condition of the eyes) by exploiting the facial and physiological information of the driver and states that a novel deep neural network is designed to classify the eye and mouth states. Hashemi teaches at pg. 2 a preprocessing unit would be utilized in the edge to process and sample the video stream with 10 frames per second rate.]
[…].
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare, at the time of filing, to modify to the methods and apparatus for screening for maladies by retinal scan of Lambrou to the deep learning-based multimodal fatigue monitoring system of Hashemi with the motivation of decreasing traffic accident, which according to the World Health Organization, road traffic accidents are one of the leading causes of death in the world (Hashemi at pg. 1 at the Introduction).
Regarding Claim 4
Lambrou/Hashemi teaches the information processing system according to claim 3. Lambrou/Hashemi further teach:
determining means for determining which type of monitored information to monitor for the monitored user according to user attributes of the monitored user, [Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] in some aspects, the ophthalmic testing system will prompt the user to input additional information about the user before the test is performed. Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] in some implementations, this information will help determine what tests the user may need to take. Collectively, this teaches determining means for determining which type of monitored information to monitor for the monitored user according to user attributes of the monitored user.]
wherein the acquiring means acquires monitored information of the monitored user corresponding to the determined type. [Lambrou teaches at para. [0041] ophthalmic testing system will further include sensors allowing for the detection of other data relating to the patient. This teaches acquiring means acquires monitored information of the monitored user corresponding to the determined type (taught immediately below). Lambrou teaches at para. [0041] this data will be useful for correlating with data obtained from the patient’s retinal scans. Lambrou teaches at para. [0041] for example, ophthalmic testing system will include a global positioning system (GPS) to allow for geographic coordinates to be appended to the patient’s retinal scan. Lambrou teaches at para. [0041] additionally, ophthalmic testing system will include a scale, a height measurement, a pulse oximeter, a pulse reader, a blood pressure cuff, or any other sensors descriptive of a health condition of the patient.]
Regarding Claim 6
Lambrou/Hashemi teaches the information processing system according to any one of claims 3. Lambrou/Hashemi further teach:
wherein the notifying means provides notification of at least one of: information of the acquired monitored information of the monitored user formatted to enable submitting to a medical institution; information enabling the monitoring user to communicate with a medical institution on behalf of the monitored user; or information related to a diagnosis or treatment regarding health condition judged to be poor, abnormal, or to have deteriorated based on judgment criteria or to the medical institution, as information including acquired monitored information of the monitored user and/or information for monitoring health of the determined type. [Lambrou teaches at para. [0032] in some embodiments, an OTS will process and analyze the ophthalmic images and send them to a user’s doctors and healthcare facilities they will have provided. Lambrou teaches at para. [0032] in some implementations, the user will receive instant results from an OTS via a text message or email that the user has provided. Lambrou teaches at para. [0039] in some implementations, the ophthalmic testing system will require the user to enter information protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) such as, by way of non-limiting example, name, birthday, and insurance. This teaches wherein the notifying means provides notification of at least one of: information acquired monitored information of the monitored user formatted to enable submitting to a medical institution.]
Regarding Claim 9
Lambrou/Hashemi teaches the information processing system according to any one of claims 4 Lambrou/Hashemi further teach:
wherein user attributes are information expressing individual attributes of the monitored user and the monitoring user that is information related to health and living environment including age, sex, vision, presence or absence of vision correction, chronic illness, medical history, surgical history, allergies, place of residence, living environment, living with other family members, and lifestyle. [Lambrou teaches at para. [0055] for example a scan will include data such as the patient’s age, sex, weight, height, medical history, or geographic location. This is information expressing individual attributes of the monitored user and the monitoring user that is information related to health and living including age, sex, vision, presence or absence of vision correction, chronic illness, medical history, surgical history, allergies, place of residence, living environment, living with other family members, and lifestyle.]
Regarding Claim 10
Lambrou/Hashemi teaches the information processing system according to any one of claims 4. Lambrou/Hashemi further teaches:
wherein the notifying means provides notification of information including acquired monitored information of the monitored user and/or information for monitoring health of the determined type, or information including information related to user attributes of the monitored user or information related to user attributes of the monitoring user. [Lambrou teaches at para. [0055] for example a scan will include data such as the patient’s age, sex, weight, height, medical history, or geographic location. This is information expressing individual attributes of the monitored user and the monitoring user that is information related to user attributes of the monitored user.]
Claim(s) 12, 14-16, and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pujari (Clinically Useful Smartphone Ophthalmic Imaging Techniques) in view of US 2022/0104703 A1 (hereafter Lambrou).
Regarding Claim 12
Pujari teaches:
An information processing method, comprising: an acquiring step for acquiring monitored information of the monitored user, wherein the monitored information includes at least one of images and video of eyes of the monitored user, eye movements obtained from the images and video of the eyes, and interaction data indicating behavior of work where eyes are used; [Pujari teaches at pg. 280 that in many of their previous observations, they had used an iPhone 7 clipped with macro lens (x10 magnification as per manufactures details) such that it aligned long the smartphone camera. Pujari teaches at pg. 280 this was used in a standard slit lamp setup, where the light source (Diffuse, slight, or cobalt blue light) was projected onto the anterior segment structure of interest, and then the lens-clipped smartphone was slowly advanced towards the subjects eye. Pujari teaches at pg. 280 that at a distance of 3 to 5 cm from the ocular surface, a fine focus of the area of interest was obtained using the auto focus option. Pujari teaches at pg. 280 that multiple pictures, magnified or otherwise, and/or video recordings were obtained. Pujari collectively teaches an information processing method, comprising: an acquiring step for acquiring monitored information of the monitored user, wherein the monitored information includes at least one of images and video of eyes of the monitored user.]
a judging step for judging a health condition of the eyes of the monitored user, including presence or absence of glaucoma and cataract, using the acquired monitored information including the images and video of the eyes of the monitored user based on judgement criteria; [Pujari teaches at pg. 280 multiple pictures, magnified or otherwise, and/or video recordings were obtained (Video 1, Fig. 1). Pujari teaches at Figure 1 smartphone macro lens acquired anterior segment image. Pujari teaches at pg. 282 glaucoma screening will also be performed using a smartphone coupled with external attachments to improve glaucoma detection at the community level. The glaucoma screening teaches the presence or absence of glaucoma. Pujari teaches at pg. 281 implantable collamer lens (ICL) vault predicts the possibility of subsequent cataract formation and other complications; therefore, its measurement is deemed essential in the post-operative period. These last teachings are included to demonstrate that testing for cataracts. Collectively, Pujari teaches a judging step for judging a health condition of the eyes of the monitored user, including presence or absence of glaucoma and cataract, using the acquired monitored information including the images and video of the eyes of the monitored user based on judgement criteria. The judgment criteria is interpreted as measurement of ICL vault.]
Pujari may not explicitly teach:
and a notifying step to provide notification of the acquired monitored user monitored information and/or information for monitoring health based on the judgement results to a monitoring user associated with the monitored user.
Lambrou teaches:
and a notifying step to provide notification of the acquired monitored user monitored information and/or information for monitoring health based on the judgement results to a monitoring user associated with the monitored user. [Lambrou teaches displaying a diagnosis on a touchscreen. This is interpreted as a notifying step to provide notification of the acquired monitored user monitored information and/or information for monitoring health based on the judgement results to a monitoring user associated with the monitored user. The viewer of the diagnosis is interpreted here as monitoring user associated with the monitored user. The diagnosis is interpreted as information for monitoring health based on the judgement results.]
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare, at the time of filing, to modify to the clinically useful smartphone ophthalmic imaging techniques of Pujari methods and apparatus for screening for maladies by retinal scan of Lambrou with the motivation of offering a convenient eye exam, offering easy physical accessibility that is low or no cost, has the potential to save sight and lives (Lambrou at para. [0005]).
Regarding Claim 14
Pujari/Lambrou teaches the information processing method of claim 12. Pujari/Lambrou further teach:
further comprising: a determining step for determining which type of monitored information to monitor for the monitored user according to user attributes of the monitored user, [Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] in some aspects, the ophthalmic testing system will prompt the user to input additional information about the user before the test is performed. Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] in some implementations, this information will help determine what tests the user may need to take. Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] in some embodiments, the system will simply recommend the specific tests the user may need to be screened for and it may be up to the user’s discretion whether they take the recommended tests or not.]
wherein the acquiring step acquires monitored information of the monitored user corresponding to the determined type. [Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] in some aspects, the ophthalmic testing system will prompt the user to input additional information about the user before the test is performed. Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] in some implementations, this information will help determine what tests the user may need to take. These teaching encompass determining the type. Lambrou teaches at para. [0084] in some embodiments, test instructions will be transmitted, such as guidance to effectively acquire test data, information about the screening process, or how to disinfect the area, as non-limiting examples. Collectively, this teaches acquiring step acquires monitored information of the monitored user corresponding to the determined type.]
Regarding Claim 15
Pujari/Lambrou teaches the information processing method of claim 14. Pujari/Lambrou further teach:
wherein the judging step determines judgement criteria according to user attributes of the monitored user. [Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] in some aspects, the ophthalmic testing system will prompt the user to input additional information about the user before the test is performed. The entered information is the user attributes of the monitored user. Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] in some implementations, this information will help determine what tests the user may need to take. Lambrou teaches at para. [0037] in some embodiments, the system will simply recommend the specific tests the user may need to be screened for and it may be up to the user’s discretion whether they take the recommended tests or not. Lambrou teaches at para. [0054] in some aspects, the AI of the system will then generate specific tags for each image based on their information and possible classification of health issues, as shown in 340. Lambrou teaches at para. [0054] in some implementations, an algorithm will generate unique tags for each image based on various different non-limiting examples that help classify the image. Collectively, this teaches wherein the judging step determines judgement criteria according to user attributes of the monitored user.]
Regarding Claim 16
Pujari/Lambrou teach the information processing method of claim 12. Pujari/Lambrou further teach:
wherein the notifying step provides notification of at least one of: information of the acquired monitored information of the monitored user formatted to enable submitting to a medical institution; information enabling the monitoring user to communicate with a medical institution on behalf of the monitored user; or information related to a diagnosis or treatment regarding health condition judged to be poor, abnormal, or to have deteriorated based on judgement criteria or to the medical institution, as information including acquired monitored information of the monitored user and/or information for monitoring health of the determined type. [Lambrou teaches at para. [0039] the ophthalmic testing system 100 will require the user to enter information protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) such as, by way of non-limiting example, name, birthday, and insurance. Lambrou teaches at para. [0032] in some embodiments, an OTS will process and analyze the ophthalmic images and send them to a user’s doctors and healthcare facilities they may have provided. This teaches the notifying step provides notification of at least one of: information of the acquired monitored information of the monitored user formatted to enable submitting to a medical institution. HIPAA is the format to enable submission to a medical institution. ]
Regarding Claim 18
Pujari/Lambrou teach the information processing method of claim 14. Pujari/Lambrou further teach:
wherein user attributes are information expressing individual attributes of the monitored user and the monitoring user that is information related to health and living environment including age, sex, vision, presence or absence of vision correction, chronic illness, medical history, surgical history, allergies, place of residence, living environment, living with other family members, and lifestyle. [Lambrou teaches at para. [0055] for example a scan will include data such as the patient’s age, sex, weight, height, medical history, or geographic location. This is information expressing individual attributes of the monitored user and the monitoring user that is information related to health and living including age, sex, vision, presence or absence of vision correction, chronic illness, medical history, surgical history, allergies, place of residence, living environment, living with other family members, and lifestyle.]
Regarding Claim 19
Pujari/Lambrou teach the information processing method of claim 14. Pujari/Lambrou further teach:
wherein the notifying step further provides notification of information related to user attributes of the monitored user or information related to user attributes of the monitoring user. [Lambrou teaches displaying a diagnosis on a touchscreen. The diagnosis is interpreted as information related to user attributes of the monitored user.]
Claim(s) 8 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0104703 A1 (hereafter Lambrou) in view of Hashemi (Towards Safer Roads: A Deep Learning-Base Multimodal Fatigue Monitoring System) in view of US 2022/00354489 (Gilboa-Solomon).
Regarding Claim 8
Lambrou/Hashemi teach the information processing system according to claim 3. Lambrou/Hashemi may not explicitly teach:
further comprising: an alert threshold determining means for determining time and/or frequency of viewing a digital device screen that is healthy according to user attributes of the monitored user and/or external factors, as an alert threshold, wherein the acquiring means acquires time and/or frequency of viewing a digital device screen by the monitored user as monitored information, and the judging means judges whether or not the time and/or frequency of the monitored user viewing a digital device screen exceeds the threshold.
Gilboa-Soloman teaches:
further comprising: an alert threshold determining means for determining time and/or frequency of viewing a digital device screen that is healthy according to user attributes of the monitored user and/or external factors, as an alert threshold, wherein the acquiring means acquires time and/or frequency of viewing a digital device screen by the monitored user as monitored information, and the judging means judges whether or not the time and/or frequency of the monitored user viewing a digital device screen exceeds the threshold. [Gilboa-Solomon teaches at the Abstract a method for monitoring interaction with 3D medical images, comprising: dividing the 3D image into a sequence of a 2D images, arranging the sequence into slabs each including at least one 2D image, computing, for each respective slab, a minimal amount of viewing time a user is predicted to spend viewing the respective slab, monitoring while the 3D medical image is presented on a display, an amount of time a user actually spent viewing portions of the 3D medical image corresponding to each of the of slab, in response to the amount of time spent viewing a certain portion of the 3D medical image being less than the computer minimal amount of viewing time of a certain slab corresponding to the certain portion, generating instructions for implementation by a user interface indicative of the amount of time spent being less than the computed minimal amount of time. Gilboa-Soloman teaches at para. [0031] exemplary actions include generating instructions for implementation by a user interface indicative of the amount of time spent being less than the computed minimal amount of time, for example, presenting the 2D images of the certain slab on the display for additional viewing, and/or generating alerts to the user. Note that the exemplary actions are here to interpreted to be healthy actions and that the Gilboa-Soloman teaching at para. [0031] includes a description of a threshold.]
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare, at the time of filing, to modify to the methods and apparatus for screening for maladies by retinal scan of Lambrou to the deep learning-based multimodal fatigue monitoring system of Hashemi to the machine learning methods for monitoring a user’s interaction with 3D medical images of Gilboa