DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-8 and 10-36 are pending.
Claim 9 is cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that “nowhere does Aimone teach or disclose a linear editor, a timeline-based playback interface, or any structure resembling a digital audio workstation or linear editor in which multiple previously recorded data streams may be independently selected, aligned on a common timeline in synchronization, and replayed under user control. More specifically, Aimone does not teach or disclose a playback interface comprising a linear editor configured to receive a selection of at least two previously recorded data streams and playback of the at least two previously recorded data streams in synchronization as recited in the independent claims. Thus, Aimone does not teach or disclose each and every limitation of independent claims 1, 17, 21, 28, and 33.” See Remarks at 11.
Applicant’s argument has been fully considered but it is not persuasive.
Aimone teaches time-based synchronization of bio-signal data. See, e.g., [0039] (“In some embodiments, the VR event is associated with event time data and a portion of bio-signal data is associated with bio-signal time data corresponding to the event time data, wherein the processor is configured to identify a portion of the bio-signal data based on the event time data and process the portion of the bio-signal data to determine the user states during the VR event, the bio-signal time data synchronized to the event time data using a common timeline or clock or a synchronization or context operation.”) Note that the bio-signal data may include a plurality of synchronized signals from a brainwave sensor (e.g., [0028]), facial bio-signal sensor or inertial sensor (e.g., [0031]), and other sensors (e.g., [0056], [0059]). Note further that the pre-recorded time-based synchronization of bio-signal data is used to determine user states during a VR event and to provide feedback to the user. See, e.g., [0028]-[0030], [0040], [0043].
Accordingly, contrary to Applicant’s argument, Aimone teaches or discloses a linear editor, a timeline-based playback interface, and structure resembling a digital audio workstation or linear editor in which multiple previously recorded data streams may be independently selected, aligned on a common timeline in synchronization, and replayed under user control. More specifically, Aimone teaches or discloses a playback interface comprising a linear editor configured to receive a selection of at least two previously recorded data streams and playback of the at least two previously recorded data streams in synchronization as recited in the independent claims.
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.
Claims 1-20 and 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Aimone et al. (US 20160077547 A1, 2016-03-17) (hereinafter “Aimone”).
Regarding claims 1-20 and 28-30, as discussed above (Response to Arguments incorporated by reference herein). Aimone teaches a system (and method of use) for data collection during therapy on a patient comprising: a grip device to be held by the patient, the grip device comprising one or more buttons (e.g., [0056]) and being configured to: detect pressing of a pattern of the one or more buttons by the patient (e.g., [0056]); and transmit an indication of the pattern to a user device (e.g., [0056]); a mask device to be positioned over eyes of the patient (e.g., [0058), the mask device comprising one or more functional near infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) sensors and being configured to: measure fNIRS data from the patient; and transmit the fNIRS data to the user device; and a wearable device to be worn by the patient, the wearable device being configured to: measure biometric data from the patient; and transmit the biometric data to the user device (e.g., [0180]); wherein the user device is configured to provide a playback interface displaying at least one of the fNIRS data or biometric data (e.g., [0058], [0181]), wherein the playback interface comprises a linear editor configured to: receive a selection of at least two previously recorded data streams, and playback the at least two previously recorded data streams in synchronization on the user device (e.g., [0028]-[0030], [0039-[0040], [0043], [0056], [0059], [0066], [0083], [0088], [0111]) (as recited in claims 1, 17, 28); further comprising a provider device communicably coupled to the user device and configured to provide the playback interface (e.g., [0082], [0096], [0181]) (as recited in claims 2, 29); wherein the biometric data comprises at least one of a heart rate, an average body temperature, motion information, oxygen levels, respiratory rates, blood pressure, or skin moisture information (e.g., [0118] (as recited in claim 3); wherein the mask device further comprises at least one microphone (e.g., [0055) and is configured to: measure audio data from the patient; and transmit the audio data to the user device to be displayed in the playback interface (e.g., [0121]) (as recited in claims 4, 30); wherein the user device is configured to generate a transcription based on the audio data and display the transcription in the playback interface (e.g., [0119]) (as recited in claim 5); wherein the user device is configured to perform vocal analysis and sentiment analysis on the audio data and quantify a mood assessment for the patient (e.g., [0060], [0066]) (as recited in claim 6); further comprising a server communicably coupled to the user device, wherein the server is configured to: receive the audio data; generate a transcription based on the audio data; and transmit the transcription to the user device (e.g., [0053]-[0054], [0060], [0066]-[0069]) (as recited in claim 7); further comprising a server communicably coupled to the user device, wherein the server is configured to: receive the audio data; perform vocal analysis on the audio data; perform sentiment analysis on the audio data; quantify a mood assessment for the patient; and transmit the mood assessment to the user device (e.g., [0053]-[0054], [0060], [0066]-[0069]) (as recited in claims 8, 20); further comprising a server communicably coupled to the user device, wherein the server is configured to: receive the biometric data and the fNIRS data; and analyze the biometric data and the fNIRS data to detect, via a machine learning algorithm, at least one timepoint (e.g., [0060]-[0065]-[0067], [0088], [0092]) (as recited in claims 10, 18); wherein the user device is configured to detect, via a machine learning algorithm, at least one timepoint in the at least one data stream (e.g., [0060]-[0065]-[0067], [0088], [0092]) (as recited in claim 11); wherein the playback interface is configured to receive an annotation for the at least one timepoint (e.g., [0120]) (as recited in claims 12, 19); further comprising a server communicably coupled to the user device, wherein the server is configured to: receive the biometric data and fNIRS data from the user device; identify a previously recorded data stream associated with the patient; and execute a neurofeedback procedure based on a comparison between the received biometric data and fNIRS data and the previously recorded data stream, wherein feedback is provided via the playback interface or a light emitting diode configuration during playback of the previously recorded data stream (e.g., [0109], [0120], [0124], [0128], [0130]-[0131]) (as recited in claim 13); wherein the server is configured to, in response to the execution of the neurofeedback procedure, transmit one or more feedback signals to the user device (e.g., [0109], [0120], [0124], [0128], [0130]-[0131]) (as recited in claim 14); wherein the execution of the neurofeedback procedure is performed based on the pattern of the one or more buttons, the pattern being indicative of a desired neural state or a moment demarcated for playback (e.g., [0109], [0120], [0124], [0128], [0130]-[0131]) (as recited in claim 15); wherein the user device comprises a data hub configured to store baseline data of the patient and the user device is configured to compare the fNIRS data and biometric data to the baseline data (e.g., [0053]-[0054], [0060], [0066]-[0069]) (as recited in claim 16).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 21-22, 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aimone.
Regarding claims 21-22, 26, as discussed above, Aimone teaches a system (and method of use) for data collection during therapy on a patient comprising: a microphone configured to record patient audio; a speaker configured to play audio (e.g., [0055]); one or more functional near infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) sensors.
Aimone does not expressly teach a light emitting diode (LED) configuration configured to illuminate a pattern based on a received neurofeedback signal. However, Aimone teaches illuminating a pattern based on a received neurofeedback signal (e.g., [0167]).
Official Notice is given that LEDs are commonly used for illumination.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention taught by Aimone such that the invention comprises
a microphone configured to record patient audio and to transmit the recorded patient audio to a user device; a speaker configured to play audio; one or more functional near infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) sensors configured to measure fNIRS data from the patient and transmit the fNIRS data to the user device; and a light emitting diode (LED) configuration configured to illuminate a pattern based on a received neurofeedback signal, wherein the user device is configured to provide a playback interface, and wherein the playback interface comprises a linear editor configured to: receive a selection of at least two previously recorded data streams, and playback the at least two previously recorded data streams in synchronization on the user device (as recited in claim 21); wherein the device is configured to be worn around a head of the patient (e.g., Fig. 1) (as recited in claim 22); comprising one or more electrooculography (EOG) sensors configured to detect eye movement of the patient (e.g., [0058]-[0059]) (as recited in claim 26) in order to enhance the modality of the neuro-feedback.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aimone, as applied to claim 21, and further in view of Jiang (US 20180032101 A1, 2018-02-01).
Regarding claim 23, as discussed above, Aimone teaches a system (and method of use) for data collection during therapy on a patient, except comprising a zipper. Jiang teaches a VR headset equipped with a zipper. See, e.g., [0026].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Jiang with the invention taught by Aimone
such that the invention further comprises a zippable functionality, wherein the device is configured to operate in conjunction with a virtual reality headset (as recited in claim 23) in order to improve the usability of the invention.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aimone, as applied to claim 21, and further in view of Rosenberg (US 20150314102 A1, 2015-11-05).
Regarding claim 24, as discussed above, Aimone teaches a system (and method of use) for data collection during therapy on a patient, except comprising nebulizers for drug delivery. Rosenberg teaches a nebulizer for drug delivery. See, e.g., [0168].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Rosenberg with the invention taught by Aimone
such that the invention further comprises a nebulizer extension for drug delivery and configured to collect dose data (as recited in claim 24) in order to better ascertain and/or affect the neuro-psychological state of the user.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aimone, as applied to claim 21, and further in view of Berka et al. (US 20100292545 A1, 2010-11-18) (hereinafter “Berka”).
Regarding claim 25, as discussed above, Aimone teaches a system (and method of use) for data collection during therapy on a patient, except comprising pupillometric sensors. Berka teaches pupillometric sensors. See, e.g., [0026].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Berka with the invention taught by Aimone
such that the invention further comprises one or more pupillometric sensors configured to measure pupil dilation information from the patient (as recited in claim 25) in order to better ascertain the neuro-psychological state of the user.
Claims 27 and 31-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aimone, as applied to claim 21, and further in view of Murdock (US 20210265055 A1, 2021-08-26).
Regarding claims 27 and 31-36, as discussed above, Aimone teaches a system (and method of use) for data collection during therapy on a patient, except comprising measuring pulse using a camera and using a camera directed at the face of the user.
Murdock teaches measuring pulse using a camera (e.g., [0062]) and using a camera directed at the face of the user (e.g., [0052]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Murdock with the invention taught by Aimone
such that the invention further comprises a camera module configured to record a video feed of a face of the patient (as recited in claim 27); wherein the user device is configured to process the video feed to detect pulse data of the user (as recited in claim 31); wherein the user device is configured to, in
response to detecting pressing of the pattern of the one or more buttons, create a bookmark demarcating a moment in a previously recorded data stream for playback (as recited in claim 32); a method for administering a therapy on a user comprising: receiving fNIRS data measured by a mask device positioned over eyes of the user; receiving a video feed recorded by the mask device; processing the video feed to detect pulse data of the user; receiving audio data measured by at least one microphone positioned at a head of the user; and providing a user-configurable playback interface displaying at least one of the fNIRS data, the audio data, or the pulse data; receiving, by a linear editor of the user-configurable playback interface, a selection of at least two previously recorded data streams; and playing, by the linear editor, the at least two previously recorded data streams in synchronization (as recited in claim 33); further comprising receiving, via the playback interface, an annotation for at least one section of a data stream, the data stream comprising at least one of the fNIRS data, the audio data, or the pulse data (as recited in claim 34); further comprising receiving an annotation for at least one section of a data stream, the data stream comprising at least one of the fNIRS data, the audio data, or the pulse data from a provider device (as recited in claim 35); further comprising receiving an integral from a provider decide on a pre-defined schedule (e.g., [0167] of Aimone) (as recited in claim 36) in order to better ascertain and/or affect the neuro-psychological state of the user.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee 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 SCOTT T LUAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1860. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am-5pm, M-F (generally).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Gary Jackson, can be reached on 571-272-4697. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Scott Luan
/SCOTT LUAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Prosecution Insights