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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election with traverse of invention (II) drawn to claims 6-20, and withdrawn claims 1-5 from further consideration, in the reply filed on 07/27/2026 is acknowledged.
Applicant's arguments filed 07/27/2026 regarding there’s no further burden on examining all filed claims have been fully considered but they are not persuasive, for the same reason indicated in the Requirement for Restriction and Election.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “an emotional state” in line 2 should be amended to read –the emotional state--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a patient” in line 6 should be amended to read –the patient--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a signal is needed” in line 21 should be amended to read –the signal is needed--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a Fast Fourier Transformation” in lines 2-3 should be amended to read –the Fast Fourier Transformation--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a signal is needed” in line 20 should be amended to read –the signal is needed--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a Fast Fourier Transformation” in lines 2-3 should be amended to read –the Fast Fourier Transformation--. Appropriate correction is required.
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 6-20 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.
Claim 6 recite the limitation “receive a plurality of biosensor data” and claim 16 recite the limitation “collect, on a device, a plurality of biosensor data”, these limitations are not defined by the claims which renders the claims indefinite. One with ordinary skill in the art would not be able to know if the claimed “plurality of biosensor data” are the same data from the EEG, EMG, gyroscope, accelerometer and sound sensor, or different data. The scope of the claim remains indeterminate because of the claimed “a plurality of biosensor data”. Examiner respectfully notes for purpose of examination the claimed “plurality of biosensor data” will be interpreted as data from any biosensor data in the device that may or may not include data from EEG, EMG, gyroscope, accelerometer and sound sensor.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the frequency" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the plurality of individual power bands" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 17 depends on independent claim 6, which should depend on independent claim 16. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Examiner respectfully notes, for purpose of examination claim 17 will be examined as it depends on claim 16.
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) 6-8, 11 and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 1029a)(1) as being anticipated by Srour et al (US 2022/0157434).
As to claims 6 and 16, Srour teaches a system and method for detecting an emotional state (system and method 100 for monitoring emotional state, abstract, par.47-64, fig.1-3) comprising:
a wearable device for detecting an emotional state (ear-wearable device 110 and/or 210 including sensor package that has multiple sensors, par.23, par.50-64 and par.93-95, fig.1-3), comprising:
an electroencephalogram (EEG) configured to measure electrical activity in a brain of a patient, the EEG comprising a plurality of EEG biosensors (electroencephalography (EEG) sensor in ear sensor package which can be a neurological sensor, par.95)
an electromyogram (EMG) configured to measure electrical activity in a muscle and nerve of a patient, the EMG comprising a plurality of EMG biosensors (myographic potential electrode sensor (EMG) in ear sensor package, par.95),
a sound sensor configured to detect sound in the patient's environment (microphone in ear senor package, par.47-51, par.53 and par.95),
an accelerometer configured to detect the frequency and intensity of the patient's movement over time (Motion sensors herein can include inertial measurement units (IMU), accelerometers, gyroscopes in ear sensor package, par.74, and par.93-98), and
a gyroscope configured to detect rotational movement and orientation of the patient over time (Motion sensors herein can include inertial measurement units (IMU), accelerometers, gyroscopes in ear sensor package, par.74, and par.93-98);
a converter (systems can also include various signal processing chips and components such as analog-to-digital converters, par.51) communicably coupled to the wearable device, the converter configured to:
receive a plurality of biosensor data from the wearable device (receive signals from sensor package, par.51), and
convert the plurality of biosensor data to a plurality of digital data (convert signals to digital signals/data, par.51); and
an external device comprising a computer readable storage media and a processor (external devices 230 that includes phone 112, smartwatch 114 and accessory device 212, par.64-65, fig.1-3), the external device configured to:
receive the digital data from the converter (par.51, par.64-67 and par.93-95, fig.1-3),
store the digital data in a cloud drive (store data in cloud 252, par.66, fig.2),
analyze the digital data (analyze signals from sensor package and extract features, par.65-69 and par.93-95),
in response to analyzing the digital data, determine if a signal is needed (analyze data and feedback is provided regarding patient’s emotional state, par.60, par.62, par.65-69, par.47 par.93-95) and in response to determining a signal is needed, send a signal to the patient indicating a medical intervention (feedback provided with suggested intervention if anxiety is detected, par.20-22, par.47-47, par.106-107).
As to claims 7 and 17, Srour teaches the system and method, wherein analyzing the digital data comprises:
performing an algorithm on the plurality of digital data (signals are being
analyzed by using signal processing algorithms and/or machine learning classification techniques, and can include aspects of phoneme recognition, frequency analysis, par.54-55, par.61 and par.67);
determining if the digital data meets or exceeds a predefined threshold (determining feedback from analyzed signals, and if anxiety state is determined suggest a feedback, par.20-22, par.47-49, and par.106-107)(Examiner respectfully notes to determine emotional state from measured signals there must be comparing step to a predetermined value/signal); and in response to the digital data meeting or exceeding the predefined threshold, sending a signal to deliver an intervention (suggesting an intervention, par.20-22, par.47-49, and par.106-107).
As to claim 8, Srour teaches the system, wherein in response to determining the digital data does not meet or exceed the predefined threshold, the external device ends the analysis (inherently, if feedback does not suggest anxiety intervention, the system will end analysis and/or repeat analysis later, par.74-76).
As to claim 11, Srour teaches the system, wherein the external device is a computer, the computer configured to receive a plurality of digital data from a plurality of patients (remote devices 230 are more than capable of receiving data from multiple patients and/or multiple wearable devices, as it receives data from two different ear wearable devices 110 and 210, par.64-70, fig.2).
As to claim 15, Srour teaches the system, wherein the external device is configured to notify a health care provider in response to the digital data meeting or exceeding the predefined threshold (sending feedback from analyzed signals, and if anxiety state is determined suggest anxiety intervention, par.20-22, par.47-49, and par.106-107)(Examiner respectfully notes to determine emotional state from measured signals there must be comparing step to a predetermined value/signal).
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.
Claim(s) 9, 10, 12-14 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Srour et al (US 2022/0157434), in view of Poltorak et al (US 2021/0041953).
As to claims 9, 10, 18 and 19, Srour teaches the invention substantially as claimed above, wherein the signal processing uses algorithms and/or machine learning classification techniques (par.54-55, par.61 and par.67), but failed to explicitly teach the algorithm includes creating a Fast Fourier Transformation (FFT) on the plurality of digital data, wherein creating a Fast Fourier Transformation of the data creates a plurality of individual power bands, wherein the algorithm further includes calculating a power and a coherence for each of the plurality of individual power bands.
However, Poltorak teaches an analogous system to detect emotional state of a user (abstract, par.3-20), using various biosensors (par.20-25 and par.996), wherein the system teaches algorithm includes creating a Fast Fourier Transformation (FFT) on the plurality of digital data (using Fourier Transform to analyze data from sensors, par.553-558), wherein creating a Fast Fourier Transformation of the data creates a plurality of individual power bands (par.25-26, creating power series, par.553-558), wherein the algorithm further includes calculating a power and a coherence for each of the plurality of individual power bands (determining EEG coherence, par.31-32, par.553-558).
Since using Fourier Transform for analyzing signals extracted from biosensors is well-known in the art, so it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the algorithm taught by Srour’s invention with Fourier Transform to analyzed measured signals from the biosensors, as taught by Poltorak’s invention, to accurately analyze/processes the measured signals and determine the emotional state of the patient, as taught by Poltorak’s invention (abstract, par.3-20).
As to claims 12-14 and 20, Srour teaches the invention substantially suggesting anxiety intervention if anxiety is detected (par.20-22, par.47 and par.107) as claimed above, but failed to explicitly teach he medical intervention comprises administering a drug (par.805-808, par.995), an electrical stimulation (electrical stimuli, par.178, par.189, par.750, par.765, par.769 and par.784), and a magnetic stimulation (magnetic stimuli, par.143, par.750, par.765, par.769, and par.784).
Since drug, electrical and magnetic intervention are well-known in the art, so it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to suggest drug, electrical and magnetic intervention in Srour’s invention, as taught by Poltorak’s invention, along with the suggest interventions taught by Srour’s invention, for the same purpose of decreasing anxiety and/or controlling emotional state of the patient, as taught by Poltorak’s invention (par.750, par.765, par.769, and par.784).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAY A ABOUELELA whose telephone number is (571)270-7917. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5.
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, JACQUELINE CHENG can be reached at 5712725596. 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.
/MAY A ABOUELELA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights