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 .
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 1-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an
abstract idea without significantly more. Claims 1 recites a system with instructions for performing operations of the device comprising:
receive biodata;
assign a timestamp to the received biodata;
store received biodata along with the assigned timestamp into a database and the environmental data;
analyze stored data along with the assigned timestamp to predict an evoked response to one or more stimuli and the environmental data;
provide a feedback to the subject or a healthcare worker based on the analysis.
To determine whether a claim satisfies the criteria for subject matter eligibility, the claim is
evaluated according to a stepwise process as described in MPEP 2106(III) and 2106.03-2106.05. The instant claims are evaluated according to such analysis.
Step 1: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Claim 1 is directed to an apparatus/system and thus meet the requirements for step 1.
Step 2A (Prong 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural
phenomenon?
Claims 1 recites a system with instructions for performing operations of the device comprising:
receive biodata;
assign a timestamp to the received biodata;
store received biodata along with the assigned timestamp into a database and the environmental data;
analyze stored data along with the assigned timestamp to predict an evoked response to one or more stimuli and the environmental data;
provide a feedback to the subject or a healthcare worker based on the analysis.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the
limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Therefore, claim 1 recite an abstract idea of a mental process.
Claim 1 recite the abstract idea of a mental process. The limitations as drafted in the
claims, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the claimed steps in the mind, but for the recitation of a generic processor. Other than reciting a generic processing system and memory, nothing in the elements of the claims precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind or manually by a clinician. For example:
“Receive biodata;” A physician may gather biodata using manual sensors.
“Assign a timestamp to the received biodata;” A physician may assign a timestamp to biodata while performing the data gathering step.
“Store received biodata along with the assigned timestamp into a database and the environmental data;” A physician may store biodata along with their assigned timestamps using pen and paper. A physician may gather environmental data through observational analysis and manual sensors.
“Analyze stored data along with the assigned timestamp to predict an evoked response to one or more stimuli and the environmental data;” A physician may make analysis with equation using biodata, environmental data, and assigned timestamps.
“Provide a feedback to the subject or a healthcare worker based on the analysis.” A physician may give visual or auditory feedback to a patient based on their analysis.
Step 2A (Prong 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial
exception into a practical application?
Claims 1, 4, 14, 17, and 19 recite the additional elements of a “a plurality of biosensor devices”, “one or more communication interfaces”, “a processor executing software on a non-transitory memory”, “a smartdevice”, “one or more of intelligent devices including virtual reality (VR) headsets, smart glasses, and artificial intelligent devices”, “a continuous glucose monitoring device”, “a muscle contraction measurement device,” which are being interpreted as a processor of a data gathering device.
A plurality of biosensor devices, a continuous glucose monitoring device, and a muscle contraction measurement device are recited as pre-resolution activity for the step of data gathering. The examiner suggest amending claim 1 to recite a structural combination of these elements.
One or more of intelligent devices including virtual reality (VR) headsets, smart glasses, and artificial intelligent devices are computer implementation to perform the abstract idea of analysis of the biodata and providing feedback.
However, these elements are recited at a high level of generality performing the function of generic data processing such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to simply implement the abstract idea using generic computer components. See MPEP 2106.05(b) and (f).
Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical
application.
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the
judicial exception?
The additional elements when considered individually and in combination are not enough to
qualify as significantly more than the abstract idea.
A plurality of biosensor devices, a continuous glucose monitoring device, and a muscle contraction measurement device are recited as pre-resolution activity for the step of data gathering. The examiner suggest amending claim 1 to recite a structural combination of these elements.
One or more of intelligent devices including virtual reality (VR) headsets, smart glasses, and artificial intelligent devices are computer implementation to perform the abstract idea of analysis of the biodata and providing feedback.
As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, “a plurality of biosensor devices”, “one or more communication interfaces”, “a processor executing software on a non-transitory memory”, “a smartdevice”, “one or more of intelligent devices including virtual reality (VR) headsets, smart glasses, and artificial intelligent devices”, “a continuous glucose monitoring device”, “a muscle contraction measurement device,” which are being interpreted as a processor of a data gathering device as recited to perform the steps of:
receive biodata;
assign a timestamp to the received biodata;
store received biodata along with the assigned timestamp into a database and the environmental data;
analyze stored data along with the assigned timestamp to predict an evoked response to one or more stimuli and the environmental data;
provide a feedback to the subject or a healthcare worker based on the analysis.
amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer
components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic components cannot provide an inventive concept. These additional elements are well‐understood, routine (For example Bender et al. US 20200126670 A1, hereinafter Bender) teaches a data gathering device with a processor and memory, and conventional limitations that amount to mere instructions or elements to implement the abstract idea. In addition, the end result of the system/method, the essence of the whole, is a patent-ineligible concept. Therefore, the claims are not patent eligible.
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 1-14, 16, and 21-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by
Bender et al. US Pub.: US 20200126670 A1, hereinafter Bender.
Regarding claim 1, Bender teaches a system for integrating a plurality of biosensor devices (27),
comprising: a plurality of biosensor devices (27) connected to a subject (fig. 9; paragraph 130-135);
one or more communication interfaces (22) adapted to communicate with each of the plurality of biosensor devices (27) (fig. 9; paragraph 130-135);
a processor (16) executing software on a non-transitory memory (28), the execution of the software configures the processor to: establish a communication link with each of the plurality of biosensor devices (27) each through the one or more communication interfaces (22) (fig. 9; paragraph 130-135 and 143);
receive biodata from each of the plurality of biosensor devices (27) through the one or more communication interfaces (22) at a sampling rate (27) (fig. 9; paragraph 27-31, 43, 130-135 and 143); The device takes biodata from a patient’s history and compares it to real-time data collected for stress classification. Real-time data collection of biosensors to monitor, detect, or analyze biological signals operate with a sampling rate.
assign a timestamp to the received biodata such that the received data from the plurality of biosensor devices are synchronized (fig. 9; paragraph 27-31 and 43); A client computer device incorporating a biometric sensor, at a time of output of biometric data by biometric sensor can tag output biometric data with a timestamp and geo-stamp specifying time and location of biometric data output.
receive environmental data via one or more environmental sensors (fig. 9; paragraph 135); One or more sensor device 27 can include a Global Positioning Sensor (GPS), which equates to an environmental sensor.
store received biodata along with the assigned timestamp into a database and the environmental data (fig. 9; paragraph 135);
analyze stored data along with the assigned timestamp to predict an evoked response to one or more stimuli and the environmental data (fig. 9; paragraph 27-31 and 43-48); The device takes into account assigned timestamped biodata and environmental data for the manager system 110 running machine learning process 117 can train one or more predictive model for use by manager system 110 in returning predictions e.g. such as the described prediction of a returned stress level of a user in response to a presented topic/stimuli.
and provide a feedback to the subject or a healthcare worker based on the analysis (fig. 9; paragraph 27-31 and 43-48); The device may provide feedback to a caregiver user so that the caregiver user interacts with a certain user in a manner that reduces a stress level of the certain user.
Regarding claim 2, Bender teaches wherein the timestamp is provided by the plurality of the
biosensor devices (27) (fig. 9; paragraph 27-31 and 43).
Regarding claim 3, Bender teaches wherein the timestamp is generated based on a
predetermined period divided by the sampling rate (fig. 9; paragraph 27-31 and 43). A client computer device incorporating a biometric sensor, at a time of output of biometric data by biometric sensor can tag output biometric data with a timestamp and geo-stamp specifying time and location of biometric data output. An output biometric data is tagged; therefore, a division or separation of the sampling rate has occurred.
Regarding claim 4, Bender teaches wherein the plurality of biosensor devices (27) includes a
smartdevice (fig. 1; paragraph 23 and 107). The system includes a smart watch in communication with the biosensor device.
Regarding claim 5, Bender teaches wherein the smartdevice provides heart rate biodata (fig. 9;
paragraph 27 and 135).
Regarding claim 6, Bender teaches wherein the smartdevice provides electrocardiogram biodata
(fig. 9; paragraph 27 and 135).
Regarding claim 7, Bender teaches wherein the smartdevice provides blood oxygen saturation biodata (fig. 9; paragraph 135). A pulse oximeter measures blood oxygen saturation of a patient.
Regarding claim 8, Bender teaches wherein the smartdevice provides blood pressure biodata
(fig. 9; paragraph 135).
Regarding claim 9, Bender teaches wherein the smartdevice provides caloric expenditure
Biodata (fig. 9; paragraph 27 and 135). Calorie expenditure may be measured using heart rate and motion data.
Regarding claim 10, Bender teaches wherein the smartdevice provides sleep pattern biodata
(fig. 9; paragraph 27 and 135). Heart rate and brain wave activity measure from EKG and EEG may determine sleep pattern biodata.
Regarding claim 11, Bender teaches, wherein the smartdevice provides perspiration biodata (fig. 9; paragraph 135). A humidity sensor detects a patient’s perspiration.
Regarding claim 12, Bender teaches wherein the smartdevice provides position information of
the subject (fig. 9; paragraph 135). A gyroscope detects a patient’s change in orientation. Therefore, the position of a patient is measured.
Regarding claim 13, Bender teaches wherein the environmental data includes geographical
locations (fig. 9; paragraph 135).
Regarding claim 14, Bender teaches wherein the plurality of biosensor devices includes one or
more of intelligent devices including virtual reality (VR) headsets, smart glasses, and artificial intelligent devices (fig. 9; paragraph 107). Artificial intelligent devices and platforms are used within the computer system for processing data.
Regarding claim 16, Bender teaches wherein the one or more intelligent devices provide eye movement biodata (fig. 9; paragraph 27 and 135). A camera sensor for use in sensing facial expressions of a user, which includes eye movement data.
Regarding claim 21, Bender teaches wherein the received data is based on a synchronous data
transfer protocol (fig. 9; paragraph 27-31 and 43). A client computer device incorporating a biometric sensor, at a time of output of biometric data by biometric sensor can tag output biometric data with a timestamp and geo-stamp specifying time and location of biometric data output. The timestamp and biometric data are received and synchronized as a tag output.
Regarding claim 22, Bender teaches wherein the storing of the data is based on using a direct
memory access protocol (fig. 9; paragraph 130-135 and 143).
Regarding claim 23, Bender teaches wherein the one or more communication interfaces include
wireless channels (paragraph 30, 61, and 144).
Regarding claim 24, Bender teaches wherein the one or more communication interfaces are
wired (paragraph 143).
Regarding claim 25, Bender teaches wherein the wireless channels are based on Bluetooth
connectivity (paragraph 30, 50, 61, and 143).
Regarding claim 25, Bender teaches wherein the wireless channels are based on Wi-Fi
connectivity (paragraph 30, 61, and 144).
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.
Claims 15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bender in
view of Braido et al. US Pub.: US 20210369394 A1, hereinafter Braido.
Regarding claim 15, Bender does not teach wherein the one or more intelligent devices provide
heatmap biodata associated with where the subject is staring
Braido, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the one or more intelligent devices provide heatmap biodata associated with where the subject is staring (paragraph 201).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display system of Bender to generate a heatmap from Braido for the benefit of providing a gaze heatmap for the user allowing for instant attention towards warm or cold temperatures.
Regarding claim 17, Bender does not teach wherein the plurality of biosensors includes a
continuous glucose monitoring device.
Braido, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the plurality of biosensors includes a continuous glucose monitoring device (paragraph 46, 63, 126, 155, 158, and 363).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the biosensors of Bender to add the glucose monitoring system from Braido for the benefit of providing continuous glucose data to the patient.
Regarding claim 18, Bender does not teach wherein the continuous glucose monitoring device
provides glucose biodata.
Braido, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the continuous glucose monitoring
device provides glucose biodata (paragraph 46, 63, 126, 155, 158, and 363).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the biosensors of Bender to add the glucose monitoring system from Braido for the benefit of providing continuous glucose data to the patient.
Regarding claim 19, Bender does not teach wherein the plurality of biosensors includes a muscle
contraction measurement device.
Braido, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the plurality of biosensors includes a muscle contraction measurement device (paragraph 44, 61, 77, 94, 111, 128, 174, 177, 346, 349, 422, 425, 471, 474, 532, and 536). EMG equates to a muscle contraction measurement device.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the biosensors of Bender to add the muscle contraction measurement device from Braido for the benefit of providing muscle contraction data to the patient.
Regarding claim 20, Bender does not wherein the muscle contraction measurement device
provides muscle contraction biodata.
Braido, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the muscle contraction measurement
device provides muscle contraction biodata (paragraph 44, 61, 77, 94, 111, 128, 174, 177, 346, 349, 422, 425, 471, 474, 532, and 536). EMG equates to a muscle contraction measurement device.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the biosensors of Bender to add the muscle contraction measurement device from Braido for the benefit of providing muscle contraction data to the patient.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THIEN J TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-0486. The examiner can normally be reached M-F. 8:30 am - 5:30 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, Benjamin Klein can be reached at 571-270-5213. 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.
/T.J.T./Examiner, Art Unit 3792
/Benjamin J Klein/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3792