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 .
It appears the inventor(s) filed the current application pro se (i.e., without the benefit of representation by a registered patent practitioner). While inventors named as applicants in a patent application may prosecute the application pro se, lack of familiarity with patent examination practice and procedure may result in missed opportunities in obtaining optimal protection for the invention disclosed. The inventor(s) may wish to secure the services of a registered patent practitioner to prosecute the application, because the value of a patent is largely dependent upon skilled preparation and prosecution. The Office cannot aid in selecting a patent practitioner.
A listing of registered patent practitioners is available at https://oedci.uspto.gov/OEDCI/. Applicants may also obtain a list of registered patent practitioners located in their area by writing to Mail Stop OED, Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 07/01/2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-30 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The numbering of claims is not in accordance with 37 CFR 1.126 which requires the original numbering of the claims to be preserved throughout the prosecution. When claims are canceled or withdrawn, the remaining claims must not be renumbered. When new claims are presented, they must be numbered consecutively beginning with the number next following the highest numbered claims previously presented (whether entered or not). For example, there are currently two number 1 claims, 2 number 2 claims, claims 9 that is presented before a 2nd claim 8. The examiner recommends that these claim be cancelled and then rewrite the claim content in a new claim with a new claim number.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to judicial exception(s) without significantly more.
[STEP 1] The claim is directed to a speech therapy app. An app or application are typically defined as a program that is designed specifically for a mobile device or a computer. The examiner notes that a speech therapy app is not directed to one the four categories of subject matter that Congress deemed to be appropriate subject matter for a patent: processes, machines, manufactures and compositions of matter1. As explained by the courts, these “four categories together describe the exclusive reach of patentable subject matter. If a claim covers material not found in any of the four statutory categories, then the claim falls outside the plainly expressed scope of § 101 even if the subject matter is otherwise new and useful.” In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1354, 84 USPQ2d 1495, 1500 (Fed. Cir. 2007) [see also MPEP 2106.03]. (Step 1: No).
Claim(s) 2-8, 9-30 are dependent on supra claim(s) and includes all the limitations of the claim(s). Therefore, the dependent claim(s) recite(s) the same abstract idea. The claim recites no additional limitations. Accordingly, the additional element(s) do(es) not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and the claim is therefore directed to the judicial exception. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Thus, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e., an inventive concept) to the abstract idea.
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 1-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 9 and 19 are directed to a speech therapy app that uses melodic intonation therapy. It is unclear what the metes and bound for the limitation “melodic intonation therapy” as the specification fails to provide standard to determine the metes and bound for the subjective terminology. When a subjective term is used in the claim, the examiner should determine whether the specification supplies some objective standard for measuring the scope of the term. Some objective standard must be provided in order to allow the public to determine the scope of the claim. A claim term that requires the exercise of subjective judgment without restriction may render the claim indefinite. In re Musgrave, 431 F.2d 882, 893, 167 USPQ 280, 289 (CCPA 1970). Claim scope cannot depend solely on the unrestrained, subjective opinion of a particular individual purported to be practicing the invention. Datamize LLC v. Plumtree Software, Inc., 417 F.3d 1342, 1350, 75 USPQ2d 1801, 1807 (Fed. Cir. 2005));
Claim 2 recite the limitation "the user” and “the primary user interface” in line 2. There are insufficient antecedent basis for these limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 line 1-2 recite the limitation “the user interface” and “the first embodiment”. There are insufficient antecedent basis for these limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 is separately rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite in that it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language. Claim 3 is directed to the “first embodiment”. The metes and bound of claim 3 is unclear since it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the first embodiment. This claim is an omnibus type claim.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite in that it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language. Claim 5 is directed to the “second embodiment”. The metes and bound of claim 5 is unclear since it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the first embodiment. This claim is an omnibus type claim.
Claim 9 recite the limitation of “the telephone game”, “the same number of syllable words or phrases” and “the same number ….” in line 2-3. There are insufficient antecedent basis for these limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite in that it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language. Claim 10 is directed to the “third embodiment”. The metes and bound of claim 5 is unclear since it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the first embodiment. This claim is an omnibus type claim.
Claim 10 recite the limitation “the word bank” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recite the limitation “the screen” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recite the limitation “the animated left hand” in line 2 and “the melody” in line 3. There are insufficient antecedent basis for these limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recite the limitation “the animated left hand” in line 2 and “the melody” in line 3. There are insufficient antecedent basis for these limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recite the limitation “the game of musical chair” line 2 and “the first three children” in line 3. There are insufficient antecedent basis for these limitation in the claim.
Claim 21 recite the limitation of “the game of musical chair” line 3 and the “winner” in line 4. There are insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-2, 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Capik WO2013/086534
Claim 1: A speech therapy app that uses Melodic Intonation therapy2 to facilitate production of speech (see page 16 last paragraph-page 17 first paragraph “The system 200 issues a request 402 for the subject 202 to sing "Happy birthday to you" and “As depicted, the subject responds 404 by singing and tapping and the Session Guide hears the same response 404) in non-verbal children with austism and facilitate speech fluency in children who stutter (see page 9 1st paragraph). The examiner notes the limitation of “non-verbal children with austism and facilitate speech fluency in children who stutter” can be interpreted as intended use limitation that do not result in a structural difference between the Capik prior art and the current claim limitation. The Capik reference without being modified can be presented to “non-verbal children with austism and facilitate speech fluency in children who stutter” and perform the MIT therapy described therein. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Claim 2: The Capik reference provides a teaching of wherein the user is directed to the primary user interface (see page 9 paragraph 2 GUI 102). Claim 19: The Capik reference provides a teaching of a speech therapy app that uses MIT (see page 16 last paragraph-page 17 first paragraph “The system 200 issues a request 402 for the subject 202 to sing "Happy birthday to you" and “As depicted, the subject responds 404 by singing and tapping and the Session Guidehears the same response 404) consisting of voice recognition (see page 33 line 9-10), audio sound quality and a playback recording feature to analyze and examine the progress of each child (see page 16 line 5-15 “analysis module”).
Claim 9: The Capik reference reference provides a teaching of a speech therapy app that uses MIT (see page 16 last paragraph-page 17 first paragraph “The system 200 issues a request 402 for the subject 202 to sing "Happy birthday to you" and “As depicted, the subject responds 404 by singing and tapping and the Session Guidehears the same response 404)
With respect to the limitation “… in musical chairs and the telephone game further comprising the same number of syllable words or phrases and the same number of four children for the games to be effective”, the examiner takes the position that limitation the can be interpreted as intended use limitation that do not result in a structural difference between the Capik prior art and the current claim limitation. The Capik reference without being modified can perform the function of providing a game musical and telephonic game comprising the same number of syllable words or phrases and the same number of four children for the games to be effective. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 3-8, 10-18 and 20-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Capik
Claim 3: While the Capik referene provides a teaching of a user interface consisting of at least one icon (see page 16 second paragraph). The Capik reference is silent on the teaching wherein the user interface consists of three separate icons which is the first embodiment.
At the time the invention was made, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have multiple number of icons because the Applicant has not disclosed that three separate icons provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem.
One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Capik’s icon and applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with either number of separate icons. Bot the Capik disclosure and Applicant’s disclosure would perform the same function of allowing the user to navigate to different functions of the software.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to modify to obtain the invention as specified in claim 3 because such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over the prior art of Capik.
Claim 4: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of having icons that represents elementary level, intermediate level, and the advance level of MIT. However, the current claim limitation is directed to meaning of the icons in the mind of a user or support for information or data. As such, the examiner takes the position that the claim limitation is directed to non-functional descriptive material that do not results in a functional relationship between the icon (the printed matter) and the computing device (the substrate). Since the icons relies on meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. To be given patentable weight, the printed matter and associated product must be in a functional relationship. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 5: While the Capik reference provides teaching of icons; the Capik reference is silent on the teaching of users can click on the icon the level of MIT that they want to use in games session and said icon will collapse which is the second embodiment. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 5 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 6: While the Capik reference provides a teaching of a second interface for interactive game (see page 11 last paragraph). The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the secondary user interface appears said icon collapses to show a drop-down feature where the user can select an interactive MIT games of musical chairs or the telephone game. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 6 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 7: While the Capik reference provides a teaching of user interface and icons, it is silent if the user interface includes option for the user to select if the child or the children or a stutterer. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 7 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 8: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the third user interface appears which is the third embodiment, consisting of a word bank words or phrases for nonverbal autism and children who stutter. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 8 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 10: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of fourth user interface appears which is the fourth embodiment and begins the game of musical chairs with a visual cue of the syllable word or phrase selected from thew ord bank for nonverbal children. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 10 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 16:The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the children will sing in unison until the user slowly fades out leaving said children to continue singing while a new visual cue of the game of musical chairs will show four chairs lighting up in different colors one-by-one in a a clockwise motion on the app. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 16 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 11: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the user will begin to hum along with the melody. However, the the limitation “… wherein the user will begin to hum along with the melody”, the examiner takes the position that limitation the can be interpreted as intended use limitation that do not result in a structural difference between the Capik prior art and the current claim limitation. The Capik reference without being modified can perform the function of “…wherein the user will begin to hum along with the melody”. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Claim 12: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching wherein the game of musical chairs will have a small, left hand in the corner of the screen that includes animated tapping. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 12 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 13: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching the animated left hand tapping to synchronize to the melody. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 13 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 14: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the user will begin to intone(sing) the syllable word or phrase in said visual cue to the melody in the game of musical chair. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 14 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 15: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the melody and user will guide the children to do an inner rehearsal preparing them to sing the syllable word or phrase. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 15 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 17: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the melody stops said children, will sit down.
Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 17 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 18: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the user will ask said children a probe question. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 18 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 20: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching wherein the game of musical chairs will include a round of applause in response to the voice recognition after the first three children sing the syllable word or phrase correctly. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 20 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 21: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of wherein another round of applause will happen after said children play the game of musical chairs to a new syllable word or phrase for each round until, they reach the bottom two children and one child is declared the winner. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 21 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 22: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of the fourth user interface appears which is the fourth embodiment and begins the telephone game with a visual cue of relaxed mouth movements, followed by a tongue twister selected from the word bank for children who stutters. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 22 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 23: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the user will begin to hum along with the melody. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 23 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 24: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of a speech therapy wherein the telephone game will have a small, left hand in the corner of the screen that includes animated tapping. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 24 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 25: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching further comprising the animated left hand tapping to synchronize to the melody. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 25 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 26: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching the user will begin to intone the tongue twister syllable phrase to the melody while said visual cue mimics the user’s mouth movements. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 26 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 27: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the melody and user will guide the children to do inner rehearsal preparing them to sing the phrase in each other’s ear. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 27 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 28: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the children will sing in unison until the user slowly fades out leaving said children to sing the phrase in each other’s ear while a new visual cue of four telephones will light up in different colors one-by-one on the app. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 28 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 29: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the melody stops and the user will ask a probe question to the last child in the telephone line. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 29 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Claim 30: The Capik reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the telephone game will include a round of applause in response to the voice recognition after the last child at the end of the telephone line the game sings said tongue twister phrase fluently. Similar to the analysis of claim 4, the limitation of claim 30 relies on the meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product, the examiner takes the position no functional relationship between the icon and computing device can be found. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1584, 32 USPQ2d at 1035 (citing Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404) [see MPEP 2111.05].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT J UTAMA whose telephone number is (571)272-1676. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 17:30 Monday - Friday.
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, Kang Hu can be reached at (571)270-1344. 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.
/ROBERT J UTAMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
1 A process is defined as “actions”, i.e., an invention that is claimed as an act or step, or a series of acts or steps.
A machine is defined as a “concrete thing, consisting of parts, or of certain devices and combination of devices.”
A manufacture is “a tangible article that is given a new form, quality, property, or combination through man-made or artificial means.
A composition of matter is a “combination of two or more substances and includes all composite articles.” Digitech, 758 F.3d at 1348-49, 111 USPQ2d at 1719 (citation omitted).
2 Melodic Intonation therapy commonly understood as the use of musical elements of speech (melody & rhythm) to improve expressive language by capitalizing on preserved function (singing) and engaging language-capable regions in the undamaged right (brain) hemisphere. “ Norton et al. “Melodic Intonation on Therapy: Shared Insights on How it is Done and Why it Might Help” Ann NY Acad Sci. 2009