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 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Claim 8 an emotion estimation method, which is executed by a computer system including at least one computer, the at least one computer including: a processor; a storage device coupled to the processor; and a coupling interface coupled to the processor, the emotion estimation method including: a first step of obtaining, by the processor, from a user, biological data including a biological signal of the user and motion data including a motion signal relating to a motion of the user and storing the biological data and the motion data in the storage device. The limitation of obtaining, by the processor, from a user, biological data including a biological signal of the user and motion data including a motion signal relating to a motion of the user and storing the biological data and the motion data in the storage device, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting computer, processor, storage device, and interface, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “computer, processor, storage device, and interface” language, “obtaining” in the context of this claim encompasses the user mentally watching another user react to an event and remembering it. Similarly, the limitations of: generating, correcting, estimating and storing are processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. The same interpretation is applied to the remaining steps in claim 8. 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. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites a few additional elements – computer, processor, storage device, and interface. The computer, processor, storage device, and interface are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor implementing a step) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of using computer, processor, storage device, and interface amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. Similar reasoning is applied to claims 1-7 and 9-14.
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.
Claim(s) 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Publication No. 2020/0204874 A1 to Sasaki et al. (hereinafter “Sasaki”).
Concerning claim 1, Sasaki discloses a computer system, comprising at least one computer, the at least one computer including: a processor; a storage device coupled to the processor; and a coupling interface coupled to the processor (Fig. 2, paragraphs [0026], [0037]-[0039]), the processor being configured to:
obtain, from a user, biological data including a biological signal of the user and motion data including a motion signal relating to a motion of the user and store the biological data and the motion data in the storage device (paragraphs [0040]-[0047] – motion and biological data of the user are obtained and stored);
generate a biological signal time series and a motion signal time series through use of the biological data and the motion data in any time range (paragraphs [0040]-[0047] – time series data is generated);
correct, through use of the motion signal time series, the biological signal timeseries to a corrected biological signal time series having reduced influence of the motion of the user (paragraphs [0040]-[0047], [0078]-[0081] – data is corrected based on the biological signal having a reduced influence on the user motion); and
estimate emotion of the user through use of a first biological feature amount calculated from the corrected biological signal time series, and store an emotion estimation result of the user in the storage device (paragraphs [0040]-[0047], [0078]-[0081] – emotion of user is estimated (i.e., happy, unhappy, joyful, painful, etc.).
Concerning claims 2 and 9, Sasaki discloses wherein the processor is configured to correct the biological signal time series to the corrected biological signal time series through use of a motion feature amount calculated from the motion signal time series (paragraphs [0040]-[0047], [0078]-[0081] –data is evaluated and changed based on location/motion of user).
Concerning claims 3 and 10, Sasaki discloses wherein the processor is configured to estimate the emotion of the user through use of the motion feature amount, the corrected biological signal time series, and the first biological feature amount (paragraphs [0040]-[0047], [0078]-[0081] – emotion of user is determined based on collected data).
Concerning claims 4 and 11, Sasaki discloses wherein the processor is 19configured to: determine whether the correction of the biological signal time series is required based on the motion feature amount; and estimate the emotion of the user through use of the motion feature amount, the biological signal time series, and a second biological feature amount calculated from the biological signal time series in a case where the correction of the biological signal time series is not required (paragraphs [0040]-[0047], [0078]-[0081] – user emotion is determined based on collected data).
Concerning claims 5 and 12, Sasaki discloses wherein the storage device is configured to store a first model for generating the corrected biological signal time series and a second model for discriminating whether a biological signal time series input thereto is a biological signal time series at a calm time, and wherein the processor is configured to execute learning processing including: processing of obtaining the motion signal time series, the biological signal time series, and a ground-truth biological signal time series; processing of inputting, to the first model, the motion feature amount calculated from the obtained motion signal time series and the first biological feature amount calculated from the obtained biological signal time series; processing of inputting, to the second model, the obtained ground-truth biological signal time series and the corrected biological signal time series output from the first model; processing of calculating a value of a loss function defined from output of the first model and output of the second model; and processing of updating the first model and the second model based on the value of the loss function (paragraphs [0040]-[0047], [0078]-[0081] – location and motion of the user is evaluated to see if a change is needed based on estimated emotion).
Concerning claims 6 and 13, Sasaki discloses wherein the biological signal is a signal relating to a heartbeat, and wherein the motion signal is a signal relating to an acceleration (paragraphs [0033], [0040]-[0047], [0078]-[0081] – sensors collect data including acceleration and heartbeat).
Concerning claims 7 and 14, Sasaki discloses wherein the processor is configured to present an interface for displaying an estimation result of the emotion of the user (paragraphs [0040]-[0047], [0078]-[0081] – output is provided to user via display).
Concerning claim 8, see the rejection of claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is listed in the PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MALINA D BLAISE whose telephone number is (571)270-3398. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Thurs. 7:00 am - 5:00 pm (PT).
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, Xuan Thai can be reached at 571-272-7147. 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.
MALINA D. BLAISE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3715
/MALINA D. BLAISE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights