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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments in combination with amendments, see Remarks and Claims, filed 05/11/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the following:
Claim(s) 1, 4-7, 9-11, 13, 15, 17, 21-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220362576 A1 to Chen et al. (hereinafter “Chen”) in view of US 20040162549 to Altshuler.
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as modified by Altshuler as applied to claims 1, 4-7, 9-11, 13, 15, 17, 21-26 above, and further in view of WO2004045322 to Kim (previously presented).
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-7, 9-11, 13, 15, 17, 21-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220362576 A1 to Chen et al. (hereinafter “Chen”) in view of US 20040162549 to Altshuler.
Regarding claim 1. (Currently Amended) Chen discloses a phototherapy device for cerebral functional related diseases (para 0093, 0095, fig. 3), comprising: a headgear, comprising a housing assembly, wherein an inner side of the housing assembly forms an accommodation cavity (para 0095, fig. 3 “phototherapy device 100 further includes a housing adapted to the shape of the human head”) and is provided with a first gas inlet (para 0097), the accommodation cavity is configured to accommodate a head of a user during phototherapy (para 0095 “phototherapy device [] housing adapted to the shape of the human head”), wherein when the head of the user is placed inside the accommodation cavity (fig. 3-4), a spaced cavity between the inner side of the housing assembly and a with scalp of the user forms a gas pathway between the first gas inlet and the scalp of the user during phototherapy (para 0092, 0095 “the distance between the near-infrared irradiation module 110 and a user's head is adjusted by the movable component 420”; para 0097, fig 3-4); a suspension component provided on the headgear and configured to suspend the headgear during phototherapy (fig. 4, para 0100 “a mechanical arm”), wherein, when the headgear is suspended via the suspension component during phototherapy (fig. 4, para 0100 “a mechanical arm”), the housing assembly is configured to leave a margin that allows movement of the head of the user within a preset range (para 0095 “the distance between the near-infrared irradiation module 110 and a user's head is adjusted by the movable component 42”); an irradiation assembly, mounted to the housing assembly and configured to emit transcranial light to the inner side of the housing assembly (para 082-0086, etc.).
Chen discloses “the near-infrared irradiation module 110 may also be provided with a heat dissipation component such as a fan to dissipate heat from the light-emitting diode.” (para 0097) which is understood to read over the limitations of having gas inlet, gas pathway. Chen however fails to disclose having cooled gas supply mechanism, fluid-interconnected to the first gas inlet, wherein the cooled gas supply mechanism is configured to introduce cooled gas from outside of the housing assembly.
Altshuler from a similar field of endeavor teaches a photo treatment device having light sources, and an air cooling device which is connected to the treatment area using a connector to provide a phase change material (i.e., liquid nitrogen, air pump, airflow, fan) to provide cooling and comfort (para 0051). 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 disclosure of Chen with the teachings of Altshuler to provide the predictable result of cooling the treatment area and providing comfort.
Regarding claim 4. (Currently Amended) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 1, wherein, the housing assembly comprises an outer housing, a euphotic inner housing, and a spacer, a chamber is formed between the outer housing and the euphotic inner housing, the spacer divides the chamber to form a first chamber between the outer housing and the spacer and a second chamber between the euphotic inner housing and the spacer, the irradiation assembly is provided within the first chamber, the first gas inlet is opened in the euphotic inner housing, and the cooled gas supply mechanism is interconnected to the first gas inlet through the second chamber (Altshuler, fig. 7-8, outer wall 826, inner wall, the light sources being considered to be the “spacer”, dividing the space; gas inlet 706; It is further noted that rearrangement of parts would be an obvious matter of design choice, see In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)).
Regarding claim 5. (Currently Amended) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 4, further comprising a hot gas pumping and discharging mechanism, wherein the discharging mechanism is interconnected to the first chamber, and is configured to extract hot gas heated by heat generated by the irradiation assembly out, and discharge the hot gas to the outside of the housing assembly (Chen, para 0097 “fan to dissipate heat”; Altshuler para 0051, figs 7-8; it is understood that forcing cooling air will cause the hot air to be discharged to the outside).
Regarding claim 6. (Currently Amended) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 1, wherein, the headgear further comprises a branch pathway mechanism, wherein the branch pathway mechanism is provided to the inner side of the housing assembly and is fluid- interconnected to the first gas inlet, a first vent is opened in the branch pathway mechanism, and the branch pathway mechanism includes a plurality of branch pathways in the spaced cavity (Chen, para 0096-0097 “heat dissipation holes 424”; It is further noted that rearrangement of parts would be an obvious matter of design choice, see In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)).
Regarding claim 7. (Original) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 6, wherein, the headgear further comprises a support assembly provided to the inside of the housing assembly, the support assembly comprises one or more support bodies, each support body is opened with a second vent to be fluid-interconnected to the corresponding branch pathway, the cooled gas entering from the first gas inlet is discharged to the spaced cavity through the branch pathway and the second vent during phototherapy (Chen, para 0096-0097 “heat dissipation holes 424”).
Regarding claim 9. (Original) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 4, wherein, the first chamber and the second chamber are both independent from each other (any arbitrary chambers is considered to be independent and separate from one another Altshuler, fig. 7-8, outer wall 826, inner wall, the light sources being considered to be the “spacer”, dividing the space; gas inlet 706; It is further noted that rearrangement of parts would be an obvious matter of design choice, see In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)).
Regarding claim 10. (Currently Amended) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 4, wherein, a top portion of the spacer is provided with a second gas inlet configured to introduce the cooled gas, the euphotic inner housing has an outer top surface (Chen, fig. 3; Altshuler figs 7-8); configured to form a wind guide surface corresponding to the second gas inlet and to guide the cooled gas introduced via the second gas inlet to a periphery (Altshuler figs 7-8; It is further noted that rearrangement of parts would be an obvious matter of design choice, see In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)).
Regarding claim 11. (Currently Amended) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 10, wherein, the top portion of the euphotic inner housing is arch-shaped with a curvature less than a preset curvature, and is configured to guide the introduced cooled gas to the periphery (Chen, fig. 3).
Regarding claim 13. (Currently Amended) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 5, wherein, a gas extraction port is provided in the outer housing, wherein the gas extraction port is interconnected to the hot gas pumping and discharging mechanism and is provided with a retaining structure (Chen, fig. 3, para 0096-0097), wherein the retaining structure comprises a stop plate and a plurality of gas extraction holes interconnected to the first chamber, and the stop plate is provided corresponding to the gas extraction port in the up-down direction (Chen, fig. 3, para 0096-0097).
Regarding claim 15. (Currently Amended) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 1, further comprising a plurality of the irradiation assemblies
Regarding claim 17. (Currently Amended) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 15, wherein, the housing assembly comprises an inner housing, and an area of the inner housing for opening each group of the first gas inlets comprises a first area covering the corresponding irradiation assembly and a second area surrounding the first area (Chen; fig 3; Altshuler figs 7-8).
Regarding claim 21. (Currently Amended) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 1, wherein, when the headgear is suspended via the suspension component during phototherapy, the housing assembly is configured to define the margin that allows rotation of the head within a predetermined angle range and movement of the head in an up-down direction within a predetermined distance range while the housing assembly covers a region of interest (Chen, figs 3-4).
Regarding claim 22. (Currently Amended) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 1, wherein, the irradiation assembly is configured to emit near-infrared light with an average irradiance greater than 40 mW/cm2 towards the head of the user (Chen, para 0084, 0103; "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)), and temperature near the scalp of the user is within a range from 18 degrees Celsius to 43 degrees Celsius during the phototherapy (para 0164 "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)).
Regarding claim 23. (Currently Amended) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 1, wherein, the housing assembly is configured to form a cooled gas transmission inner cavity,
Regarding claim 24. (Original) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 4, wherein, the first chamber is located outer than the second chamber (see rejection of fig. 4).
Regarding claim 25. (Currently Amended) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 23, wherein, the cooled gas supply mechanism introduces the cooled gas from an upperside of the housing assembly to the cooled gas transmission inner cavity (Altshuler, figs 7-8; It is further noted that rearrangement of parts would be an obvious matter of design choice, see In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)), and the cooled gas transmission inner cavity is configured to form a wind guide surface to guide the cooled gas to a periphery and then downwards (Altshuler, figs 7-8It is further noted that rearrangement of parts would be an obvious matter of design choice, see In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)).
Regarding claim 26. (Currently Amended) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 1, wherein, the phototherapy device is configured to treat at least one of Alzheimer's disease, depression, autism, or bipolar disorder (Chen para 0006).
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as modified by Altshuler as applied to claims 1, 4-7, 9-11, 13, 15, 17, 21-26 above, and further in view of WO2004045322 to Kim.
Regarding claim 19. (Currently Amended) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein, during phototherapy the gas pathway formed by the spaced cavity maintains a wind velocity adjacent to the scalp of the user within a range from 0.5 m/s to 3.5 m/s.
Kim, from a similar field of endeavor teaches the wind velocity of the blowing air to be of about 2m/s (description). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the disclosure of Chen as modified by Altshuler with the known teachings of Chen, because doing so would allow for the predictable result of using the known wind speeds.
Regarding claim 20. (Currently Amended) Chen as modified by Altshuler renders obvious the phototherapy device of claim 1, wherein, [[the]] temperature of the cooled gas is tunableIn re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955), but fails to disclose when a wind velocity adjacent to the scalp of the user is maintained within a range from 0.5 m/s to 3.5 m/s.
Kim, from a similar field of endeavor teaches the wind velocity of the blowing air to be of about 2m/s (description). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the disclosure of Chen as modified by Altshuler with the known teachings of Chen, because doing so would allow for the predictable result of using the known wind speeds.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 SANA SAHAND whose telephone number is (571)272-6842. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30 am -5:30 pm; F 9 am-3 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, Jennifer S McDonald can be reached at (571) 270- 3061. 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.
/SANA SAHAND/Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights