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, 13-25, 27, 29-30, 45-47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception without significantly more.
Analysis step 1 of Subject Matter Eligibility Test
The claims are directed to a machine of claims 1, 13-24 and a process () of claims 25, 27, 29-30, 45-47.
Analysis step 2A, Prong I
The claims recite abstract ideas, in particular mental processes, e.g., concepts performed in the human mind (including an identification, detection, generation, playing) or pen and paper (presenting).
Claim 1 recites “first visual stimulus associated with the condition and (ii) a second visual stimulus; presenting, by the computing system, via a display, the first visual stimulus at least partially overlapped with the second visual stimulus, to direct the user to interact with the display; detecting, by the computing system, a response identifying an interaction associated with one of the first visual stimulus or the second visual stimulus; generating, by the computing system, an auditory stimulus to include one or more portions indicating feedback based on the response; and playing, by the computing system, via a transducer, the auditory stimulus to provide the feedback on the response to the user.”
Claim 13 recites “identify, for addressing a condition of a user, (i) a first visual stimulus associated with the condition and (ii) a second visual stimulus; present, via a display, the first visual stimulus at least partially overlapped with the second visual stimulus, to direct the user to interact with the display; detect a response identifying an interaction associated with one of the first visual stimulus or the second visual stimulus; generate an auditory stimulus to include one or more portions indicating feedback based on the response; and play, via a transducer, the auditory stimulus to provide the feedback on the response to the use”.
Claim 25 recites “obtaining, by a computing system, a first metric associated with the user prior to a plurality of sessions; repeating, by the computing system, during each session of the plurality of sessions: (i) presentation, via a display to a user, of a respective set of visual stimuli comprising (a) a first visual stimulus associated with the symptom and (b) a second visual stimulus at least partially overlapped with the first visual stimulus, to direct the user to perform an interaction, and (ii) playing, via a transducer to the user, of a respective auditory stimulus to provide feedback based on the interaction with one of the respective sets of visual stimuli via the display; and obtaining, by the computing system, a second metric associated with the user subsequent to at least one of the plurality of sessions, wherein a reduction in the symptom associated with the attention bias occurs in the user, when the second metric is (i) decreased from the first metric by a first predetermined margin or (ii) increased from the first metric by a second predetermined margin.”
Claim 45 recites “obtaining, by a computing system, a first metric associated with the user prior to a plurality of sessions; repeating, by the computing system, during each session of the plurality of sessions: (i) presentation, via a display to a user, of a respective set of visual stimuli comprising (a) a first visual stimulus associated with the symptom and (b) a second visual stimulus at least partially overlapped with the first visual stimulus, to direct the user to perform an interaction, and (ii) playing, via a transducer to the user, of a respective auditory stimulus to provide feedback based on the interaction with one of the respective sets of visual stimuli via the display; and obtaining, by the computing system, a second metric associated with the user subsequent to at least one of the plurality of sessions, wherein a reduction in the symptom associated with the attention bias occurs in the user, when the second metric is (i) decreased from the first metric by a first predetermined margin or (ii) increased from the first metric by a second predetermined margin.”
Such recitation encompasses mental observations or evaluations, e.g. identifying a visual stimulus, second visual stimulus, geneating and playing a sound (i.e. auditory stimulus), further presenting a visual stimulus can be done wit pen and paper.. Furthermore, obtaining a metric can be done by user observation, increasing or reducing the stimulus can be done by a person.
Analysis step 2A, Prong II
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements merely add insignificant extra-solution activity and are mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP 2106.05 (f) and (g).
The claim set forth obtaining data, which is insignificant extra-solution activity, in particular mere data gathering.
The computing system which results in mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer.
Analysis step 2B
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the processor is an additional element that merely results in instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer that is well-understood, routine, and conventional activity previously known to the industry. The remaining additional elements merely add insignificant extra-solution activity, in particular mere data gathering and insignificant application, to the judicial exception that are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities previously known to the industry.
Claims 1, 13-25, 27, 29-30, 45-47 are therefore directed to a judicial exception without significantly more. The claims are not patent eligible.
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, 13-25, 27, 29-30, 45-47 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.
In claims, 1, 13 it is set forth to “identifying….a first visual stimulus associated with the condition and a second visual stimulus’’, but it is unclear from what/where/who is the second visual stimulus identified from (i.e. from the user, i.e. the computing system is obtaining such stimulus somehow from the user) or what does it mean “a first stimulus associated with the condition” does a stimulus not from the user, but somehow associated with a condition read on such a limitation; the limitation is unclear.
In claims 1, 13 the limitation of “presenting, but the computing system, the first visual stimulus….to direct the user to interact wit the display” is unclear; does this limitation intend to mean that by presenting the overlapped stimulus, the user is directed to interact wit the display? Just seeing the overlapped stimulus in a display?
In claim 1, 13 is unclear what it means “….to include one or more portions indicating feedback based on the response”; what is divided into portions, the auditory stimulus…the response? The claim language is unclear.
In claims 25, 45 it is set forth “wherein a reduction in the symptom associated with the attention bias occurs in the user, when the second metric is (i) decreased from the first metric by a first predetermined margin or (ii) increased from the first metric by a second predetermined margin.”, however, such a limitation appear to not be positively set forth as a step in the method; there is not step in the method setting forth decreasing the second metric from the first metric by a first predetermined margin or increasing the second metric from the first metric by a second predetermined margin.
Examiner’s Comments
The closest prior art:
US 2014/0349261 which disclose method of presenting multimodal stimuli to address symptoms associated with conditions, comprising:
paragraph 0002 discloses "a therapeutic video game device and method for treating anxiety, addiction, depression, eating disorders, lack of exercise, lack of self-esteem and other negative behaviors".
identifying, by a computing system, for addressing a condition of a user, (i) a first visual stimulus associated with the condition and (ii) a second visual stimulus;
paragraph 0070 discloses that "a few of the cards are briefly 'flipped over' to reveal either a positive prompt or a negative prompt".
presenting, by the computing system, via a display, the first visual stimulus at least partially overlapped with the second visual stimulus, to direct the user to interact with the display;
detecting, by the computing system, a response identifying an interaction associated with one of the first visual stimulus or the second visual stimulus;
D1, paragraph 0073 discloses that the "user then taps a card".
generating, by the computing system, an auditory stimulus to include one or more portions indicating feedback based on the response; and
paragraph 0073 discloses that if "the user selects either the card that was the negative prompt or a card that didn't show a prompt at all, the screen flashes red for a moment" and that if "the user does tap the positive prompt card (either as their first guess, or after many incorrect guesses), the positive prompt is shown again, and a quick star/sparkle image is displayed behind the prompt, and then the card/prompt is faded away entirely".
playing, by the computing system, via a transducer, the auditory stimulus to provide the feedback on the response to the user.
However, US 2014/0349261 fails to disclose:
A. in that the visual stimuli are at least partially overlapped (see feature F3), and
B. in that the feedback is an auditory stimulus.
US 2011/0027765 to Nader disclose I paragraphs 0028 to 0030 discloses simultaneously (at least partially [temporally] overlapped) displaying negative and neutral stimuli. However, does not disclose a response identifying an interaction associated with one of the first visual stimulus or the second visual stimulus. Also, does not disclose any auditory stimulus to include one or more portions indicating feedback.
US 2015/0155353 to Merzenich disclose paragraph 0165 discloses "games to bias attention away from an unhealthy stimulus". Further, paragraph 0232 discloses that the "game registers an accurate response with a pleasant sound such as a 'ding' and an inaccurate response with an unpleasant sound such as a 'thunk". However, such auditory stimulus to provide the feedback is only disclosed in the context of "divided attention games" (see, paragraph 0231) and not in the context of attention bias modification treatment.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH M SANTOS RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-7782. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am to 5:30pm.
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, Anne M. Kozak can be reached at 571-270-0552. 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.
/JOSEPH M SANTOS RODRIGUEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Prosecution Insights