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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 7/27/26 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of applicant's amendment filed on 7/27/26. Claim 15 is cancelled. No claims are new. Claims 1-2, 4-13 and 16-21 are currently pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 12-13 and 16-20 is/are rejected as being unpatentable over Kaiser further in view of Andersen US 2018/0206788 and Lunner et al. US 2017/0180882.
Regarding claim 1, Kaiser discloses a device for detecting brain activity of a mammal, the device comprising at least one earpiece configured to be worn on an ear of the mammal, the earpiece ([¶13,24] earpiece housing comprises element 140) comprising:
a main body comprising a housing portion configured to be received in the ear conch of the ear of the mammal ([FIG1][¶13,24] housing 140 which is received in the conch) and an elongation portion which extends transversally from a lateral wall of the housing portion along an elongation axis ([FIG1][¶47] portion 142 extends from the lateral wall of 140), the elongation portion being configured to be inserted into an ear canal of the ear of the mammal ([FIG1] the elongation portion fits within the ear), and
an earmold configured to be inserted into an ear canal of the ear of the mammal ([FIG1][¶11] the earpiece tip indicated by 112), said earmold having a channel extending along a earmold axis ([FIG1][¶24] interface 120), and a skirt surrounding the channel ([FIG1][¶11] elastic substrate 112), the channel being adapted to receive said elongation portion to removably mount the earmold onto the main body ([¶12] the elastic tip portion is removable and replaceable from the portion 142), at least the skirt of the earmold being made of an elastically deformable material ([¶32] substrate 112 is made of elastic material), said earmold comprising a plurality of electrode assemblies ([FIG1][¶8] each ear piece has electrodes 114, 116, 118), each electrode assembly comprising:
a measurement electrode arranged on an outer surface of the skirt of the earmold to contact the ear canal and configured to deliver an electrical signal representative of the brain activity of the mammal, said electrical signal having an electrical intensity ([¶8] three electrodes on substrate 12 are used for sensing); and
a preamplifier ([¶51] high impedance op amps are used): and
a processing unit arranged in the housing portion of the main body ([FIG1] signal acquisition subsystem 130), said earpiece comprising at least one first electrical track arranged in said channel of the earmold and connected to the measurement electrode, and at least one second electrical track arranged in said elongation portion of the main body and configured to convey the electrical signal delivered by at least one measurement electrode to the processing unit ([FIG1][¶27,47] electrical tabs 122),
Kaiser does not specifically disclose the preamplifier of the electrode assembly is housed in the elongation portion. Andersen teaches a similar in-ear bio signal monitoring device that uses electrodes to collect EEG signals ([¶36]) that has a preamplifier located in what would be the elongation portion that extends into the ear ([FIG8][¶61]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to combine the device of Kaiser with the amplifier of Andersen as that arrangement allows for the flexibility and compressibility of the in-ear component.
While Kaiser discloses an amplifier it does not specifically disclose the gain and placement of the amplifier. Lunner discloses a similar hearing device that has a preamplifier having an intensity gain adapted to adapt the electrical intensity of the electrical signal delivered by the measurement electrode of said electrode assembly ([FIG1][¶16-19,104] the device uses a voltage follower circuit or unity gain amplifier), the preamplifier being positioned upstream of the processing unit in a direction of propagation of the electrical signal delivered by the measurement electrode of said electrode assembly, so that the processing unit is configured to process the electrical signal adapted in intensity from the electrode assembly ([FIG1] the amplifier is upstream of any processor as it is at the electrode), wherein the intensity gain of the preamplifier of each of the plurality of electrode assemblies is adjustable so that the electrical signal delivered by one of the plurality of measurement electrodes is amplified to a greater extent than the electrical signal delivered by another of the plurality of measurement electrodes, thereby facilitating differential measurement between the electrical signals delivered by the plurality of measurement electrodes ([¶19] the measurement electrode is amplified over the reference electrode). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to combine the device of Kaiser with the teachings of Lunner in order to provide for improved ear EEG acquisition ([¶104]).
Regarding claim 2, Kaiser discloses the preamplifier is adapted to amplify the electrical intensity of the electrical signal detected by the measurement electrode of the electrode assembly ([¶11,12,50] the preprocessing includes amplifiers which boost the signal).
Regarding claim 4, Kaiser discloses the preamplifier presents a working frequency range extending from 0.1 Hz to I kHz ([¶84] the system processes signals from 0.5 Hz to 50 Hz which is a narrower range inside of the claimed range).
Regarding claim 12, Kaiser the earpiece is further configured to transmit a sound signal into an ear canal by means of at least one electroacoustic transducer housed in the elongation portion ([¶64] the earpiece can have a speaker), the preamplifier being attached to the electroacoustic transducer along a circumferential direction of the elongation axis ([FIG1] processing circuitry is along a circumferential direction of the axis).
Regarding claim 13, Kaiser discloses the earmold is arranged to be rotatable about the elongation axis on the elongation portion so as to allow the measurement electrode to be directed to an area of the brain of said mammal ([¶59,70] the earpiece can be rotated to be positioned in the ear), the second electrical track extending in a circumferential direction around the elongation axis on at least a portion of an outer surface of the elongation portion, the first electrical track presenting an end portion extending radially with respect to the elongation axis to be in contact with the second electrical track ([FIG1][¶27,47,60] electrical contacts 144).
Regarding claim 16, Kaiser discloses the plurality of electrode assemblies comprises at least first and second electrode assemblies, at least a first measurement electrode of the first electrode assembly being configured to deliver a first electrical signal and a second measurement electrode of the second electrode assembly being configured to detect a second electrical signal ([FIG1][¶8] each ear piece has electrodes 114, 116, 118), said at least first electrical track comprises at least two first electrical tracks, and said at least second electrical track comprises at least two second electrical tracks, said at least two first electrical tracks being electrically insulated from each other, said at least two second electrical tracks being electrically insulated from each other ([¶37,47,48,60] traces 122 and 144), the processing unit being configured to detect brain activity as a function of said first electrical signal delivered by said first measurement electrode and adapted in intensity by a first preamplifier of the first electrode assembly and of said second electrical signal delivered by said second measurement electrode and adapted in intensity by a second preamplifier of the second electrode assembly ([¶11,20,21,76] EEG parameters and mental states are determined from the amplified electrode signals), in particular as a function of a difference between said first electrical signal and said second electrical signal ([¶28,39,83] the differential data is used to determine mental states).
Regarding claim 17, Kaiser discloses the first and second electrode assemblies are arranged on a single earpiece, the first and second measurement electrodes being spaced apart along the earmold axis ([FIG4] electrodes 114, 116 and 118 are spaced apart), the two first electrical tracks being spaced apart along the earmold axis and the two second electrical tracks being spaced apart along the elongation axis ([FIG1] electrical tracks 122 and 144).
Regarding claim 18, Kaiser discloses the device comprises two earpieces configured to be arranged respectively in a first ear canal of the mammal and a second ear canal of the mammal and configured to convey respective electrical signals to the processing unit, and wherein the first and second electrode assemblies are arranged respectively on the two earpieces ([FIG1] earpieces 110 in either ear).
Regarding claim 19, Kaiser discloses the processing unit is further configured to determine physiological or psychological state based on the detected brain activity ([¶11,83] the device determines mental states).
Regarding claim 20, Kaiser discloses computer-implemented method for determining a physiological or psychological state of a mammal with the device according to claim 19 ([FIG1][¶50] earpiece to collect EEG data and determine mental state), said method comprising:
determining an electroencephalogram signal of the mammal based on the delivered electrical signals ([¶11,13] electrodes sense the signals),
determining an amplitude of at least one brain wave in a predefined frequency range as a function of said electroencephalogram signal ([FIG2][¶10] voltage amplitude is analyzed), and
determining a psychic state based on said amplitude of at least one brain wave by comparing said amplitude to a predetermined threshold ([FIG2][¶83] the amplitudes are fed to the model to determine mental states).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaiser and Andersen and Lunner further in view of Tran US 7,558,622.
Regarding claim 5, Kaiser does not disclose the preamplifier is coupled to an ESD circuit. Tran teaches a physiological collecting device that uses an ESD circuit with the amplifiers ([C91 L29-36] ESD and RFI protection circuits are used). Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to combine the device of Kaiser with the ESD of Tran in order to act as prevent RF interference and static damage ([C91 L26-36]).
Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaiser and Andersen and Lunner further in view of Kilsgaard et al. US 2014/0171775.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Kaiser discloses using a preamplifier but does not disclose the preamplifier comprises a follower circuit. Kilsgaard teaches a similar EEG measuring earpiece device that does use a follower circuit ([FIG10][¶59] the electrodes are connected to an op amp which is an active follower circuit). Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to combine the device of Kaiser with the specific preamplifier of Kilsgaard in order to act as a low noise amplifier ([¶54]).
Regarding claim 8, Kaiser discloses using a preamplifier but does not disclose the preamplifier comprises an impedance matching circuit. Kilsgaard teaches a similar EEG measuring earpiece where the preamplifier comprises an impedance matching circuit ([¶10]). Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to combine the device of Kaiser with the specific preamplifier of Kilsgaard in order to make processing signals easier.
Claim(s) 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaiser and Andersen and Lunner further in view of LeBoeuf et al. US 2014/0140567.
Regarding claim 9, Kaiser does not disclose the preamplifier is mounted on a printed circuit board of maximum dimension 3 mm. LeBoeuf teaches a similar physiological monitoring device implemented in an earpiece that has the preamplifier mounted on a circuit board ([¶65] a flexible circuit board can mount the electronics). Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to combine the flexible circuit board of LeBoeuf with the device of Kaiser in order to allow the board to find more within a smaller housing. LeBoeuf does not disclose the 3mm dimension, however; at the time the invention was filed, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use the 3mm size because Applicant has not disclosed that 3mm or below 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 LeBoeuf, and applicant' s invention, to perform equally well with either the circuit board taught by LeBoeuf or the claimed 3mm board because both boards would perform the same function of mounting the electronics equally well considering the typical size of an earpiece
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to modify LeBoeuf to obtain the invention as specified in the claim because such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over the prior art of LeBoeuf.
Regarding claim 10, LeBoeuf teaches the printed circuit board is made out of a flexible material, so as to be folded ([FIG8][¶65] the board is flexible).
Regarding claim 11, LeBoeuf teaches the preamplifier is adapted to amplify the electrical intensity of the electrical signal detected by the measurement electrode of the electrode assembly, and wherein said printed circuit board comprises a U-shape so as to embrace additional components embedded in the elongation portion ([FIG8][¶56,65] the board can curve and mounts the amplifiers and other electronic components).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaiser and Andersen and Lunner further in view of Bibian et al. US 2011/0295096.
Regarding claim 21, Kaiser does not disclose computing a quality index of the electrical signals delivered by the measurement electrodes based on a correlation computation between a common mode measurement and a difference between said first electrical signal and said second electrical signal or a difference between two electrical signals. Bibian teaches a similar EEG collection device that determines a signal quality based on the difference in signals ([¶67-69] impedance is measured to determine signal quality metrics). Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to combine the device of Kaiser with the signal quality metric of Bibian in order to show the user a state of signal quality ([¶17]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pgs. 10-13, filed 7/27/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2, 4-13 and 15-21 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 Lunner.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Pedersen et al. US 2019/0253793 specifically figure 13.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL ANTHONY CATINA whose telephone number is (571)270-5951. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6pm.
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, Robert Chen can be reached on 5712723672. 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.
/MICHAEL A CATINA/ Examiner, Art Unit 3791 /TSE CHEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights