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 .
Election/Restrictions
In response to restriction requirement of 09/11/2025, applicant elected group III directed to claims 1, 8-18. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 2-7, 19 are currently withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) and 102 (a) (2) as being anticipated by Moriya [US 20210386347 A1].
As per claim 1, Moriya teaches a sensor unit for detecting brain current-induced magnetic fields in an unshielded environment (Moriya Fig 1),
comprising: a plurality of gradiometer units configured for arrangement around a head of a user (Moriya Fig 1 (OPM) modules 1 comprising gradiometers),
wherein each gradiometer unit has two magnetometers which are arranged at a fixed distance from each other (Moriya ¶0019 “The optically pumped magnetometer 1A may be, for example, an axial gradiometer. The axial gradiometer has a measurement region and a reference … (for example, 3 cm) in a direction away from the scalp of the subject, …The axial gradiometer outputs the respective measurement results in the measurement region and the reference region” Readings from measurement region and a reference region requires two magnetometer units as part of the OPM module), and further wherein each magnetometer has a sensor medium (Implied from Moriya ¶0019 if readings from measurement region and a reference region are taken) and is configured to detect a magnetic field strength at a measurement location by reading a spin resonance in the sensor medium dependent on the magnetic field strength (Principle of operation of OPM as discussed in applicant spec. ¶0035. Moriya ¶0018 “The excited alkali metal is in a spin polarization state, and when this receives magnetic field, the inclination of the spin polarization axis of the alkali metal atom changes according to the magnetic field. The inclination of the spin polarization axis is detected by probe light”),
at least one excitation light source configured to radiate light
at least one signal processing unit (Moriya Fig 1 item 5) configured to determine a magnetic field gradient at a gradiometer unit as a difference of the output signals of the two magnetometers of the gradiometer unit and to detect a time course of the magnetic field gradient (Moriya ¶0019 “Common mode noise is removed by acquiring the difference between the output result of the measurement region and the output result of the reference region” The resultant signal is a time course of the magnetic field gradient (here interpreted as change in magnetic field with time)).
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.
Claims 8-10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moriya as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Iwata [US 20210373092 A1].
As per claims 8-10, Moriya does not expressly teach wherein the head of the user can be received in the holding device such that the head remains freely movable relative to the holding device, or wherein the sensor unit further comprises a position reference unit wearable on the head of a user and configured to determine a relative position or relative movement between the head of a user and the plurality of gradiometer units, or wherein the position reference unit comprises at least one gyroscope or at least one element configured to generate a reference magnetic field that can be detected by magnetometers of the sensor unit.
Iwata, in a related field of magnetoencephalography (MEG), teaches wherein the head of the user can be received in the holding device such that the head remains freely movable relative to the holding device (Iwata Fig 3, ¶0049-¶0050, ¶0086, head moved and tracked with respect to helmet), or wherein the sensor unit further comprises a position reference unit wearable on the head of a user and configured to determine a relative position or relative movement between the head of a user and the plurality of gradiometer units (Iwata ¶0050 “tracking information, such as pose, motion, or position of the helmet or orientation of the OPM sensors (or any combination thereof) including the relative position or pose of the user's head with respect to the helmet or other headgear.”, ¶0080 “inertial sensors 332, such as gyroscopes (for example, a 3-axis gyroscope) or accelerometers (such as a 3-axis accelerometer) or any combination thereof, are rigidly attached to the helmet 302 or the user 306”), or wherein the position reference unit comprises at least one gyroscope or at least one element configured to generate a reference magnetic field that can be detected by magnetometers of the sensor unit (Iwata ¶0080).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus in Moriya by utilizing a modified helmet / headgear for brain measurements as in Iwata, so that movement and tasks of a user are not restricted during measurements and natural testing environments can be provided (Iwata ¶0003).
Claims 11, 14-18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moriya as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shahaf [US 20120296569 A1].
As per claims 11, Moriya further teaches a method for detecting brain current-induced magnetic fields using a sensor unit according to claim 1, the method comprising: detecting magnetic field strengths through the magnetometers of the sensor unit in the head region of a user (Moriya Fig 1 (OPM) modules 1 comprising gradiometers); determining, for each gradiometer unit, a magnetic field gradient by forming a respective difference signal from the output signals of the associated magnetometers (Moriya ¶0019 “Common mode noise is removed by acquiring the difference between the output result of the measurement region and the output result of the reference region”); detecting a time course of the magnetic field gradients for each gradiometer unit (The resultant signal is a time course of the magnetic field gradient (here interpreted as change in magnetic field with time).
Moriya does not expressly teach checking the time course of one or more magnetic field gradients for the occurrence of predetermined patterns.
Shahaf, in a related field of neurophysiology teaches checking the time course of one or more magnetic field gradients for the occurrence of predetermined patterns (Shahaf ¶0119-¶0120, ¶0111 constructing, comparing BNA patterns).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus in Moriya by analyzing neurophysiological data, as in Shahaf. The motivation would be to identify multiple conditions like ADHD, stroke, traumatic brain injury etc. (Shahaf ¶0207).
As per claim 14, Moriya in view of Shahaf further teaches detecting, based on checking the time course, an undesirable state of the user, and initiating responses based on the detection (Shahaf ¶0212-¶0216 detecting and analyzing anormal BNA).
As per claim 15, Moriya in view of Shahaf further teaches wherein the undesirable state comprises one of the following: fatigue, stress, falling asleep, a neural disease, stroke, and epilepsy (Shahaf ¶0207).
As per claims 16-18, Moriya in view of Shahaf further teaches a computing unit, which is configured to carry out all method steps of a method according to claim 11, or a computer program which prompts a computing unit to carry out all method steps of a method according to claim 11 when it is executed on the computing unit, or a machine-readable storage medium with a computer program stored thereon according to claim 17 (Shahaf ¶0057).
Claims 12-13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moriya in view of Shahaf as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Iwata [US 20210373092 A1].
As per claims 12-13, Moriya in view of Shahaf does not expressly teach further comprising detecting a position reference signal for determining a relative position between the gradiometer units and the head of a user, and processing the position reference signal and the magnetic field gradients to determine a position-corrected path of the magnetic field gradients, wherein the signal for forming a position reference comprises one of the following: an additional brain current-induced magnetic field signal independent of a user's mental state; a gyroscope signal from one or more gyroscopes attached to the head of a user; and a magnetic field signal generated by a position reference unit attached to the head of a user.
Iwata, in a related field of magnetoencephalography (MEG), teaches detecting a position reference signal for determining a relative position between the gradiometer units and the head of a user (Iwata Fig 3, ¶0049-¶0050, ¶0086, head moved and tracked with respect to helmet, ¶0050 “tracking information, such as pose, motion, or position of the helmet or orientation of the OPM sensors (or any combination thereof) including the relative position or pose of the user's head with respect to the helmet or other headgear”), and
processing the position reference signal and the magnetic field gradients to determine a position-corrected path of the magnetic field gradients (Iwata ¶0106 “The horizontal (x) positions of the helmet 302 (or helmet fiducial) and user's head 306′ are no longer aligned, indicating that the helmet 302 has moved relative to the head. Using the tracking data, which includes orientation, distance and lateral x and y positions, the co-registration can be corrected to account for this change”);
wherein the signal for forming a position reference comprises one of the following: an additional brain current-induced magnetic field signal independent of a user's mental state; a gyroscope signal from one or more gyroscopes attached to the head of a user; and a magnetic field signal generated by a position reference unit attached to the head of a user (Examiner choses gyroscope. Iwata ¶0080).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus in Moriya by utilizing a helmet / headgear for brain measurements as in Iwata, so that movement and tasks of a user are not restricted during measurements and natural testing environments can be provided (Iwata ¶0003).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OOMMEN JACOB whose telephone number is (571)270-5166. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:00.
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.
/Oommen Jacob/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797