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 § 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.
Claim 15 is 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. Independent claim 15 contains an instance of vague indefinite language, including the use of the word “can”. It is unclear whether the features following “can” in each claim is intended to be positively recited as part of the claimed invention.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Step 1: The claims are directed to a method and a device/system which falls within one of the statutory categories of invention. Step 2A, Prong One: Independent claim(s) 1, 10 & 15, recite(s) providing, monitors, patient device, display, input device and caretaker device. The claims and background of the application do not put any limits on the plain meanings of providing or monitoring. These claims recite a patient device, display, input device and caretaker device and is recited at a high level of generality of performing generic functions. The broadest reasonable interpretation of the steps is that those steps fall with the mental process grouping of abstract ideas because they cover concepts performed in the human mind, selection by a human and/or can be presented using a piece of paper, including providing and monitoring. Step 2A, Prong Two: The claims recite patient device, display, input device and caretaker device. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claims. Again, patient device, display, input device and caretaker device perform their generic functions and is recited at a high level of generality. With these limitations, patient device, display, input device and caretaker device are used as a tool to perform the generic function of providing and monitoring. Therefore, in these limitations the patient device, display, input device and caretaker device are used to perform an abstract idea, as discussed above in Step, 2A, Prong One, such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic patient device, display, input device and caretaker device. Even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practice application, and the claim is directed to the judicial exception. Step 2B: As explained in the Step 2A, Prong Two, these are two additional elements. The additional elements of a “patient device, display, input device and caretaker device” in the limitations are at best mere instructions to “apply” the abstract ideas, which cannot provide an inventive concept. See MPEP 2106.05(f). The additional elements were both found to be insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A, Prong Two, because they were determined to be insignificant limitations as necessary data providing and monitoring. As discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two above, the recitations of “patient device, display, input device and caretaker device” are recited at a high level of generality. These elements amount to providing and monitoring and are well-understood, routine and conventional activity. Therefore, even when considered in combination, these additional elements represent mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception with a processor and memory and insignificant extra-solution activity, which do not provide an inventive concept. So, these claims are ineligible.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over V= Parker et al. (U.S. Publication Number 2018/0059781) in view of Burton (U.S. Publication Number 2021/0169417).
Referring to claim 1, Parker et al. discloses providing a device to an individual, wherein the device comprises a display and an input device, wherein the display provides a set of stimuli and wherein the input device is capable of tracking an eye of the individual (Fig. 1, 2A & 2B); wherein the input device monitors focus of the individual and wherein the individual’s focus on a stimulus in the set of stimuli provides a signal to select that input (Fig. 1, 2A & 2B). Parker et al. does not disclose providing, by the display on the patient device, a set of one or more stimuli for
interaction by the individual using an eye of the individual: tracking, using the input
device, the eye of the individual during the individual's interaction with the set of one or more stimuli to gather a set of eye movement data; determining, using the patient
device, a type of the interaction based on the set of eye movement data; analyzing,
using the patient device, a set of eye movement data for the individual based on the
type of interaction; wherein the input device monitors focus of the individual and
wherein the individual's focus on a stimulus in the set of stimuli provides a signal to
select that input generating, by the patient device, a prediction for a health condition of the individual based on the analyzed set of eye movement data; and transmitting, from the patient device, the set of eye movement data and the generated prediction to a
monitoring device for evaluation. However, Burton teaches providing, by the display on the patient device, a set of one or more stimuli for
interaction by the individual using an eye of the individual (paragraphs 2219-2222): tracking, using the input
device, the eye of the individual during the individual's interaction with the set of one or more stimuli to gather a set of eye movement data (Figs. 30 & 40B); determining, using the patient
device, a type of the interaction based on the set of eye movement data (Fig. 30); analyzing,
using the patient device, a set of eye movement data for the individual based on the
type of interaction (Fig. 30); wherein the input device monitors focus of the individual and
wherein the individual's focus on a stimulus in the set of stimuli provides a signal to
select that input generating, by the patient device, a prediction for a health condition of the individual based on the analyzed set of eye movement data (paragraph 1061, 1062, 1217, 1243,. 1348, 1589, 2198, 2220, 2226); and transmitting, from the patient device, the set of eye movement data and the generated prediction to a
monitoring device for evaluation (Fig. 30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed providing, by the display on the patient device, a set of one or more stimuli for
interaction by the individual using an eye of the individual: tracking, using the input
device, the eye of the individual during the individual's interaction with the set of one or more stimuli to gather a set of eye movement data; determining, using the patient
device, a type of the interaction based on the set of eye movement data; analyzing,
using the patient device, a set of eye movement data for the individual based on the
type of interaction; wherein the input device monitors focus of the individual and
wherein the individual's focus on a stimulus in the set of stimuli provides a signal to
select that input generating, by the patient device, a prediction for a health condition of the individual based on the analyzed set of eye movement data; and transmitting, from the patient device, the set of eye movement data and the generated prediction to a
monitoring device for evaluation, as disclosed by Burton, incorporated into Parker et al. in order to determine if the patient has any health conditions.
Referring to claim 2, Parker et al. discloses wherein the selection of the stimulus transmits a request to a caretaker (abstract).
Referring to claim 3, Parker et al. discloses wherein the device is capable of detecting changes in focus which are indicative of a mental state (Figs. 2A & 2B).
Referring to claim 4, Parker et al. discloses wherein the mental state is selected from depression, anxiety, stress, and fatigue (paragraph 0034).
Referring to claim 5, Parker et al. discloses wherein the device is capable of detecting a health event and/or early detection of a health event (abstract).
Referring to claim 6, Parker et al. discloses wherein the health event is selected from stroke and cognitive decline (abstract).
Referring to claim 7, Parker et al. discloses wherein each stimulus in the set of stimuli is displayed as an icon (Fig. 3).
Referring to claim 8, Parker et al. discloses wherein the set of stimuli include at least one of: personal needs, mood, food, and drink (Figs. 2A, 2B & 3).
Referring to claim 9, Parker et al. discloses wherein at least one stimulus in the set of stimuli represents a hierarchical menu, wherein selection of the at least one stimulus provides a second set of stimuli with more specificity (Figs. 2A & 2B).
Referring to claim 10, Parker et al. discloses a display to provide a set of stimuli to an individual; and an input device capable of tracking an eye of the individual; wherein the input device monitors focus of the individual and wherein the individual’s focus on a stimulus in the set of stimuli provides a signal to select that input (Fig. 1, 2A, 2B & 3).
Referring to claim 11, Parker et al. discloses further comprising a wireless communication device capable of sending information to another device (Fig. 6).
Referring to claim 12, Parker et al. discloses wherein each stimulus in the set of stimuli is displayed as an icon (Fig. 3).
Referring to claim 13, Parker et al. discloses wherein the set of stimuli include at least one of: personal needs, mood, food, and drink (Figs. 2A, 2B & 3).
Referring to claim 14, Parker et al. discloses wherein at least one stimulus in the set of stimuli represents a hierarchical menu, wherein selection of the at least one stimulus provides a second set of stimuli with more specificity (Figs. 2A & 2B).
Referring to claim 15, Parker et al. discloses a patient device, comprising: a display to provide a set of stimuli to a patient; and an input device capable of tracking an eye of the patient; wherein the input device monitors focus of the individual and wherein the individual’s focus on a stimulus in the set of stimuli selects that stimulus (Fig. 1, 2A & 2B); and a caretaker device, comprising: a display to provide information to a caretaker (Fig. 1, 2A & 2B); and an input device capable of accepting input from the caretaker (Fig. 1, 2A & 2B); wherein a request from a patient is displayed on the display and the caretaker can provide input via the input device to acknowledge a request (Fig. 1, 2A & 2B); wherein the selection of a stimulus from the patient device sends a request to the caretaker device (Fig. 1, 2A & 2B).
Referring to claim 16, Parker et al. discloses wherein the patient device and the caretaker device each further comprise a wireless communication device capable of sending and receiving information to each other (Fig. 6).
Referring to claim 17, Parker et al. discloses wherein each stimulus in the set of stimuli is displayed as an icon (Fig. 3).
Referring to claim 18, Parker et al. discloses wherein the set of stimuli include at least one of: personal needs, mood, food, and drink (Figs. 2A, 2B & 3).
Referring to claim 19, Parker et al. discloses wherein at least one stimulus in the set of stimuli represents a hierarchical menu, wherein selection of the at least one stimulus provides a second set of stimuli with more specificity (Figs. 2A & 2B).
Referring to claim 20, Parker et al. discloses wherein the caretaker provides input via the input device to mark a request as complete (Fig. 8).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see amended claim 20, filed 9/5/2025, with respect to 35 USC 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 20 has been withdrawn. However, the rejection of claim 15 still stands as the issue has not been addressed.
Applicant's arguments filed 9/5/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The manner in which the claims have been amended do not overcome the current 35 USC 101 rejection. These amendments do not make an improvement in the function of the structural elements, in this case, the display on the patient device. These elements are merely being used as a tool to perform the recited abstract idea. Further, this amendment is still considered a mental process that can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper and in this case eyes.
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 KESHA FRISBY whose telephone number is (571)272-8774. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 730AM-4PM.
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.
/KESHA FRISBY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715