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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-7 are pending in this application.
Claim rejections 35 USC 101 are maintained.
Claim rejections 35 USC 102 are maintained.
Claim rejections 35 USC 103 are maintained.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that claim 1 is amended to clarify that the emotion generation amount is output to the user, which makes clear that the features recited in amended claim 1 are not a mental process because at least outputting the emotion generation amount requires more than thought. Thus, the combination of features recited in amended claim 1 integrate any abstract idea upon which claim 1 might touch into a practical application, i.e., emotion determination in varying situations (Remarks, page 10).
Examiner respectfully submits that MPEP 2106.04(d) recites that:
“The courts have also identified limitations that did not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application:
• Merely reciting the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(f);
• Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(g); and
• Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(h).” (Emphasis added).
In fact, the claims recite limitation of “outputting the emotion generation amount to the user” which amounts to a field of use or technological environment, such as collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results (See MPEP 2106.05 (h)).Therefore, the claim is not integrated into a practical application.
Applicant argues that Balassanian does not disclose or suggest the amended features of claim 1 because Balassanian only generally describes user emotion under difference conditions and does not disclose or suggest determining whether an emotion will occur when the condition of the user changes from one to another (Remarks, pages 11-12).
Examiner respectfully submits that Balassanian discloses that: “As an alternative or addition to the report, the computer system may forecast a future mental state for the user based on the correlation determined at block 230. In addition to the correlation determined at block 230, the computer system may also use an updated version of at least the portion of influential data for the forecasted mental state. For example, the computer system may determine that there may be a correlation between the mental health data indicative of a happy mental state and the weather condition being sunny. When the weather condition is updated for next day's forecast, the computer system may predict a mental state for the user for the next day based on the correlation determined at block 230 and the weather forecast. That is, when the weather forecast indicates that the weather will be sunny the next day, the computer system may, based on the correlation determined at block 230, predict that the user may be in a happy mental state the next day.” ([0057])
Examiner interprets that predicting the user may be in a happy mental state if the weather will be sunny the next day in Balassanian ([0057]) means for determining the user is happy if the weather at the user’s place/scene is changed to sunny. Therefore, it teaches “determining whether an emotion will occur when the condition of the user changes from one to another.”
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding claim 1:
Step 1:
Claim 1 recites “An emotion estimation apparatus” and therefore is a machine.
Step 2A Prong One:
Claim 1 recites the limitations “estimates” and “estimate” which specifically recite “An emotion estimation apparatus that estimates an emotion generated by a user, using first management information in which a first situation of the user under a condition of a scene related to the user, a second situation changed from the first situation under the condition of the scene, emotion information representing an emotion expression of the user when the first situation changes to the second situation under the condition of the scene,” and “estimate the emotion generation amount on the basis of the calculation definition of the emotion generation amount corresponding to the scene currently related to the user and some or all of the extracted results,” These limitations are processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other reciting a “processing circuitry”, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in a human mind or with the aid of pen and paper. For example, “estimates” and “estimate” in the context of this claim encompasses a user mentally, and with the aid of pen and paper evaluating an emotion generated by a user using multiple information when a first situation changes to a second situation, and evaluating an emotion generation amount indicating a strength of an emotion expression generated by the user on the basis of extracted results and calculation definition of the emotion generation amount corresponding to a scene currently related to the user. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas (concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgment and opinion).
Step 2A Prong Two: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim 1 recites the additional elements “a prediction degree indicating a magnitude of a possibility that an emotion of the user may occur when the first situation changes to the second situation, and an expectation degree indicating a magnitude of an expectation of the user for an emotion of the user to occur when the-change-from the first situation changes to the second situation are managed together with information indicating the scene related to the user, second management information in which at least one of a knowledge amount indicating an amount of knowledge of the user for the scene and an experience amount indicating an amount of experience of the user for the scene is managed, and third management information in which a calculation definition of an emotion generation amount indicating a strength of an emotion expression generated by the user when the first situation changes to the second situation, based on the prediction degree, the expectation degree, and the second management information is managed together with the information indicating the scene related to the user,” The limitations amount to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, such as selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated (See MPEP 2106.05(g)). The claim also recites the additional elements “processing circuitry configured to extract the prediction degree corresponding to the scene currently related to the user and the expectation degree, from the first management information, extract the second management information corresponding to the scene currently related to the user,” and “output the emotion generation amount to the user.” The limitations amount to a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception includes collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results (See MPEP 2106.05 (h)).
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim 1 recites the limitations “processing circuitry configured to extract the prediction degree corresponding to the scene currently related to the user and the expectation degree, from the first management information, extract the second management information corresponding to the scene currently related to the user,” The limitations amount to well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions, e.g. electronically scanning or extracting data (See MPEP 2106.05(d)). As discussed above, the additional elements of using a “processing circuitry” to perform the steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 4:
Step 1:
Claim 4 recites “An emotion estimation apparatus” and therefore is a machine.
Step 2A Prong One:
Claim 4 recites the limitations “estimates” and “estimate” which specifically recite “An emotion estimation apparatus that estimates an emotion generated by a user, using first management information in which a first situation of the user under a condition of a scene related to the user, a second situation changed from the first situation under the condition of the scene, emotion information representing an emotion expression of the user when the first situation changes to the second situation under the condition of the scene,” and “estimate the emotion generation amount indicating the strength of the emotion expression generated by the user, on the basis of the calculation definition of the emotion generation amount and some or all of the extracted prediction degree, the extracted expectation degree, and the extracted second management information,” These limitations are processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other reciting a “processing circuitry”, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in a human mind or with the aid of pen and paper. For example, “estimates” and “estimate” in the context of this claim encompasses a user mentally, and with the aid of pen and paper evaluating an emotion generated by a user using multiple information when a first situation changes to a second situation, and evaluating an emotion generation amount indicating a strength of an emotion expression generated by the user on the basis of extracted information and calculation definition of the emotion generation amount corresponding to a scene currently related to the user. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas (concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgment and opinion).
Step 2A Prong Two: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim 4 recites the additional elements “a prediction degree indicating a magnitude of a possibility that an emotion of the user may occur when the first situation changes to the second situation, and an expectation degree indicating a magnitude of an expectation of the user for the emotion of the user to occur when the first situation changes to the second situation are managed together with information indicating the scene related to the user, second management information in which at least one of a knowledge amount indicating an amount of knowledge of the user for the scene and an experience amount indicating an amount of experience of the user for the scene is managed, and third management information in which a calculation definition of an emotion generation amount indicating a strength of an emotion expression generated by the user when the first situation changes to the second situation, based on the prediction degree, the expectation degree, and the second management information is managed together with the information indicating the scene related to the user,” The limitations amount to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, such as selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated (See MPEP 2106.05(g)). The claim also recites the additional elements “processing circuitry configured to extract the prediction degree corresponding to emotion information representing an emotion expression that the user desires to share with other person and the expectation degree, from the first management information, extract the information indicating the scene managed together with the extracted results in the first management information, extract management information in which at least one of the knowledge amount and the experience amount in the second management information corresponding to the extracted scene satisfies a condition,” and “output the emotion generation amount to the user.” The limitations amount to a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception includes collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results (See MPEP 2106.05 (h)).
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim 4 recites the limitations “processing circuitry configured to extract the prediction degree corresponding to emotion information representing an emotion expression that the user desires to share with other person and the expectation degree, from the first management information, extract the information indicating the scene managed together with the extracted results in the first management information, extract management information in which at least one of the knowledge amount and the experience amount in the second management information corresponding to the extracted scene satisfies a condition,” The limitations amount to well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions, e.g. electronically scanning or extracting data (See MPEP 2106.05(d)). As discussed above, the additional elements of using a “processing circuitry” to perform the steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 2 is dependent on the claim 1 and includes all the limitations of claim 1. Therefore, claim 2 recites the same abstract idea of claim 1. The claim recites the additional element “the processing circuitry estimates the emotion generation amount indicating the strength of the emotion expression generated from the user, on the basis of some or all of the extracted results and the calculation definition of the emotion generation amount” which further elaborates on the abstract idea and therefore, does not amount to significant more. The claim also recites additional elements “the first management information includes a variation element that is an element that affects a variation of the emotion generation amount, the calculation definition of the emotion generation amount is a calculation definition based on the prediction degree, the expectation degree, the fluctuation element, and the second management information,” The limitations amount to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, such as selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated (See MPEP 2106.05(g)). The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 3 is dependent on the claim 1 and includes all the limitations of claim 1. Therefore, claim 3 recites the same abstract idea of claim 1. The claim recites the additional elements “the expectation degree is calculated on the basis of at least one of the knowledge amount of the user for the scene related to the user and the experience amount indicating the amount of the experience of the user for the scene related to the user.” The limitations amount to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, such as selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated (See MPEP 2106.05(g)). The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 5 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1.
Claim 6 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 4.
Claim 7 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Balassanian (US 2015/0088542).
Regarding claim 1, Balassanian teaches An emotion estimation apparatus that estimates an emotion generated by a user, using first management information in which a first situation of the user under a condition of a scene related to the user, a second situation changed from the first situation under the condition of the scene, emotion information representing an emotion expression of the user when the first situation changes to the second situation under the condition of the scene, a prediction degree indicating a magnitude of a possibility that an emotion of the user may occur when the first situation changes to the second situation, and an expectation degree indicating a magnitude of an expectation of the user for an emotion of the user to occur when the-change-from the first situation changes to the second situation are managed together with information indicating the scene related to the user ([0070]: Operation optionally proceeds to block 350. When the computer system determines that there is a correlation between the mental health data indicative of a particular emotional or mental state (e.g., happy, sad, angry, etc.) and a level or a range of the user's blood sugar level, then computer system may forecast a future mental state of the user using the updated blood sugar level.), second management information in which at least one of a knowledge amount indicating an amount of knowledge of the user for the scene and an experience amount indicating an amount of experience of the user for the scene is managed ([0057]: When the weather condition is updated for next day's forecast, the computer system may predict a mental state for the user for the next day based on the correlation determined at block 230 and the weather forecast. That is, when the weather forecast indicates that the weather will be sunny the next day, the computer system may, based on the correlation determined at block 230, predict that the user may be in a happy mental state the next day. [0103]: For example, summary screen 820 may be configured to indicate that the user is in a "Happy" mental state 85% of the time when the weather is sunny and the temperature is above 67°F (at location 816). Summary screen 822 may be configured to indicate that the user is in a "Happy" mental state 62% of the time when it is Tuesdays and Fridays (at location 818). Summary screen 822 may be configured to additionally indicate that the user is in a "Happy" mental state 71% of the time when the influential data indicates that the user has run more than two miles (at location 820).), and third management information in which a calculation definition of an emotion generation amount indicating a strength of an emotion expression generated by the user when the first situation changes to the second situation, based on the prediction degree, the expectation degree, and the second management information is managed together with the information indicating the scene related to the user ([0064]: For example, when a computer system (e.g., computer system 100) compiles or aggregates influential data for the user, the influential data may include a plurality of data items such as temperature on a particular day, the Dow Jones Industrial Average, number of miles the user has run over a week and a variety of other data items. Among the influential data, the computer system may determine a correlation between the mental health data indicative of a happy mental state and the temperature being between 65° F and 72° F.), the emotion estimation apparatus comprising:
processing circuitry configured to extract the prediction degree corresponding to the scene currently related to the user and the expectation degree, from the first management information, extract the second management information corresponding to the scene currently related to the user ([0078]: Influential data aggregation unit 412 may be configured to receive, collect, retrieve, extract or otherwise aggregate influential data from one or more data sources such as data sources 402 or 403. Each of data sources 402 and 403 may include one or more data sources 1-n. Data sources 402 and 403 may include any data source including, without limitation, weather, Dow Jones Industrial Average, financial data, rainfall, location, time, user-specific data such as amount of exercise, calorie consumptions, exercise parameters such as heart rate or miles per minute, email volumes, appointments on a schedule, a scheduled, specific information such as names, phone numbers or email addresses, etc.), and estimate the emotion generation amount on the basis of the calculation definition of the emotion generation amount corresponding to the scene currently related to the user and some or all of the extracted results ([0108]: For example, the report may indicate at 1030 that the user has indicated a mental/emotional state of being "Happy" 70% of the time when the stock market is up (e.g., indicated by the upward arrow 25a) compared to the user indicating being "Angry" 25% of the time when the stock market is down (e.g., indicated by the downward arrow 25b). Other types of mental/emotional state may be indicated by their respective percentages. For example, when the stock market is up (e.g., indicated by the upward arrow 25a), the report may show that the user has indicated another type of mental/emotional state 22% of the time and a third type of mental/emotional state 8% of the time. When the stock market is down (e.g., indicated by the downward arrow 25b), the report indicates that the user has indicated four types of emotional/mental state 25% (e.g., indicating being "Angry"), 25%, 15%, and 10% of the time respectively.); and
output the emotion generation amount to the user ([0075]: User interface 440 may be configured to provide reporting tools that may display information regarding the influential data that relate to a user's mental or emotional state compared to overall data from data sources 402 or 403 over a specified period of time.).
Regarding claim 2, Balassanian teaches the first management information includes a variation element that is an element that affects a variation of the emotion generation amount ([0070]: Operation optionally proceeds to block 350. When the computer system determines that there is a correlation between the mental health data indicative of a particular emotional or mental state (e.g., happy, sad, angry, etc.) and a level or a range of the user's blood sugar level, then computer system may forecast a future mental state of the user using the updated blood sugar level.),
the calculation definition of the emotion generation amount is a calculation definition based on the prediction degree, the expectation degree, the fluctuation element, and the second management information ([0098]: When the influential data include weather and data indicative of the user's activity in the past 30 days, the computer system may compare the occurrences of the user indicating as being "happy" with these influential data. In one particular embodiment, the computer system may calculate that 85% of the time the user indicates as being in a "happy" emotional/mental state, the influential data indicates that the weather is generally sunny and warm. In another example, the computer system may calculate that 71% of the days that the user indicated to be "happy" were days the user ran more than 2 miles.), and
the processing circuitry estimates the emotion generation amount indicating the strength of the emotion expression generated from the user, on the basis of some or all of the extracted results and the calculation definition of the emotion generation amount ([0108]: For example, the report may indicate at 1030 that the user has indicated a mental/emotional state of being "Happy" 70% of the time when the stock market is up (e.g., indicated by the upward arrow 25a) compared to the user indicating being "Angry" 25% of the time when the stock market is down (e.g., indicated by the downward arrow 25b). Other types of mental/emotional state may be indicated by their respective percentages.).
Regarding claim 3, Balassanian teaches the expectation degree is calculated on the basis of at least one of the knowledge amount of the user for the scene related to the user and the experience amount indicating the amount of the experience of the user for the scene related to the user ([0057]: When the weather condition is updated for next day's forecast, the computer system may predict a mental state for the user for the next day based on the correlation determined at block 230 and the weather forecast. That is, when the weather forecast indicates that the weather will be sunny the next day, the computer system may, based on the correlation determined at block 230, predict that the user may be in a happy mental state the next day. [0098]: When the influential data include weather and data indicative of the user's activity in the past 30 days, the computer system may compare the occurrences of the user indicating as being "happy" with these influential data. In one particular embodiment, the computer system may calculate that 85% of the time the user indicates as being in a "happy" emotional/mental state, the influential data indicates that the weather is generally sunny and warm. In another example, the computer system may calculate that 71% of the days that the user indicated to be "happy" were days the user ran more than 2 miles.).
Claim 5 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1.
Claim 7 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1. Balassanian also teaches A non-transitory computer-readable medium having computer-executable instructions that, upon execution of the instructions by a processor of a computer, cause the computer to function as each unit of the emotion estimation apparatus ([0006]: Techniques are disclosed relating to determining a correlation between a user's emotional or mental state and influential data for the user. In an embodiment, a computer system may include a processor and one or more memories that store executable instructions. The instructions may be executable by the processor to receive mental health data associated with a mental state of a user and/or mental health of the user.).
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.
Claims 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balassanian in view of Flickinger et al. (US 2021/0401337, hereinafter “Flickinger”).
Regarding claim 4, Balassanian teaches An emotion estimation apparatus that estimates an emotion generated by a user, using first management information in which a first situation of the user under a condition of a scene related to the user, a second situation changed from the first situation under the condition of the scene, emotion information representing an emotion expression of the user when the first situation changes to the second situation under the condition of the scene, a prediction degree indicating a magnitude of a possibility that an emotion of the user may occur when the first situation changes to the second situation, and an expectation degree indicating a magnitude of an expectation of the user for the emotion of the user to occur when the first situation changes to the second situation are managed together with information indicating the scene related to the user ([0070]: Operation optionally proceeds to block 350. When the computer system determines that there is a correlation between the mental health data indicative of a particular emotional or mental state (e.g., happy, sad, angry, etc.) and a level or a range of the user's blood sugar level, then computer system may forecast a future mental state of the user using the updated blood sugar level.), second management information in which at least one of a knowledge amount indicating an amount of knowledge of the user for the scene and an experience amount indicating an amount of experience of the user for the scene is managed ([0057]: When the weather condition is updated for next day's forecast, the computer system may predict a mental state for the user for the next day based on the correlation determined at block 230 and the weather forecast. That is, when the weather forecast indicates that the weather will be sunny the next day, the computer system may, based on the correlation determined at block 230, predict that the user may be in a happy mental state the next day.), and third management information in which a calculation definition of an emotion generation amount indicating a strength of an emotion expression generated by the user when the first situation changes to the second situation, based on the prediction degree, the expectation degree, and the second management information is managed together with the information indicating the scene related to the user ([0064]: For example, when a computer system (e.g., computer system 100) compiles or aggregates influential data for the user, the influential data may include a plurality of data items such as temperature on a particular day, the Dow Jones Industrial Average, number of miles the user has run over a week and a variety of other data items. Among the influential data, the computer system may determine a correlation between the mental health data indicative of a happy mental state and the temperature being between 65° F and 72° F.), the emotion estimation apparatus comprising:
processing circuitry configured to extract the prediction degree corresponding to emotion information representing an emotion expression and the expectation degree, from the first management information, extract the information indicating the scene managed together with the extracted results in the first management information, extract management information in which at least one of the knowledge amount and the experience amount in the second management information corresponding to the extracted scene satisfies a condition ([0078]: Influential data aggregation unit 412 may be configured to receive, collect, retrieve, extract or otherwise aggregate influential data from one or more data sources such as data sources 402 or 403. Each of data sources 402 and 403 may include one or more data sources 1-n. Data sources 402 and 403 may include any data source including, without limitation, weather, Dow Jones Industrial Average, financial data, rainfall, location, time, user-specific data such as amount of exercise, calorie consumptions, exercise parameters such as heart rate or miles per minute, email volumes, appointments on a schedule, a scheduled, specific information such as names, phone numbers or email addresses, etc.), estimate the emotion generation amount indicating the strength of the emotion expression generated by the user, on the basis of the calculation definition of the emotion generation amount and some or all of the extracted prediction degree, the extracted expectation degree, and the extracted second management information ([0108]: For example, the report may indicate at 1030 that the user has indicated a mental/emotional state of being "Happy" 70% of the time when the stock market is up (e.g., indicated by the upward arrow 25a) compared to the user indicating being "Angry" 25% of the time when the stock market is down (e.g., indicated by the downward arrow 25b). Other types of mental/emotional state may be indicated by their respective percentages. For example, when the stock market is up (e.g., indicated by the upward arrow 25a), the report may show that the user has indicated another type of mental/emotional state 22% of the time and a third type of mental/emotional state 8% of the time. When the stock market is down (e.g., indicated by the downward arrow 25b), the report indicates that the user has indicated four types of emotional/mental state 25% (e.g., indicating being "Angry"), 25%, 15%, and 10% of the time respectively.); and
output the emotion generation amount to the user ([0075]: User interface 440 may be configured to provide reporting tools that may display information regarding the influential data that relate to a user's mental or emotional state compared to overall data from data sources 402 or 403 over a specified period of time.).
Balassanian in view of Arora does not explicitly teach an emotion expression that the user desires to share with other person.
Flickinger teaches an emotion expression that the user desires to share with other person ([0030]: In some other embodiments, the person may share their emotional data or portions thereof with another person or party.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the forecasting a mental state of the user of Balassanian with the teaching about sharing emotional data of Flickinger because it may provide other feedback including subjective feedback of said person's own emotional state in order to improve the accuracy of said estimations or improve an adaptive learning or artificial intelligence system used for estimating emotional states (Flickinger, [0015]).
Claim 6 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 4.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Asukai et al. (US 2018/0081365) discloses that an emotion estimating unit configured to estimate an emotion of the target.
Mizuno et al. (US 2022/0048519) discloses that an information processing apparatus according to a first aspect of the present disclosure includes a control unit configured to acquire first information on a behavior of a first vehicle associated with each operation performed by a first driver on the first vehicle, acquire second information on a change in emotion of a user who shares the first vehicle, extract information on the change in emotion of the user associated with each behavior of the first vehicle by associating the first information with the second information, determine a user's evaluation of the first driver's driving based on the change in emotion of the user associated with each behavior of the first vehicle, and store the evaluation in a storage unit.
Ryuzaki et al. (US 10,937,334) discloses that an arithmetic unit of a server functions as an estimating unit that estimates the emotion, the driving skill, and the physical condition according to acquired information and functions as an information processing unit that carries out information provision to a rider according to the combination of the emotion, the driving skill, and the physical condition that are estimated.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHONG H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1766. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5pm EST.
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, Ajay Bhatia can be reached at (571) 272-3906. 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.
/PHONG H NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2156
November 14, 2025
Prosecution Insights