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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-4, 7-10, 12-14, and 16-19 are rejected. Claims 5-6, 11, 15, and 20 are canceled.
Response to Arguments
Claim Interpretation
Applicant asserts that the specification discloses corresponding structure for each of these elements, and that the § 112(f) interpretation therefore does not give rise to any indefiniteness (Remarks, page 9). The Examiner agrees that the specification discloses corresponding structure for each of these elements and there was no indefiniteness regarding the claim interpretation. The claim interpretation is not a rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Applicant's arguments filed 8/10/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts that with respect to the hub device (claim 3), the specification discloses first through fifth machine learning models 11-15, each of which is "pre-trained to extract a feature" from a specific type of sensor data pressure data (model 11), UWB displacement data (model 12), eye-movement data (model 13), heart rate/oxygen saturation/ECG data (model 14), and acceleration data (model 15), respectively (¶¶[0261]-[0262] of originally filed specification) (Remarks, page 10). Applicant additionally asserts that the specification further identifies the output of each model, including information about the user's posture, respiration rate, heart rate, sleep stage, eye movement, and/or body movement (¶¶[0263]-[0267] of originally filed specification) (Remarks, page 10).
However, this is not found to be persuasive. ¶262 discloses: “The first machine learning model 11 may be pre-trained to extract a feature from pressure data collected by the pressure sensor.” This language is repeated for each model. The specification does not indicate how the models are pre-trained or even what particular features are being extracted. A machine learning model is defined by how it is trained and what data output it is producing. Without either of those clearly or explicitly defined, the algorithm for producing said results is not adequately disclosed. The models are so broadly described that they amount to intended functional results without any clear indication on how those results are achieved or what those results even are other than “a feature.”
Applicant asserts that with respect to the user device (former claims 6 and 15, now incorporated into independent claims 1 and 13, and claims 7 and 16), the specification discloses that machine learning model 21 is "an artificial neural network (deep neural network) model" that is "trained to estimate the user's sleep state based on the processed data processed by the hub device," and that receives the processed data output by the hub device's models as input and outputs sleep state information including information about the user's sleep stage and body movement (¶¶[0273]-[0278] of originally filed specification) (Remarks, page 11).
However, ¶275 does not remedy this issue in that this section describes using the various feature outputs of the various models to feed into another model that has been trained to use these features to make a prediction. This model 21 has likewise not been described in sufficient detail. There is no indication on how this model is trained or what particular features it is trained to produce the intended result. This is a “black box” algorithm without sufficient detail to satisfy the written description requirement.
Applicant asserts that the specification further describes, in connection with FIG. 9, that the user device obtains information about a first body movement and a second body movement by inputting processed data corresponding to the contact sensor and the non-contact sensor, respectively, to a machine learning model (¶¶[0321]-[0326] of originally filed specification) (Remarks, page 11).
However, the specification does not indicate how the model is trained or what particular features are used to make a prediction. For instance, how does the first body movement signal differ from the second body movement signal? How is the preset movement determined? Are the first and second body movements added together and compared to the preset movement or are they separate comparisons?
Applicant asserts that amended claim 3 recites that the first and second machine learning models are each "trained to extract a feature from sensor data corresponding to the [first/second] data for determining sleep state information of the user," which is supported by paragraphs [0261]-[0267] of the originally filed specification (Remarks, page 11).
However, the specification does not indicate how the models are pre-trained or even what particular features are being extracted.
Applicant asserts that amended claims 7 and 16 recite that the machine learning model is "trained to determine sleep state information of the user based on the first processed data and the second processed data," which is supported by paragraphs [0273]-[0278] of the originally filed specification (Remarks, page 12).
However, ¶275 does not remedy this issue in that this section describes using the various feature outputs of the various models to feed into another model that has been trained to use these features to make a prediction. This model 21 has likewise not been described in sufficient detail.
Applicant asserts that the body-movement machine learning limitation now recited in independent claims 1 and 13 is supported by paragraphs [0273]-[0278] and [0321]-[0326] of the originally filed specification (Remarks, page 12).
However, as previously recited, the specification does not indicate how the model is trained or what particular features are used to make a prediction.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 8/10/26, with respect to claims 1-4, 7-10, 12-14, and 16-19 have been fully considered and are persuasive (Remarks, pages 12-13). Specifically, Applicant has incorporated additional elements that amount to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, namely device control in response to non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep behavior disorder detection. The 101 rejection of 1-4, 7-10, 12-14, and 16-19 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §§ 102 and 103
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 8/10/26, with respect to claims 1-4, 7-10, 12-14, and 16-19 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 102 and 103 rejections of claims 1-4, 7-10, 12-14, and 16-19 has been withdrawn. See the Examiner’s Note section below for further details.
Double Patenting
Applicant requests the Examiner hold the double patenting rejections in abeyance until allowable claims have been found (Remarks, page 17). The double patenting rejections are maintained.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: for the limitation “a body movement” in line 17, Applicant is encouraged to recite –the body movement—to properly refer back to “a body movement” in lines 13-14 previously recited. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1 are 4 are objected to because of the following informalities: for the limitation “the user’s sleep stage” in claim 1, line 24 and claim 4, lines 2-3. Applicant is encouraged to change the limitation to recite –the sleep stage of the user—to properly refer back to “a sleep stage and a body movement of the user” in claim 1, lines 13-14. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Applicant is encouraged to change the limitation of “an operation of driving a vibration element of a furniture control device to output vibration corresponding to a heart rate of the user” in lines 35-36 to recite --an operation of driving a vibration element of a furniture control device configured to output vibration corresponding to a heart rate of the user-- for clarity purposes. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Applicant is encouraged to change the limitation of “an operation of driving an actuator of a furniture control device to change a structure of the furniture control device to change a posture of the user” in lines 36-38 to recite --an operation of driving an actuator of a furniture control device to change a structure of the furniture control device configured to change a posture of the user-- for clarity purposes. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: Applicant is encouraged to change the limitation of “a machine learning model” in lines 2-3 to –the machine learning model—to properly refer back to “a machine learning model” in claim 1, lines 16-17. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 8 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities: regarding the limitation “at least one of sleepwalking disorder (somnambulism) or sleep terror disorder (pavor nocturnus),” Applicant is encouraged to change the limitation to recite --at least one of sleepwalking disorder or sleep terror disorder-- or --at least one of somnambulism or pavor nocturnus-- for clarity purposes. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 13-14 are objected to because of the following informalities: for the limitation “the user’s sleep stage” in claim 13, lines 21-22 and claim 14, line 3. Applicant is encouraged to change the limitation to recite –the sleep stage of the user—to properly refer back to “a sleep stage and a body movement of the user” in claim 13, lines 8-9. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: Applicant is encouraged to change the limitation of “a machine learning model” in lines 2-3 to –the machine learning model—to properly refer back to “a machine learning model” in claim 13, line 15. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a hub device in claims 1, 3, and 13;
a user device in claims 1, 4, 7, 10, 12, 13, 16, and 19;
a server device in claims 1, 12, and 13
a lighting device in claims 1 and 13;
a vibration element in claims 1 and 13;
a furniture control device in claims 1 and 13; and
a structure in claims 1 and 13.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
For a hub device in claims 1, 3, and 13, the specification discloses “the hub device 1 may include a communication interface capable of communicating with the user device 2, the server device 3 and/or the home appliances 4, at least one processor for processing data, and at least one memory that stores a program for controlling operation of the hub device 1” (¶60). Therefore, the Examiner is interpreting the hub device to be a communication interface, the server device or the home appliances, at least one processor, and at least one memory, or equivalents thereof.
For a user device in claims 1, 4, 7, 10, 12, 13, 16, and 19, the specification discloses “the user device 2 may include a personal computer, a terminal, a mobile phone, a smart phone, a handheld device, a wearable device, a display device, etc., without being limited thereto” (¶76). Therefore, the Examiner is interpreting the user device to be a personal computer, a terminal, a mobile phone, a smart phone, a handheld device, a wearable device, a display device, or equivalents thereof.
For a server device in claims 1, 12, and 13, the specification discloses “the server device 3 may include at least one processor that may process data received from the hub device 1, the user device 2 and/or the home appliances 4, and at least one memory that may store a program for processing data or processed data” (¶69). Therefore, the Examiner is interpreting the service device to be at least one processor and at least one memory, or equivalents thereof.
For “a lighting device” in claims 1 and 13, the specification discloses “the lighting device 43 may include a light source with a controllable intensity and/or color of light” (¶66). Therefore, the Examiner is interpreting a lighting device to be a light source, or equivalents thereof.
For “a vibration element” in claims 1 and 13, the claims recite “a vibration element of a furniture control device” (claims 1 and 13). Therefore, the Examiner is interpreting a vibration element to be a part of the furniture control device, or equivalents thereof.
For “a furniture control device” in claims 1 and 13, the specification discloses “the furniture control device 42 may include the vibration element 42 a that may transmit vibration to the user who lies or sits on the furniture 10 , and/or the actuator 42 b that may change the posture of the user by changing the structure of the furniture 10” (¶392). Therefore, the Examiner is interpreting the furniture control device to be an actuator or a vibration element, or equivalents thereof.
For “a structure” in claims 1 and 13, the specification discloses “the furniture 10 on which the user may sit or lie may include, for example, a bed, a chair and/or a sofa, but obviously, any furniture having the form that allows the user to sit or lie thereon may be used as the furniture 10 without limitation” (¶206). Therefore, the Examiner is interpreting a structure to be a position of the furniture, where the furniture is a bed, a chair, a sofa, or equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-4, 7-10, 12-14, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 7, 13, and 16 require obtaining information by inputting processed data into machine learning models. These limitations include:
“obtain information with respect to a first body movement of the user by inputting the first processed data, corresponding to the first data collected by the contact sensor, to a machine learning model trained to obtain information about a body movement of the user based on processed data; and obtain information with respect to a second body movement of the user by inputting the second processed data, corresponding to the second data collected by the non- contact sensor, to the machine learning model” in claim 1,
“obtain the first processed data by inputting the first data to a first machine learning model trained to extract a feature from sensor data corresponding to the first data for determining sleep state information of the user; and obtain the second processed data by inputting the second data to a second machine learning model trained to extract a feature from sensor data corresponding to the second data for determining sleep state information of the user” in claim 3,
“wherein the user device is further configured to store a sleep management application including a machine learning model trained to determine sleep state information of the user based on the first processed data and the second processed data” in claim 7,
“obtaining information with respect to a first body movement of the user by inputting the first processed data, corresponding to the first data collected by the contact sensor, to a machine learning model trained to obtain information about a body movement of the user based on processed data, and obtaining information with respect to a second body movement of the user by inputting the second processed data, corresponding to the second data collected by the non- contact sensor, to the machine learning model” in claim 13, and
“wherein the user device is configured to store a sleep management application including a machine learning model trained to determine sleep state information of the user based on the first processed data and the second processed data” in claim 16.
These are computer implemented functional limitations. MPEP 2161.01(I) states the following:
Claims may lack written description when the claims define the invention in functional language
specifying a desired result but the specification does not sufficiently describe how the function is
performed or the result is achieved. For software, this can occur when the algorithm or
steps/procedure for performing the computer function are not explained at all or are not
explained in sufficient detail (simply restating the function recited in the claim is not necessarily
sufficient). In other words, the algorithm or steps/procedure taken to perform the function must
be described with sufficient detail so that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand how
the inventor intended the function to be performed. See MPEP §§ 2163.02 and 2181, subsection
IV.”
Applicant’s specification repeats the functional result of obtaining information by inputting processed data into machine learning models (see ¶260-264 of the instant specification and Fig. 7). Applicant has not provided any details regarding how each model is specifically trained, what specific type of information is being produced from the model, and how that information is used to identify NREM sleep behavior disorder information. Applicant has claimed a functional result on the use of a machine learning model without setting forth any steps that the model takes to provide said results and the steps taken to particularly train a model to produce said results. The claimed models are essentially “black box” algorithms as currently claimed and described.
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 1-4, 7-10, 12-14, and 16-19 are 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.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the contact sensor" in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Dependent claims 14 and 16-19 are rejected for the same deficiency in claim 13.
Claims 1, 9-10, 12-13, and 18-19 recite versions of “a first operation,” “a second operation,” and “a third operation” which seem unclear. The specification does not disclose “a first operation,” “a second operation,” and “a third operation.” Therefore, it remains unclear what distinguishes these various operations. Applicant is encouraged to change these limitations back to recite “a preset operation” as supported in the specification (¶9). For the purpose of examination, the Examiner is interpreting these operations to be under a preset operation. Dependent claims 2-4, 7-10, 12, 14, and 16-19 are rejected for the same deficiency in claims 1 and 13.
Examiner’s Note
Claims 1-4, 7-10, 12-14, and 16-19 distinguish over the prior art but are still rejected under 35 USC § 112.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of overcoming the prior art:
The scope of a plurality of sensors comprising a first sensor and a second sensor, the first sensor being a contact sensor and the second sensor being a non-contact sensor, a hub device configured to: receive first data collected by the first sensor and second data collected by the second sensor; a user device configured to: obtain sleep state information corresponding to a sleep stage and a body movement of the user based on the first processed data and the second processed data; obtain information with respect to a first body movement of the user by inputting the first processed data, corresponding to the first data collected by the contact sensor, to a machine learning model trained to obtain information about a body movement of the user based on processed data; obtain information with respect to a second body movement of the user by inputting the second processed data, corresponding to the second data collected by the non-contact sensor, to the machine learning model; determine that a non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep behavior disorder of the user occurs based on both the first body movement and the second body movement being greater than a preset movement and the user's sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage; and a server device configured to: control at least one home appliance to perform a second operation to reduce the NREM sleep behavior disorder based on the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder, wherein the second operation comprises at least one of an operation of controlling a lighting device to output light of a preset color, an operation of increasing a fan speed of an air conditioner, an operation of driving a vibration element of a furniture control device to output vibration corresponding to a heart rate of the user, or an operation of driving an actuator of a furniture control device to change a structure of the furniture control device to change a posture of the user were not found in the prior art alone or in combination with one another to be obvious over the prior art of record. The closest prior art of record is Garcia (US 20230329583); however it fails to recite the first sensor being a contact sensor; obtain information with respect to a first body movement of the user by inputting the first processed data, corresponding to the first data collected by the contact sensor, to a machine learning model trained to obtain information about a body movement of the user based on processed data; and determine that a non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep behavior disorder of the user occurs based on both the first body movement and the second body movement being greater than a preset movement and the user's sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-4, 8-14, and 17-19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-8 and 11-18 of copending Application No. 18/784521 in view of Garcia (US 20230329583).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection. It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include the subject matter in Garcia as shown below.
Claims of the Present Application (18/887842)
Claims of US Application (18/784521)
Secondary Reference Garcia (US 20230329583)
1
1, 4, 5, 6
Garcia teaches the user's sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage (¶16-determining a sleep state of a user based on sensed data received from the one or more sensors during a sleep session of the user; ¶8-receive sensor data from the at least one sensor during a sleep session of a user of a bed, provide, as input to a sleep state classifier; ¶297-a new sleep stage is detected (such as NREM)) and an occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder (¶8-generate output based on identification of the sleepwalking event; ¶4-the output can be provided to the user and/or healthcare providers of the user). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include the user's sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage and an occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder of Garcia in order for the user to continue to experience uninterrupted sleep, thereby improving the user's overall sleep experience and/or sleep quality (Garcia, ¶4).
2
2
3
3
4
4
Garcia teaches wherein the user device is further configured to determine that the NREM sleep behavior disorder occurs, based on the user’s sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage and the user’s body movement being greater than a preset movement (¶8-determine whether (i) the sleep state classification for the user satisfies a first threshold condition and (ii) the bed exit detection classification for the user satisfies a second threshold condition, identify, based on a determination that the first and the second threshold conditions are satisfied, a sleepwalking event for the user; ¶9-the first threshold condition can be a N3 sleep state, the second threshold condition can be detection of at least one bed exit event). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the user device is further configured to determine that the NREM sleep behavior disorder occurs, based on the user’s sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage and the user’s body movement being greater than a preset movement of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
8
Garcia teaches wherein the NREM sleep behavior disorder includes at least one of sleepwalking disorder (somnambulism) or sleep terror disorder (pavor nocturnus) (¶4-detecting sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the NREM sleep behavior disorder includes at least one of sleepwalking disorder (somnambulism) or sleep terror disorder (pavor nocturnus) of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
9
7
Garcia teaches wherein the first operation includes an operation of alerting the user of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder by a user interface (¶10-generating the output can include generating a notification indicating that the sleepwalking event was identified during the user's sleep session, transmit the notification to a user device of the user for presentation in a graphical user interface (GUI) display when the user wakes up from the sleep session). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the first operation includes an operation of alerting the user of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder by a user interface of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
10
8
Garcia teaches wherein the first operation includes an operation of notifying an external emergency center registered and the user device of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder (¶4-the computing system can also generate output about the detected sleepwalking event. The output can be provided to the user and healthcare providers of the user; ¶10-generating the output can include generating a notification indicating that the sleepwalking event was identified during the user's sleep session. The computer system can also transmit the notification to a user device of the user for presentation in a graphical user interface (GUI) display when the user wakes up from the sleep session. The computer system may transmit the notification to a user device of a healthcare provider associated with the user, the notification being a machine-instruction to engage an automated device). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the first operation includes an operation of notifying an external emergency center registered and the user device of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
12
Garcia teaches wherein the server device is further configured to control at least one home appliance, registered with the user device, to perform a third operation to wake up the user based on the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder (¶178-server hardware 1204; ¶55-perform an intervention to prevent the sleepwalking onset during the given sleep session. As described further below, the intervention can include adjusting a microclimate of the bed system by increasing a temperature of the microclimate such that the user's CBT decreases quickly and N3 sleep can be advanced. Another intervention can include providing sensory stimulation to delay N3 sleep. One or more other interventions may also be determined and performed; ¶101-the home automation device can also be instructed to activate an alarm that can cause the user 308 to wake up; ¶296). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the server device is further configured to control at least one home appliance, registered with the user device, to perform a third operation to wake up the user based on the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
13
1, 4, 5, 6, 13
Garcia teaches the user's sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage (¶16-determining a sleep state of a user based on sensed data received from the one or more sensors during a sleep session of the user; ¶8-receive sensor data from the at least one sensor during a sleep session of a user of a bed, provide, as input to a sleep state classifier; ¶297-a new sleep stage is detected (such as NREM)) and an occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder (¶8-generate output based on identification of the sleepwalking event; ¶4-the output can be provided to the user and/or healthcare providers of the user). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include the user's sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage and an occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder of Garcia in order for the user to continue to experience uninterrupted sleep, thereby improving the user's overall sleep experience and/or sleep quality (Garcia, ¶4).
14
14
Garcia teaches wherein the user device is further configured to determine that the NREM sleep behavior disorder occurs, based on the user’s sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage and the user’s body movement being greater than a preset movement (¶8-determine whether (i) the sleep state classification for the user satisfies a first threshold condition and (ii) the bed exit detection classification for the user satisfies a second threshold condition, identify, based on a determination that the first and the second threshold conditions are satisfied, a sleepwalking event for the user; ¶9-the first threshold condition can be a N3 sleep state, the second threshold condition can be detection of at least one bed exit event). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the user device is further configured to determine that the NREM sleep behavior disorder occurs, based on the user’s sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage and the user’s body movement being greater than a preset movement of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
17
Garcia teaches wherein the NREM sleep behavior disorder includes at least one of sleepwalking disorder (somnambulism) or sleep terror disorder (pavor nocturnus) (¶4-detecting sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the NREM sleep behavior disorder includes at least one of sleepwalking disorder (somnambulism) or sleep terror disorder (pavor nocturnus) of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
18
7
Garcia teaches wherein the first operation includes an operation of alerting the user of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder by a user interface (¶10-generating the output can include generating a notification indicating that the sleepwalking event was identified during the user's sleep session, transmit the notification to a user device of the user for presentation in a graphical user interface (GUI) display when the user wakes up from the sleep session). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the first operation includes an operation of alerting the user of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder by a user interface of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
19
8
Garcia teaches wherein the first operation includes an operation of notifying an external emergency center registered and the user device of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder (¶4-the computing system can also generate output about the detected sleepwalking event. The output can be provided to the user and healthcare providers of the user; ¶10-generating the output can include generating a notification indicating that the sleepwalking event was identified during the user's sleep session. The computer system can also transmit the notification to a user device of the user for presentation in a graphical user interface (GUI) display when the user wakes up from the sleep session. The computer system may transmit the notification to a user device of a healthcare provider associated with the user, the notification being a machine-instruction to engage an automated device). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the first operation includes an operation of notifying an external emergency center registered and the user device of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
Claims 7 and 16 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of copending Application No. 18/784521 in view of Garcia and Baker (WO 2022006119).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection. It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include the subject matter in Garcia and Baker as shown below.
Claims of the Present Application (18/887842)
Claims of US Application (18/784521)
Secondary Reference Garcia (US 20230329583)
Secondary Reference Baker (WO 2022006119)
7
Baker teaches wherein the user device is further configured to store a sleep management application including a machine learning model trained to determine sleep state information of the user based on the first processed date and the second processed data (page 27, ¶3-the sleep management system 440 includes a user module 441 that includes a data input/output (I/O) module 444, a data processing module 445, a decision module 443, and an intervention action module 442; page 31, ¶3-the decision module 443 can include a predictive data model 460 that includes a user-specific data model 461 and ML models or functions 462 to update the user-specific data model 461 over time as new input-output relationships are revealed using feedback data and/or other revisions to the predictive data model 460; page 27, ¶3-each of the modules 442, 443, 444, 445 includes computer executable instructions which can be stored on one or a plurality of non-transitory computer-readable medium and executed by processing circuitry, such a single computing device; page 17, line 8-trained using input from a dataset; Fig. 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the user device is further configured to store a sleep management application including a machine learning model trained to determine sleep state information of the user based on the first processed date and the second processed data of Baker in order to provide intervention actions to improve sleep, such as to improve falling asleep (e.g., smoother physiological changes in the wake-to-sleep transition) and to improve the sleep processes (e.g., reducing the arousal threshold, increase sleep efficiency, enhance nighttime cardiovascular function) (Baker, page 3, lines 15-25).
16
Baker teaches wherein the user device is further configured to store a sleep management application including a machine learning model trained to determine sleep state information of the user based on the first processed data and the second processed data (page 27, ¶3-the sleep management system 440 includes a user module 441 that includes a data input/output (I/O) module 444, a data processing module 445, a decision module 443, and an intervention action module 442; page 31, ¶3-the decision module 443 can include a predictive data model 460 that includes a user-specific data model 461 and ML models or functions 462 to update the user-specific data model 461 over time as new input-output relationships are revealed using feedback data and/or other revisions to the predictive data model 460; page 27, ¶3-each of the modules 442, 443, 444, 445 includes computer executable instructions which can be stored on one or a plurality of non-transitory computer-readable medium and executed by processing circuitry, such a single computing device; page 17, line 8-trained using input from a dataset; Fig. 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the user device is further configured to store a sleep management application including a machine learning model trained to determine sleep state information of the user based on the first processed data and the second processed data of Baker in order to provide intervention actions to improve sleep, such as to improve falling asleep (e.g., smoother physiological changes in the wake-to-sleep transition) and to improve the sleep processes (e.g., reducing the arousal threshold, increase sleep efficiency, enhance nighttime cardiovascular function) (Baker, page 3, lines 15-25).
Claims 1-4, 8-14, and 17-19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of copending Application No. 18/783016 in view of Garcia (US 20230329583), Tiron (WO 2021198934), and Blanchard (US 20210295668).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection. It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include the subject matter in Garcia, Tiron, and Blanchard as shown below.
Claims of the Present Application (18/887842)
Claims of US Application (18/783016)
Secondary Reference Garcia (US 20230329583)
Secondary Reference Tiron (WO 2021198934)
Secondary Reference Blanchard (US 20210295668)
1, 13
1, 13, 14, 15
Garcia teaches a non-contact sensor(¶26-the user can merely go to bed and their sleep states and bed presence can be monitored and tracked based on BCG signals or other signals that are sensed by components of the bed (e.g., one or more sensors, sensor pads, sensor strips, sensor arrays, etc.)); a body movement of the user based on the first processed data and the second processed data (¶76-the control box 124 can also be configured to determine other characteristics of the user based on the received pressure signal, such as blood pressure, tossing and turning movements, rolling movements, limb movements, weight, presence or lack of presence of the user, and/or the identity of the user; ¶16); obtain information with respect to a first body movement of the user to obtain information about a body movement of the user based on processed data (Garcia, ¶250-machine learning techniques can be used to determine and detect bed exits of the user. For example, the computer system can provide, as input to the bed exit detection classifier, a second portion of the sensor data; ¶26-the user can merely go to bed and their sleep states and bed presence can be monitored and tracked based on BCG signals or other signals that are sensed by components of the bed (e.g., one or more sensors, sensor pads, sensor strips, sensor arrays, etc.; ¶264); determine that the NREM sleep behavior disorder occurs based on both the first body movement being greater than a present movement and the user’s sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage (Garcia, ¶8-determine whether (i) the sleep state classification for the user satisfies a first threshold condition and (ii) the bed exit detection classification for the user satisfies a second threshold condition, identify, based on a determination that the first and the second threshold conditions are satisfied, a sleepwalking event for the user; ¶9-the first threshold condition can be a N3 sleep state, the second threshold condition can be detection of at least one bed exit event); an occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder (¶8-generate output based on identification of the sleepwalking event; ¶4-the output can be provided to the user and/or healthcare providers of the user); wherein the second operation comprises at least one of an operation of controlling a lighting device to output light of a preset color, an operation of increasing a fan speed of an air conditioner, an operation of driving a vibration element of a furniture control device to output vibration corresponding to a heart rate of the user, or an operation of driving an actuator of a furniture control device to change a structure of the furniture control device to change a posture of the user (¶96-controlling various recline or incline positions of the bed 302; ¶113- changing the color of the light in the bedroom environment). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include a non-contact sensor; a body movement of the user based on the first processed data and the second processed data; obtaining information with respect to a first body movement of the user to obtain information about a body movement of the user based on processed data; and determine that the NREM sleep behavior disorder occurs based on both the first body movement being greater than a present movement and the user’s sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage; an occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder; wherein the second operation comprises at least one of an operation of controlling a lighting device to output light of a preset color, an operation of increasing a fan speed of an air conditioner, an operation of driving a vibration element of a furniture control device to output vibration corresponding to a heart rate of the user, or an operation of driving an actuator of a furniture control device to change a structure of the furniture control device to change a posture of the user. of Garcia in order for the user to continue to experience uninterrupted sleep, thereby improving the user's overall sleep experience and/or sleep quality (Garcia, ¶4).
Tiron teaches wherein the first sensor is a contact sensor (Tiron, ¶77-the PPG sensor 154 may be worn by the user; ¶78-ECG sensor 156 comprises one or more electrodes positioned on or around a portion of the user during a sleep session), and the second sensor is a non-contact sensor (Tiron, ¶84-at least one of the one or more sensors 130 is not coupled to the respiratory therapy device 122, control system 110, or external device 170 and is generally adjacent to the user during the sleep session. (e.g., positioned on or in contact with a part of the user; worn by the user; coupled to or positioned on a nightstand; coupled to a mattress; coupled to a ceiling); etc.)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the first sensor is a contact sensor and the second sensor is a non-contact sensor of Tiron in order to determine a sleep-wake signal associated with the user during the sleep session and one or more sleep-related parameter (Tiron, ¶62) and more accurately determine whether movement is due to the user being in an atypical REM sleep stage, or due to the user’s insomnia or periodic limb movement (Tiron, ¶147).
Blanchard teaches to obtain information with respect to a second body movement (¶78-automated improvement of fall detection accuracy, said system providing acceleration data to a threshold-based algorithm; ¶37-whereby if the acceleration signal is within a first low acceleration range for a predetermined period of time and is followed by a second high acceleration signal in a second predetermined period of time a fall condition is determined by the processor; ¶10-a body-worn sensor or wearable device sensor is a sensor which is mechanically associated with the body of a user such that the sensor can sense at least acceleration of the body) and the second body movement being greater than a present movement (¶101-movement of the body relative to a reference frame; ¶117-a second high acceleration signal 353 in a second high acceleration range 354 which may be greater than setting HA 354A; ¶70). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include obtaining information with respect to a second body movement and the second body movement being greater than a preset movement of Blanchard in order to determine whether a sleep walk even has been detected (Blanchard, ¶136).
2
5
Tiron teaches a radar sensor and a photoplethysmography (PPG) sensor (Tiron, ¶60-one or more sensors 130 include PPG sensor 154 and LiDAR sensor 178; ¶60-the one or more sensors 130 can include any combination and any number of each of the sensors described and/or shown herein). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include a radar sensor and a photoplethysmography (PPG) sensor of Tiron in order to determine a sleep-wake signal associated with the user during the sleep session and one or more sleep-related parameter (Tiron, ¶62) and more accurately determine whether movement is due to the user being in an atypical REM sleep stage, or due to the user’s insomnia or periodic limb movement (Tiron, ¶147).
3
2
Garcia teaches being trained to extract a feature from sensor data corresponding to the first data for determining sleep state information of the user (¶68-the processor 136 can use information collected by the pressure transducer 146 to determine a heartrate or a respiration rate for the user laying on the bed 112; ¶77-the processor 136 can also attribute such fluctuations in air pressure to sleep quality of the user. Such attributions can be determined based on applying one or more machine learning models and/or algorithms to the pressure signals generated by the pressure transducer 146; ¶249-the computersystem can provide, as input to the sleep state classifier, a first portion of the sensor data; ¶75) and being trained to extract a feature from sensor data corresponding to the second data for determining sleep state information of the user (¶54-the computer system can apply one or more machine learning models to the sensor data; ¶250-the computer system can provide, as input to the bed exit detection classifier, a second portion of the sensor data). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include being trained to extract a feature from sensor data corresponding to the first data for determining sleep state information of the user and being trained to extract a feature from sensor data corresponding to the second data for determining sleep state information of the user of Garcia in order for the user to continue to experience uninterrupted sleep, thereby improving the user's overall sleep experience and/or sleep quality (Garcia, ¶4).
4
Garcia teaches wherein the user device is further configured to determine that the NREM sleep behavior disorder occurs, based on the user’s sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage and the user’s body movement being greater than a preset movement (¶8-determine whether (i) the sleep state classification for the user satisfies a first threshold condition and (ii) the bed exit detection classification for the user satisfies a second threshold condition, identify, based on a determination that the first and the second threshold conditions are satisfied, a sleepwalking event for the user; ¶9-the first threshold condition can be a N3 sleep state, the second threshold condition can be detection of at least one bed exit event). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the user device is further configured to determine that the NREM sleep behavior disorder occurs, based on the user’s sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage and the user’s body movement being greater than a preset movement of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
8
Garcia teaches wherein the NREM sleep behavior disorder includes at least one of sleepwalking disorder (somnambulism) or sleep terror disorder (pavor nocturnus) (¶4-detecting sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the NREM sleep behavior disorder includes at least one of sleepwalking disorder (somnambulism) or sleep terror disorder (pavor nocturnus) of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
9
Garcia teaches wherein the first operation includes an operation of alerting the user of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder by a user interface (¶10-generating the output can include generating a notification indicating that the sleepwalking event was identified during the user's sleep session, transmit the notification to a user device of the user for presentation in a graphical user interface (GUI) display when the user wakes up from the sleep session). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the first operation includes an operation of alerting the user of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder by a user interface of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
10
Garcia teaches wherein the first operation includes an operation of notifying an external emergency center registered and the user device of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder (¶4-the computing system can also generate output about the detected sleepwalking event. The output can be provided to the user and healthcare providers of the user; ¶10-generating the output can include generating a notification indicating that the sleepwalking event was identified during the user's sleep session. The computer system can also transmit the notification to a user device of the user for presentation in a graphical user interface (GUI) display when the user wakes up from the sleep session. The computer system may transmit the notification to a user device of a healthcare provider associated with the user, the notification being a machine-instruction to engage an automated device). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the first operation includes an operation of notifying an external emergency center registered and the user device of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
12
10, 11
Garcia teaches wherein the server device is further configured to control at least one home appliance, registered with the user device, to perform a third operation to wake up the user based on the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder (¶178-server hardware 1204; ¶55-perform an intervention to prevent the sleepwalking onset during the given sleep session. As described further below, the intervention can include adjusting a microclimate of the bed system by increasing a temperature of the microclimate such that the user's CBT decreases quickly and N3 sleep can be advanced. Another intervention can include providing sensory stimulation to delay N3 sleep. One or more other interventions may also be determined and performed; ¶101-the home automation device can also be instructed to activate an alarm that can cause the user 308 to wake up; ¶296). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the server device is further configured to control at least one home appliance, registered with the user device, to perform a third operation to wake up the user based on the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
14
Garcia teaches wherein the user device is further configured to determine that the NREM sleep behavior disorder occurs, based on the user’s sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage and the user’s body movement being greater than a preset movement (¶8-determine whether (i) the sleep state classification for the user satisfies a first threshold condition and (ii) the bed exit detection classification for the user satisfies a second threshold condition, identify, based on a determination that the first and the second threshold conditions are satisfied, a sleepwalking event for the user; ¶9-the first threshold condition can be a N3 sleep state, the second threshold condition can be detection of at least one bed exit event). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the user device is further configured to determine that the NREM sleep behavior disorder occurs, based on the user’s sleep stage being an NREM sleep stage and the user’s body movement being greater than a preset movement of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
17
Garcia teaches wherein the NREM sleep behavior disorder includes at least one of sleepwalking disorder (somnambulism) or sleep terror disorder (pavor nocturnus) (¶4-detecting sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the NREM sleep behavior disorder includes at least one of sleepwalking disorder (somnambulism) or sleep terror disorder (pavor nocturnus) of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
18
Garcia teaches wherein the first operation includes an operation of alerting the user of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder by a user interface (¶10-generating the output can include generating a notification indicating that the sleepwalking event was identified during the user's sleep session, transmit the notification to a user device of the user for presentation in a graphical user interface (GUI) display when the user wakes up from the sleep session). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the first operation includes an operation of alerting the user of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder by a user interface of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
19
Garcia teaches wherein first preset operation includes an operation of notifying an external emergency center registered and the user device of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder (¶4-the computing system can also generate output about the detected sleepwalking event. The output can be provided to the user and healthcare providers of the user; ¶10-generating the output can include generating a notification indicating that the sleepwalking event was identified during the user's sleep session. The computer system can also transmit the notification to a user device of the user for presentation in a graphical user interface (GUI) display when the user wakes up from the sleep session. The computer system may transmit the notification to a user device of a healthcare provider associated with the user, the notification being a machine-instruction to engage an automated device). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the first operation includes an operation of notifying an external emergency center registered and the user device of the occurrence of the NREM sleep behavior disorder of Garcia in order to detect sleepwalking events of a user of a bed and preventing sleepwalking events (e.g., somnambulism) of that user during sleep sessions. (Garcia, ¶4).
Claims 7 and 16 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of copending Application No. 18/783016 in view of Garcia, Tiron, Blanchard, and Baker (WO 2022006119).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection. It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include the subject matter in Garcia, Tiron, Blanchard, and Baker as shown below.
Claims of the Present Application (18/887842)
Claims of US Application (18/783016)
Secondary Reference Garcia (US 20230329583)
Secondary Reference Baker (WO 2022006119)
7
Baker teaches wherein the user device is further configured to store a sleep management application including a machine learning model trained to determine sleep state information of the user based on the first processed data and the second processed data (page 27, ¶3-the sleep management system 440 includes a user module 441 that includes a data input/output (I/O) module 444, a data processing module 445, a decision module 443, and an intervention action module 442; page 31, ¶3-the decision module 443 can include a predictive data model 460 that includes a user-specific data model 461 and ML models or functions 462 to update the user-specific data model 461 over time as new input-output relationships are revealed using feedback data and/or other revisions to the predictive data model 460; page 27, ¶3-each of the modules 442, 443, 444, 445 includes computer executable instructions which can be stored on one or a plurality of non-transitory computer-readable medium and executed by processing circuitry, such a single computing device; page 17, line 8-trained using input from a dataset; Fig. 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the user device is further configured to store a sleep management application including a machine learning model trained to determine sleep state information of the user based on the first processed data and the second processed data of Baker in order to provide intervention actions to improve sleep, such as to improve falling asleep (e.g., smoother physiological changes in the wake-to-sleep transition) and to improve the sleep processes (e.g., reducing the arousal threshold, increase sleep efficiency, enhance nighttime cardiovascular function) (Baker, page 3, lines 15-25).
16
Baker teaches wherein the user device is further configured to store a sleep management application including a machine learning model trained to determine sleep state information of the user based on the first processed data and the second processed data (page 27, ¶3-the sleep management system 440 includes a user module 441 that includes a data input/output (I/O) module 444, a data processing module 445, a decision module 443, and an intervention action module 442; page 31, ¶3-the decision module 443 can include a predictive data model 460 that includes a user-specific data model 461 and ML models or functions 462 to update the user-specific data model 461 over time as new input-output relationships are revealed using feedback data and/or other revisions to the predictive data model 460; page 27, ¶3-each of the modules 442, 443, 444, 445 includes computer executable instructions which can be stored on one or a plurality of non-transitory computer-readable medium and executed by processing circuitry, such a single computing device; page 17, line 8-trained using input from a dataset; Fig. 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the copending application to include wherein the user device is further configured to store a sleep management application including a machine learning model trained to determine sleep state information of the user based on the first processed data and the second processed data of Baker in order to provide intervention actions to improve sleep, such as to improve falling asleep (e.g., smoother physiological changes in the wake-to-sleep transition) and to improve the sleep processes (e.g., reducing the arousal threshold, increase sleep efficiency, enhance nighttime cardiovascular function) (Baker, page 3, lines 15-25).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20150087894: relates to sensing stages of sleep and sleep events for the treatment of sleep disorders, such as night terrors (¶3).
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 LAURA HODGE whose telephone number is (571) 272-7101. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00 am-5:00 pm.
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, UNSU JUNG can be reached at (571) 272-8506. 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.
/LAURA HODGE/Examiner, Art Unit 3792
