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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/20/204 and 2/21/2025 were filed are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 8-9, 12, 14, 16-17, 20, 22, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan et al. (US 2022/0036714 A1, hereinafter Tan) in view of GUJRAL et al. (US 2020/0037964 A1, hereinafter Gujral).
Regarding claims 1, 9, and 17, Tan discloses
Claim 1: A method comprising: at an electronic device in communication with one or more displays (Para [0015]: “In some implementations, generating the notification can include presenting an indication that the user has fallen on at least one of a display device or an audio device of the mobile device.”) and one or more input devices (Fig. 25 Sensors 2510, 2512, 2514, and 2532 and Camera system 2522 ):
Claim 9: An electronic device comprising: one or more displays (Para [0015]: “In some implementations, generating the notification can include presenting an indication that the user has fallen on at least one of a display device or an audio device of the mobile device.”); one or more input devices (Fig. 25 Sensors 2510, 2512, 2514, and 2532 and Camera system 2522 ); a memory (Fig. 25 memory 2550); one or more processors (Fig. 25 Processor(s) 2504); and one or more programs stored in the memory and configured to be executed by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including instructions for:
Claim 17: A non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing one or more programs (Claim 8: “one or more non-transitory computer readable media storing instructions”), the one or more programs comprising instructions, which when executed by one or more processors of an electronic device, cause the electronic device to perform a method comprising:
capturing, using a first subset of the one or more input devices, first biometric data of a user of the electronic device; storing the first biometric data (Para [0169]: “As an example, the heart rate of the user is deviates from a particular range (e.g., a "normal" or "healthy" range), the mobile device 102 may determine that the user is more likely to be in need of assistance”; This implies that there is monitoring and storing of normal heart rate);
after storing the first biometric data of the user, detecting, using a second subset of the one or more input devices, a movement of the electronic device that satisfies one or more first criteria (Para [0172]: “For example, if the user experienced a high impact (e.g., greater than a first threshold value), and exhibited signs of trauma and/or impairment in motion after the impact, a determination can be made that the user has fallen and may be in need of assistance. As another example, if the user experienced a moderate impact ( e.g., less than the first threshold value, but greater than a second threshold value smaller than the first threshold value), was performing certain activities prior to the impact ( e.g., walking, climbing stairs, etc.), was performing a flailing or a bracing motion prior to impact, and exhibited signs of trauma and/or impairment in motion after the impact, a determination can be made that the user has fallen and may be in need of assistance.”, Para [0174]: “Other types of information can also be used to determine whether a user has fallen. As an example, as discussed above, erratic motions over a period of time may be more indicative of a fall ( e.g., the user may be flailing his arms while falling).”, Para [0183]: “The mobile device 102 can continuously measure the acceleration and the orientation of the mobile device over a sliding sample window ( e.g., to generate a continuous sample buffer). The acceleration signal can be used to identify the direction of gravity (or the inertial z-direction), and the orientation signal can be used to determine the orientation of the mobile device 102 with respect to the direction of gravity. Using this information, the mobile device 102 can determine the pose angle of the mobile device 102 (approximating the orientation of the user 110). Further, using this information, the rate of rotation of the mobile device 102 can be determined with respect to both the body frame and the inertia frame ( approximating the rate of rotation of the user 110 with respect to the body frame and the inertia frame).”);
in response to detecting the movement:
capturing, using a third subset of the one or more input devices, second biometric data (Para [0220]: “As another example, pressure sensors can be used to detect multi-level falls (e.g., a user falling off a ladder). As another example, heart rate sensors can be used to detect changes in heart rate, such as an elevation of heart rate (e.g., due of a fight-or-flight response) or heart rate decay curves (e.g., a person's heart rate decay after a fall may have distinctive characteristics, such as a smaller time constant, compared to the heart rate decay after the end of a physical work out)”);
However Tan does not explicitly discloses
in accordance with a determination that the second biometric data satisfies one or more second criteria including a criterion that is satisfied based on a comparison of the second biometric data with the first biometric data, displaying a visual indication; and
in accordance with a determination that the second biometric data does not satisfy the one or more second criteria, forgoing displaying the visual indication.
Gujral teaches
in accordance with a determination that the second biometric data satisfies one or more second criteria including a criterion that is satisfied based on a comparison of the second biometric data with the first biometric data, displaying a visual indication (Para [0019]: “If a user were in a communication session with another user's computing device and began walking or jogging, the system could monitor the velocity of the user, determine the heart rate and in conjunction analyze the user's facial characteristics to determine if delivering an S.O.S. notification would be necessary. In another example, the user might experience a sudden onset of a heart attack or other ailment. The user's pulse rate might dip or spike abnormally low or high. The user may also manifest severe physical expressions of discomfort and distress. Then, the system would analyze these physical characteristics along with a determination of whether the biometric data meets the threshold and warrant an S.O.S. alert to the other computing device.”, Para [0061]: “As illustrated in FIG. 4C, the notification 218 is an alert message which appears on the display screen 101 of the second user's client computing device 106(2). The notification 218 indicates that the first user may have a serious health condition and be in need of assistance”, Para [0067]: “At step 507, the system will determine whether the level of distress exceeds a threshold or not. For example, if the user's pulse is too high, or walking too fast, the threshold could be exceeded. In another example, the user is having an expression of distress or moving too quickly or erratically. Different combinations are possible in different embodiments of the invention to determine if the threshold is met. If the level exceeds a threshold, the system 102 proceeds to step 509 where it communicates a notification 218 indicating the level of distress to a remote computing device. For example, the server sends a notification 218 to another client computing device that is in a communication session with the first user, whereby the second user is notified that the first user is in distress.”); and
in accordance with a determination that the second biometric data does not satisfy the one or more second criteria, forgoing displaying the visual indication (Para [0067]: “If the level of distress does not exceed the threshold, no notification 218 is sent and the system will revert back to step 501 receiving biometric data 160, location 111 data, and image data 199.”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Tan with displaying visual alert notification based on a threshold and other aspects of Gujral. The determination of fall of Tan can include using heart rate (Para [0220]) and determination of sending S.O.S. message (Para [0244]-[0245]), and Gujral’s device includes monitoring heart rate for determining sending visual alert (Para [0059] and [0067]), which would have produced the predicted effect of better alert notices to other parties when the user is in need of help but cannot communicate (Gujral Para [0002]).
Regarding claims 4, 12 and 20, dependent upon claims 1, 9, and 17 respectively, Tan in view of Gujral teaches every limitation regarding claims 1, 9, and 17.
Tan further discloses
the one or more first criteria include a criterion that is satisfied when the movement of the electronic device is indicative of a head of the user exceeding a threshold acceleration (Para [0112]: “Further, in practice, the mobile device 102 can be positioned on other locations of a user's body (e.g., arm, shoulder, leg, hip, head, abdomen, hand, foot, or any other location)”, Para [0183]: “The mobile device 102 can continuously measure the acceleration and the orientation of the mobile device over a sliding sample window (e.g., to generate a continuous sample buffer). The acceleration signal can be used to identify the direction of gravity (or the inertial z-direction), and the orientation signal can be used to determine the orientation of the mobile device 102 with respect to the direction of gravity. Using this information, the mobile device 102 can determine the pose angle of the mobile device 102 (approximating the orientation of the user 110). Further, using this information, the rate of rotation of the mobile device 102 can be determined with respect to both the body frame and the inertia frame (approximating the rate of rotation of the user 110 with respect to the body frame and the inertia frame).”, Para [0190]: “In some cases, the mobile device 102 can also identify different types of tumbling falls. For example, if the one or more instantaneous axes of rotation are approximately 90° with respect to the direction of gravity, this can signify a tumble in which a user rolls headlong or sideways (e.g., somersaults or logrolls ). As another example, if the one or more instantaneous axes of rotation is between 0° and 90° with respect to the direction of gravity, this can signify a tumble in which a user twists while falling.”).
Claims 5, 13, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan et al. (US 2022/0036714 A1, hereinafter Tan) in view of GUJRAL et al. (US 2020/0037964 A1, hereinafter Gujral) and Sullivan et al. (US 2024/0058613 A1, hereinafter Sullivan).
Regarding claims 5, 13, and 21, dependent upon claims 1, 9, and 17 respectively, Tan in view of Gujral teaches every limitation regarding claims 1, 9, and 17.
However Tan in view Gujral does not explicitly teach
detecting the movement of the electronic device further comprises detecting, using a sensor on a second electronic device, an acceleration that exceeds a threshold acceleration.
Sullivan teaches
detecting the movement of the electronic device further comprises detecting, using a sensor on a second electronic device, an acceleration that exceeds a threshold acceleration (Para [0194]: “The medallion (1900) can also be used as a self-standing device, i.e., without the pair of eyeglasses, if the sought functionalities are limited to fall detection and prevention, while when added to the pair of eyeglasses further functionalities may be added such as after fall recovery.”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Tan in view of Gujral with having a separate device for fall detection of Sullivan to effectively increase the robustness for detecting fall event and sending alert messages.
Claims 6, 8, 14, 16, 22, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan et al. (US 2022/0036714 A1, hereinafter Tan) in view of GUJRAL et al. (US 2020/0037964 A1, hereinafter Gujral) and Samadani et al. (US 2016/0015275 A1, hereinafter Samadani).
Regarding claims 6, 14, and 22, dependent upon claims 1, 9, and 17 respectively, Tan in view of Gujral teaches every limitation regarding claims 1, 9, and 17.
However Tan in view Gujral does not explicitly teach
capturing the second biometric data includes capturing the second biometric data using sensors at progressive time intervals after detecting the movement of the electronic device.
Samadani teaches
capturing the second biometric data includes capturing the second biometric data using sensors at progressive time intervals after detecting the movement of the electronic device (Fig. 3, Para [0040]: “Processing logic then detects a constant activity state of the user for a predetermined period of time (processing block 306). As discussed herein, the constant activity state may include a period of constant high activity, a period of constant moderate activity, a period of constant inactivity, etc. In response to the detection of the constant activity state, processing logic stops the continuous heart rate data capture and selects a heart rate inference protocol (processing block 308). The user heart rate is thereafter inferred by processing logic without capturing new heart rate data (processing block 310).”, Para [0043]: “When there is a change in the use's activity state (processing block 312), the process returns to processing block 302 to resume continuous heart rate data capture.”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Tan in view Gujral with changing rate of capture of heart rate based on change of actions of Samadani to effectively reduce the energy consumption of a heart rate monitor.
Regarding claims 8, 16, and 24, dependent upon claims 1, 9, and 17 respectively, Tan in view of Gujral teaches every limitation regarding claims 1, 9, and 17.
However Tan in view Gujral does not explicitly teach
in accordance with the determination that the second biometric data satisfies the one or more second criteria, decreasing a rate of capturing additional biometric data.
Samadani teaches
in accordance with the determination that the second biometric data satisfies the one or more second criteria, decreasing a rate of capturing additional biometric data (Fig. 3, Para [0040]: “Processing logic then detects a constant activity state of the user for a predetermined period of time (processing block 306). As discussed herein, the constant activity state may include a period of constant high activity, a period of constant moderate activity, a period of constant inactivity, etc. In response to the detection of the constant activity state, processing logic stops the continuous heart rate data capture and selects a heart rate inference protocol (processing block 308). The user heart rate is thereafter inferred by processing logic without capturing new heart rate data (processing block 310).”, Para [0043]: “However, during the duration of constant user activity, processing logic samples user heart rate data, based on the selected heart rate inference protocol, to test an inferred heart rate (processing block 314). When the inferred heart rate is valid, based on the sample, processing logic returns to processing block 310 to continue inferring the user's heart rate. However, when the inferred heart rate is invalid, such that the sampled test heart rate is outside a threshold beats per minute, threshold percentage, etc., processing logic resumes continuous heart rate data capture (processing block 318).”).
Claims 7, 15, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan et al. (US 2022/0036714 A1, hereinafter Tan) in view of GUJRAL et al. (US 2020/0037964 A1, hereinafter Gujral) and PEYRARD (US 2022/0139188 A1, hereinafter Peyrard).
Regarding claims 7, 15, and 23, dependent upon claims 1, 9, and 17 respectively, Tan in view of Gujral teaches every limitation regarding claims 1, 9, and 17.
However Tan in view Gujral does not explicitly teach
in accordance with a determination that the second biometric data satisfies one or more third criteria indicative of a loss of consciousness, initiating an emergency response
Samadani teaches
in accordance with a determination that the second biometric data satisfies one or more third criteria indicative of a loss of consciousness, initiating an emergency response. (Para [0187]: “However, if the bradycardia event falls below certain threshold(s) (e.g., below 20 bpm), the person may be losing or has lost consciousness, where the pacing by the WCD may provide life sustaining therapy”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Tan in view of Gujral with determining a loss of consciousness based on heart rate of Samadani to effectively increase the robustness of detecting a user losing consciousness and thus responding accordingly. In addition, Tan, Gujral, and Samadani are all wearable device that can monitor a person’s biometric data and perform emergency response based on the biometric data. Thus a person with ordinary skill in the art would combine the function of detecting unconsciousness based on heart rate of Samadani with Tan in view of Gujral before the effective filing date to have achieve a predictable result of a more accurate system for detecting loss of consciousness.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2-3, 10-11, and 18-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Relevant Prior Art Directed to State of Art
Yu (US 2026/0197287 A1, hereinafter Yu) is prior art not applied in the rejection(s) above. Yu discloses a smart eyewear system, smart glasses, and a method for instant messaging playback. The smart eyewear system includes smart glasses and an intelligent terminal communicatively connected with the smart glasses. The intelligent terminal is configured to obtain at least one instant message and send push information of the at least one instant message to the smart glasses; and the smart glasses are configured to play the at least one instant message in a voice form according to the push information. With the smart eyewear system, the smart glasses, and the method for instant messaging playback, playing instant messages in a voice form is achieved via the smart glasses.
VAN OS et al. (US 2019/0080071 A1, hereinafter Van Os) is prior art not applied in the rejection(s) above. Van Os discloses a biometric authentication, including providing user interfaces for: a biometric enrollment process tutorial, aligning a biometric feature for enrollment, enrolling a biometric feature, providing hints during a biometric enrollment process, application-based biometric authentication, autofilling biometrically secured fields, unlocking a device using biometric authentication, retrying biometric authentication, managing transfers using biometric authentication, interstitial user interfaces during biometric authentication, preventing retrying biometric authentication, cached biometric authentication, autofilling fillable fields based on visibility criteria, automatic log-in using biometric authentication, retrying biometric authentication at a credential entry user interface, providing indications of error conditions during biometric authentication, providing indications about the biometric sensor during biometric authentication, and orienting the device to enroll a biometric feature.
Rothschild et al. (US 2021/0005224 A1, hereinafter Rothschild) is prior art not applied in the rejection(s) above. Rothschild discloses a method for receiving first biometric data of the user (e.g., using a camera on a mobile device) at a first period of time and self-reporting data shortly thereafter, where the first biometric data comprises at least changes in the user's pupil in response to first visuals (e.g., a series of different light intensities, etc.) (e.g., provided using a display on the mobile device) and the self-reporting data comprises a state of the user, where the self-reporting data is linked to the first biometric data. The method further includes receiving second biometric data at a second time and using the same, along with at least the first biometric data and self-reporting data, to determine (e.g., via AI, manually, etc.) a state of the user at the second period of time.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA CHEN whose telephone number is (703)756-5394. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 9:30 am - 4:30pm ET F: 9:30 am - 2:30pm ET.
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, STEPHEN R KOZIOL can be reached at (408)918-7630. 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.
/J. C./Examiner, Art Unit 2665
/Stephen R Koziol/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2665
Prosecution Insights