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 .
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 7/21/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of US 12147521 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 361-369, 371-380 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mankowski et al. (US 2015/0062321) and in view of Kime et al. (US 2017/0344812).
As to claim 379, Mankowski teaches a method for executing control commands based on facial skin micromovements, the method comprising: operating at least one audio source (S1-S4) in a manner enabling reflection of a non-lip portion of a face 201; receiving (M1-M4) specific signals representing the reflections associated with specific non-lip facial skin micromovements 202; accessing a data structure 113 associating a plurality of non-lip facial skin micromovements with control commands for controlling an electronic device 100 or application 203—205; identifying in the data structure a specific control command associated with the specific signals associated with the specific non-lip facial skin micromovements 206; and executing the specific control command to control operation of the electronic device or application 207 (Pars.5,17, 26-27; Figs.1-6).
PNG
media_image1.png
548
236
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It is noted that since Mankowski uses audio source he doesn’t explicitly teach where the facial micromovements are obtained by operating a light source causing illumination of a portion of face.
However, Kim teaches a method of operating a wearable headset device comprising a control unit for recognizing a facial expression, comprising the steps of emitting infrared rays (IR) to at least one object; receiving infrared rays related to a correlation with the at least one object; collecting intensity information from the received infrared rays; determining transmission characteristic change in the received infrared rays based on the intensity information; measuring deformation of skin for the at least one object based on the intensity information and the transmission characteristic change; and recognizing a facial expression by comparing the level or magnitude of the deformation of skin with reference data of the facial expression.
The combination of the analogous teachings would be obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the time of applicant’s invention as an alternative to utilizing a sound source.
PNG
media_image2.png
380
458
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
576
480
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As to claim 362, Kim teaches wherein the facial skin micromovements correspond to a nonvocalized articulation of at least one word associated with the specific control command (Pars.87-95; Fig.2, 3, 8).
As to claims 363-364, Kim teaches wherein the facial skin micromovements/deformation correspond to recruitment/movement of at least one specific muscle, inherently comprising the specific facial muscle mentioned in the claims (Figs.1-3, 8).
As to claim 365, Kim teaches wherein the facial skin micromovements includes a sequence of facial skin micromovements from which the specific control command is derived (Fig.4, 409, Pars.68-74).
As to claims 366-367, according to Kim the facial skin micromovements include involuntary micromovements, representing the user intention or feeling via facial expression (Pars.87-92, 119-120).
As to claim 368, according to Kim the involuntary micromovements (the deformation of the skin) that are detected by the light intensity of an infrared rays, are unnoticeable to a human eye (Pars.23, 86-93, 116; Figs.1-3)
As to claim 369, Kim teaches wherein operating the at least one light source includes determining an intensity or a light pattern for illuminating the non-lip portion of the face (Figs.1-3).
As to claim 371, Kim teaches wherein the operations further include analyzing the specific signals to identify temporal and intensity changes of speckles produced by light reflections from the non-lip portion of the face (Pars.104, 119-123).
As to claim 372, Kim teaches wherein the operations further include processing data from at least one sensor to determine context for the specific non-lip facial skin micromovements, and determining an action to initiate based on the specific control command and the determined context (Figs,1-6).
As to claim 373, Kim teaches where the facial expression is recognized and the result displayed on the display. Mazur also teaches displaying text associated with the user command. But, they do not explicitly teach audible translation of the displayed text. However, Official Notice is taken that translation of words to a target language is very common and well known in the art and would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of applicant’s invention for the purpose of providing a multilanguage service.
As to claims 374-378, Mankowski teaches where the electronic device 100 comprises devices that are worn, such as eyeglasses or eye-pieces having ultrasonic transmitters and receivers, and a display or cellular phone and wherein the functions controlled by the detected movement of a facial feature include a scrolling function a volume function, a power function, or any other similar function (Pars.27-34).
Regarding claims 361 and 380, the corresponding system and method comprising the steps similar to the steps cited in claim 379, are analogous therefore rejected as being unpatentable over Mankoski et and in view of Kim et al. for the foregoing reasons.
Claim(s) 370 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mankowski et al. and Kim et al. as applied above, and further in view of Qiu et al. (US 2020/0319301).
As to claim 370, Kim doesn’t explicitly discuss the infrared signal frequency.
However, Qui teaches detecting facial expression based on radar signal measuring light intensity reflected caused by movements of a person’s face, where the signal comprises a rate at 50HZ and 200HZ (Pars.37-40; Figs. 3-4, 8-11).
The combination of the analogous prior arts would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of applicant’s invention for the purpose of measuring the skin movement via signal rate.
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 DANIEL DEMELASH ABEBE whose telephone number is (571)272-7615. The examiner can normally be reached monday-friday 7-4.
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, Daniel Washburn can be reached at 571-272-5551. 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.
/DANIEL ABEBE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2657
Prosecution Insights