Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “closer” in claim 23 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “closer” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. As such, the type of plurality of scend scents is rendered indefinite. For the purpose of examination, the second scents is interpreted as any scent.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-10, and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20210170060A1 (Galvao, Claudia), previously cited and hereto referred as Galvao, and in view of (Okada et. al), previously cited and hereto referred as Okada, and in view of US6558322B1 (Busch, Barbara).
As to claims 1, 8-9, and 16, Galvao teaches a method for olfactory testing, generating olfactory testing data based on inputs indicating a plurality of first scents to be dispensed during a plurality of olfactory testing (Galvao, [0015], “present olfactory tests”);
and causing a scent dispensing device to dispense the plurality of first scents based on the olfactory testing data, each scent of the plurality of first scents being dispensed during operation of a respective olfactory testing of the plurality of olfactory testing (Galvao, [0014], “It is an objective of some embodiments to propose an electromechanical device for demonstrating multiple fragrances or aromas, whose concept of “dry scent” enables the testing,”), wherein
the scent dispensing device includes a plurality of chambers (Galvao, [0065], “long-lasting scent chamber (41)”), wherein
each chamber of the plurality of chambers includes a respective scent essence of a plurality of scent essences (Galvao, [0065], “absorbent cylindrical element (2), which impregnated with a fragrance or aroma”), wherein
dispensing each scent of the plurality of first scents includes causing at least one scent essence of the plurality of scent essences to be dispensed via at least a portion of the plurality of chambers of the scent dispensing device (Galvao, [0065], “direct the fragrance or aroma to the upper outlet orifice (43) of the cartridge”),
wherein performing the at least one second olfactory training exercise includes dispensing at least one second scent via the scent dispensing device (Galvao, Fig. 5, multiple cartridge (3) that dispenses at least one second scent).
However, Galvao does not teach that the method is used for olfactory training. Okada teaches a relevant art of olfactory training. Okada teaches that a scent dispensing device may be used for olfactory training exercises (Okada, [0012], “scent presentation apparatus for improving, maintaining, and enhancing olfactory capabilities.”).
defining a plurality of exercise trigger events (Okada, [0097], “a “SMELL” button 51 to be pressed by the test subject”; the examiner notes, the display of the smell button is interpreted as the trigger event) based on inputs indicating a plurality of first scents to be dispensed during a plurality of olfactory training exercises (Okada, Fig. 4 represents inputs indicating a plurality of first scents to be dispensed during olfactory training exercises), wherein each exercise trigger event of the plurality of exercise trigger events corresponds to a respective scent of the plurality of first scents (Okada, [0097]; “The display component “SMELL: ¼” at the upper left corner of the screen 50 shown in FIG. 7 indicates which of the four types of scents is currently being tested”; the examiner interprets pressing the smell button corresponds to a respective scent)
wherein the plurality of first scents is dispensed such that the respective scent of the plurality of first scents is dispensed at a time defined with respect to the corresponding exercise trigger event of the plurality of exercise trigger events (Okada, Fig. 7, the display of the smell button 51 occurs first before the respective scent of the plurality of first scents is dispensed, thus defining the time it is dispensed).
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 Galvao in view of Okada to use the scent dispensing device for olfactory training exercises because Galvao already teaches using the device for olfactory testing, and Okada suggests a further use of such devices, and to defining a plurality of exercise trigger events based on inputs indicating a plurality of first scents to be dispensed during a plurality of olfactory training exercises, wherein each exercise trigger event of the plurality of exercise trigger events corresponds to a respective scent of the plurality of first scents and wherein the plurality of first scents is dispensed such that the respective scent of the plurality of first scents is dispensed at a time defined with respect to the corresponding exercise trigger event of the plurality of exercise trigger events, which is supplementing the details of the test procedure.
Additionally, Galvao does not teach the details of adjusting scent dispensing. Busch teaches relevant art of olfactory testing (Busch, abstract). Busch teaches the following limitation: determining at least one training adjustment based on a performance of a user with respect to at least one scent category during the plurality of first olfactory training exercises (Busch, claim 1, “(c) comparing the test person's respective test results with those of a population of test persons”), wherein the at least one training adjustment includes an adjustment to an amount of scents belonging to the at least one scent category to be dispensed during at least one second olfactory training exercise (Busch, claim 1, “(d) determining the test person's relative olfactory perception based on said comparisons”); and
adjusting training by performing the at least one second olfactory training exercise, wherein the at least one second olfactory training exercise is generated based on the plurality of first olfactory training exercises and the at least one training adjustment (Busch, claim 1, “(e) presenting said test person with an additional group of odor-emitting samples having odors differing strongly from the odors of said plurality of groups”)
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 Galvao in view of Busch to include details of adjusting scent dispensing as described above because doing so would allow further testing for olfactory sensitivity, which is important for industries related to scents (Busch, col. 1, lines 13-16, “These judgments are important considerations which are noted and used strategically by many highly profitable and dynamic industries”)
As to claims 2, 10 and 20, Galvao-Okada-Busch teaches exercise data further includes an order for the plurality of olfactory training exercises, wherein the plurality of first scents is dispensed according to the order (Galvao, [0056], “containing a fragrance chosen by the user”; the examiner notes, the order of fragrances used by the user is interpreted as the order)
wherein the application of pressure in each of the at least one actuator is performed during a respective olfactory training exercise of the plurality of olfactory training exercises based on the order (Galvao, [0064], “After the cartridge (3) has advanced, the forced air flow is made present by the compressor (17)”)
As to claims 4 and 12, Galvao-Okada-Busch teaches the scent dispensing device is caused to dispense the plurality of first scents while media content is playing, wherein each scent of the plurality of first scents is dispensed at a time corresponding to a respective exercise trigger event of the plurality of exercise trigger events defined with respect to the media content (Okada, Fig. 7, screen 50 displays media content wherein the scent is dispensed when the countdown is at 0; also see [0097]). 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 further modified Galvao in view of Okada to the scent dispensing device is caused to dispense the plurality of first scents while media content is playing, wherein each scent of the plurality of first scents is dispensed at a time corresponding to a respective exercise trigger event of the plurality of exercise trigger events defined with respect to the media content because Galvao already teaches a device for olfactory testing, and Okada teaching the details of performing the testing, including the timing of scent dispense.
As to claim 5, 13 and 17, Galvao-Okada-Busch teaches the scent dispensing device further includes a plurality of actuators adapted to manipulate the plurality of scent essences disposed in the plurality of chambers (Galvao, Fig. 9, electric motor (6) and compressor (17)), wherein
causing the scent dispensing device to dispense the plurality of first scents further includes causing the scent dispensing device to drive application of pressure in at least one actuator of the plurality of actuators in order to induce emission of the at least one scent essence of the plurality of scent essences (Galvao, [0055], “mechanical actuator (11) formed by electric motor (12), gearing (13) which operates on a straight rack (14), which in turn drives a drawing cane (15), which pushes, and then retracts the cartridge, (3) inside the connector nozzle (10), and jointly with the air flow coming from a flexible hose (16), from where the air inflated by a compressor (17) enters said cartridge (3)”).
As to claims 6, 14 and 18, Galvao-Okada-Busch teaches the plurality of chambers is disposed in a drum having a body (Galvao, [0056], “the carousel (4), which receives the cartridges (3)”), wherein the body has a gear (Galvao, [0055], “gearing (8)”)
the scent dispensing device has a housing with an aperture (Galvao, [0055], “forces the emission of the scent through the outlet orifice (18)”), wherein
a cog wheel having teeth, wherein the teeth of the cog wheel mesh with the gear of the body (Galvao, [0055], “a circular rack (9)”)
a rotation motor adapted to rotate in contact with the cog wheel (Galvao, [0055], “electric motor (6)”)
causing the scent dispensing device to dispense the plurality of first scents further includes causing the scent dispensing device to rotate the drum in order to align at least one chamber of the plurality of chambers with the aperture (Galvao, [0011], “the chosen cartridge is mechanically moved to the emission position, and ventilated so that the air draws the scented vapors to the outlet orifice”; [0062], “As soon as it is aligned with the connector nozzle (10)”);
by at least driving the rotation motor to rotate in contact with the cog wheel, wherein the cog wheel rotates in order to cause the gear of the body to rotate when the rotation motor rotates in contact with the cog wheel (Galvao, [0055], “radially moved by means of an electric motor (6) with reducer (7) and gearing (8) which acts on a circular rack (9)”)
drive application of pressure in at least one actuator of the plurality of actuators in order to induce emission of the at least one scent essence of the plurality of scent essences (Galvao, [0064], “After the cartridge (3) has advanced, the forced air flow is made present by the compressor (17)”), wherein
the application of pressure in each of the at least one actuator is performed during a respective rotation of the at least one rotation (Galvao, [0011], “the chosen cartridge is mechanically moved to the emission position, and ventilated so that the air draws the scented vapors to the outlet orifice”; the examiner notes, a rotation is interpreted as the process of dispensing a scent by rotating the drum and Galvao teaches releasing a scent by rotating the cartridge).
As to claim 15, Galvao-Okada-Busch teaches causing a scent dispensing device to dispense the plurality of first scents further comprises sending the olfactory training exercise data to the scent dispensing device (Galvao, [0001], “When connected to a wired or wireless computerized system, which will command it by means of an application, this device will be capable of finding the selected fragrance in a carousel”)
As to claim 19, Galvao-Okada-Busch teaches the scent dispensing device further includes a plurality of actuators adapted to manipulate the plurality of scent essences disposed in the plurality of chambers (Galvao, Fig. 9, electric motor (6) and compressor (17)) wherein the body has a gear (Galvao, [0055], “gearing (8)”),
the plurality of chambers is disposed in a drum (Galvao, [0056], “the carousel (4), which receives the cartridges (3)”)
and a housing having an aperture (Galvao, [0055], “forces the emission of the scent through the outlet orifice (18)”),
a cog wheel having teeth, wherein the teeth of the cog wheel mesh with the gear of the body (Galvao, [0055], “a circular rack (9)”)
a rotation motor adapted to rotate in contact with the cog wheel (Galvao, [0055], “electric motor (6)”)
wherein the system is further configured to: rotate the drum in at least one rotation by at least driving the rotation motor to rotate in contact with the cog wheel, wherein the cog wheel rotates in order to cause the gear of the body to rotate when the rotation motor rotates in contact with the cog wheel (Galvao, [0055], “radially moved by means of an electric motor (6) with reducer (7) and gearing (8) which acts on a circular rack (9)”)
wherein rotating the drum at each rotation causes a chamber of the plurality of chambers to become aligned with the aperture of the housing (Galvao, [0011], “the chosen cartridge is mechanically moved to the emission position, and ventilated so that the air draws the scented vapors to the outlet orifice”; [0062], “As soon as it is aligned with the connector nozzle (10)”)
drive application of pressure in at least one actuator of the plurality of actuators in order to induce emission of the at least one scent essence of the plurality of scent essences (Galvao, [0064], “After the cartridge (3) has advanced, the forced air flow is made present by the compressor (17)”), wherein
the application of pressure in each of the at least one actuator is performed during a respective rotation of the at least one rotation (Galvao, [0011], “the chosen cartridge is mechanically moved to the emission position, and ventilated so that the air draws the scented vapors to the outlet orifice”; the examiner notes, a rotation is interpreted as the process of dispensing a scent by rotating the drum and Galvao teaches releasing a scent by rotating the cartridge).
As to claim 21, Galvao does not teach a detailed method of using the olfactory device. Busch teaches a score of the performance of the user with respect to a first scent category of the at least one scent category is above a threshold (Busch, col. 2, lines 26-29, “the test person is “scored” with respect to his/her “olfactory ranking.””; col. 1, lines 66-67, “That determination leads to the identification of a “superelite” group”; the examiner notes, the superelite group is above a certain threshold),
wherein the at least one training adjustment includes increasing a number of scents belonging to the first scent category (Busch, claim 1, “(e) presenting said test person with an additional group of odor-emitting samples having odors differing strongly from the odors of said plurality of groups”; col. 2, lines 66-67, “ten groups G1, G2, . . . G10 of three containers 2”; col. 3, lines 4-5, “additional group G11 which consists of ten individual odor-emitting samples).
As to claim 22, Galvao-Okada-Busch teaches the plurality of first olfactory training exercises includes dispensing scents from a first number of chambers among the plurality of chambers corresponding to the first scent category, wherein the at least one training adjustment includes dispensing scents from a second number of chambers among the plurality of chambers corresponding to the first scent category (Galvao, [0022], “It is an objective of some embodiments to propose an electromechanical device for demonstrating multiple fragrances”; Fig. 5; [0065], “Internally, the cartridge (3) receives an absorbent cylindrical element (2), which impregnated with a fragrance or aroma”).
However, Galvao-Busch does not expressly teach second number of chambers is higher than the first number of chambers. However, 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 further modified Galvao in view of Busch to include second number of chambers is higher than the first number of chambers because Galvao teaches multiple numbers of chambers (Fig. 5), and it would have been obvious to use some of the chambers as the second number of chambers. Additionally, Busch teaches that second number of scent to be dispensed is higher than the first number of scent (Busch, claim 1, “(e) presenting said test person with an additional group of odor-emitting samples having odors differing strongly from the odors of said plurality of groups”; col. 2, lines 66-67, “ten groups G1, G2, . . . G10 of three containers 2”; col. 3, lines 4-5, “additional group G11 which consists of ten individual odor-emitting samples”).
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 further modified Galvao in view of Busch to include second number of chambers is higher than the first number of chambers because doing so would allow identifying groups of olfactory testers, as suggested by Busch (Busch, col. 2, lines 26-29, “the test person is “scored” with respect to his/her “olfactory ranking.””; col. 1, lines 66-67, “That determination leads to the identification of a “superelite” group”).
Claim 23 is interpreted as best understood under the 112b rejection above.
As to claim 23, Galvao-Okada-Busch teaches at least a portion of the plurality of second scents is closer in smell than a corresponding at least a portion of the plurality of first scents (Galvao, [0011], “demonstrating multiple fragrances or aromas”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 12/2/2025, with respect to the 112 rejections and 103 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, new 103 rejections are made in view of Galvao, Okada, and Busch, necessitated by the amendments.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELINA S JANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7019. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am - 6:00 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, Jennifer Robertson can be reached at (571) 272-5001. 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.
/ELINA SOHYUN JANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/JENNIFER ROBERTSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791