DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claims 23-25, 29-32, and 34-42, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barzman et al. (US 11,756,448) in view of Johnson et al. (US 2007/0015121).
Regarding claims 23-24, and 37, Barzman discloses a system which provides a questionnaire to a user, and wherein user speech responses are compared against possible responses and a recognition grammar (a list of words, phrases, etc., associated with the questionnaire as per claim 24), and a raw score is generated. See col. 8: 5-23. Barzman discloses wherein the system transitions based upon the score. See col. 8: 53-58 and col. 6: 62-65.
Barzman discloses various I/O for user input and output in col. 7: 37-61, but does not explicitly disclose a microphone for input speech. However, such configurations are established, as is disclosed by the system of Johnson in paragraph 0007. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to consider such a system with Barzman, in order to provide effective user input.
Barzman does not disclose a state machine configuration, comprising a current state and transitions to a next state. However, such software configurations are well-established, as is disclosed by Johnson in paragraph 0088. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider this concept with the Barzman system, in order to maintain effective software organization.
Regarding claims 25 and 38, Barzman discloses analyzing a biomarker associated with a neuropsychological condition in the speech response to determine the program flow. See col. 6: 62-65. The use of a state machine configuration would be obvious as described above with regard to claim 23.
Regarding claim 29, Barzman discloses recording timings related to transitions. See col. 4: 1-3. The use of a state machine would be obvious as described above with regard to claim 24.
Regarding claim 30, Barzman discloses obtaining text phrases and generating speech synthesis and recognition grammars for a questionnaire, and wherein the questionnaire has transitions based on events related to the recognition grammar.. See col. 7: 11-36.
Barzman discloses a voice user interface for a clinical diagnostic application. See col. 7: 41-44.
Barzman does not disclose a state machine configuration, comprising a current state and transitions to a next state. However, such software configurations are well-established, as is disclosed by the system of Johnson in paragraph 0088. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider this concept with the Barzman system, in order to provide effective organization.
Regarding claims 31-32, Barzman discloses wherein the speech segments can be edited regarding biomarkers for a neuropsychological condition. See col. 8: 5-28.
Regarding claims 34-36, Barzman discloses wherein the phrases are obtained and predicted from previous test results of other patients with similar demographics. See col. 8: 58-63.
Regarding claim 39-41, Barzman discloses a camera for analysis of visual responses of the user, as well as touch sensors, and a visual display for providing prompts. See col. 7: 37-61. The use of a state machine would be obvious as described above with regard to claim 37.
Regarding claim 42, Barzman discloses recording timings related to transitions. See col. 4: 1-16. The use of a state machine would be obvious as described above with regard to claim 37.
Claims 26-28, and 33, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barzman et al. (US 11,756,448) in view of Johnson et al. (US 2007/0015121) and Lathan et al. (US 2015/0196242).
Regarding claims 26 and 33, Barzman does not disclose administering a battery of tests based on the bio-marker. However, this is an established concept with regard to mental health systems, as is disclosed by the testing system of Lathan in paragraph 0037. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider this with the Barzman system, in order to provide a thorough examination. The use of a state machine would be obvious as described above with regard to claim 23.
Regarding claims 27-28, Barzman does not disclose a stack for returning to the questionnaire. However, the use of such is well-established with regard to software systems, as is disclosed by Johnson in paragraph 0076. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider this concept with the Barzman system, in order to provide effective software flow and organization.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1814. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8:00AM - 4:00PM.
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, PETER S VASAT can be reached at 571-570-7625. 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.
TIMOTHY A. MUSSELMAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3715
/TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights