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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I with claims 1-11 in the reply filed on 5/26/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-11 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) for determining sleep conditions using generic processor and memory to perform data gathering and other processing operations. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because with additional generic computer elements, the generically recited computer elements do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional limitations only store and retrieve information in memory, these are well-understood, routine, conventional computer functions as recognized by the court decisions listed in MPEP § 2106.05(d).
Claim 1. A first mobile device comprising:
at least one memory; and (generic computer components)
at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the first mobile device to: (generic computer components)
receive first user state data that correlates to a user sleep condition and a sleep level state from multiple sleep level states for the user sleep condition; (data gathering)
receive a notification while the user sleep condition is active; and (data output)
trigger an escalating vibration output based at least in part on the sleep level state and the notification.
concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation (from data gathering of user sleep condition), evaluation (required for data processing to trigger based on sleep condition), judgment (determinization of trigger condition)
Similar analysis is applied for claims 21-22.
Claims 2-3 is directed to data transfer.
Claim 4 is directed to data transfer and output.
Claims 5-6 is directed to data processing.
Claim 7-10 is directed to data output.
Claim 11 is directed to data gathering and output.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-11 and 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by KUMAR et al. (US 11166128 B2).
Re claim 1. KUMAR discloses (abstract) a first mobile device 110 (FIG.1-2) comprising:
at least one memory (a memory 150); and
at least one processor (a processor 140) coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the first mobile device (FIG.5) to:
receive first user state data that correlates to a user sleep condition and a sleep level state from multiple sleep level states for the user sleep condition; (steps 503 - FIG.3-5 – c.8, l.12-23)
receive a notification while the user sleep condition is active (steps 507 – c.8, l.24-38 – FIG.5 – notification based on data from a call received); and
trigger an escalating vibration output (step 511) based at least in part on the sleep level state and the notification (…device may optionally ring the ringer in a progressively louder fashion to ensure that the user is awakened hut without unduly alarming the user – ringer function determined on step 503 – user in deep sleep – and step 507 – user receiving call within time window).
Re claim 2. KUMAR discloses (c.4, l.33-44) the first mobile device of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first mobile device to receive the first user state data from a second mobile device 203.
Re claim 3. KUMAR discloses (c.4, l.24-32) the first mobile device of claim 2, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first mobile device to transmit, to the second mobile device, a query for the first user state data. (FIG.2 – processor 140 of mobile device 110 controls various functions including communicating with mobile device 203 to obtain sleep data thru detector 180)
Re claim 5. KUMAR discloses (FIG.3-4) the first mobile device of claim 1, wherein each of the multiple sleep level states is based on a different respective set of sleep data indicators.
Re claim 6. KUMAR discloses (c.4, l.1-4) the first mobile device of claim 5, wherein each set of sleep data indicators comprises a respective set of sensor data.
Re claim 7. KUMAR discloses (c.6, l.5-33) the first mobile device of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first mobile device to trigger an escalating audio output in conjunction with the escalating vibration output, and based at least in part on the sleep level state and the notification.
Re claim 8. KUMAR discloses (c.5, l.57 – c.6, l.4) the first mobile device of claim 1, wherein each sleep level state is associated with a different respective vibration escalation profile for the escalating vibration output.
Re claim 9. KUMAR discloses (c.5, l.46 – c.6, l.33) the first mobile device of claim 8, wherein each vibration escalation profile comprises a different increase in vibration intensity over time.
Re claim 10. KUMAR discloses the first mobile device of claim 1, wherein the first user state data comprises sensor data received from a second mobile device 203, and wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first mobile device to:
map the sensor data to sleep level data for the multiple sleep level states to determine the sleep level state from the multiple sleep level states. (FIG.1-6)
Re claim 11. KUMAR discloses (FIG.6 – c.6, l.49-55) the first mobile device of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first mobile device to:
receive second user state data that indicates a transition from the user sleep condition to a user wake condition; and
disable, based at least in part on the user wake condition, the escalating vibration output.
21. (As for claim 1) A method performed by a first mobile device, the method comprising: receiving first user state data that correlates to a user sleep condition and a sleep level state from multiple sleep level states for the user sleep condition; receiving a notification while the user sleep condition is active; and triggering an escalating vibration output based at least in part on the sleep level state and the notification.
22. (As for claim 1) One or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media storing instructions that are executable by a computing device to perform operations comprising: receiving first user state data that correlates to a user sleep condition and a sleep level state from multiple sleep level states for the user sleep condition; receiving a notification while the user sleep condition is active; and triggering an escalating vibration output based at least in part on the sleep level state and the notification.
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KUMAR et al. (US 11166128 B2) in view of CHOU (US 20220218293 A1).
However, KUMAR fails to explicitly disclose:
Re claim 4. The first mobile device of claim 2, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first mobile device to transmit, to the second mobile device, an instruction to implement the escalating vibration output while the notification is pending.
CHOU teaches (abstract) in a similar field of invention (FIG.8-10) [0233], the function of using a secondary mobile device to implement a vibration output (i.e. speaker or buzzer to generate sounds) while a notification is needed for a user, to awaken such user wearing and using mobile devices 800/900, such functions are controlled by way of first mobile device 800.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try using the second mobile device to perform the escalating vibration output during the functions of generating vibration output in order to more comfortably wake a user who is in a sleep state.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS E GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-1354. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-6pm F 9-5pm.
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, Brian Zimmerman can be reached at (571) 272-3059. 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.
CARLOS E. GARCIA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2686
/Carlos Garcia/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686 8/6/2026
Prosecution Insights