DETAILED ACTION
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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a biological information acquiring unit” in claims 1 and 16, “a score acquiring unit” in claims 1, 8-14 and 16, “an output information acquiring unit” in claims 4-5 and 7-8, “an output unit” in claim 4, “a learning information acquiring unit” in claim 14 and “a measurement information storage unit” in claims 15-16. The “a biological information acquiring unit” can be found in the figure 12 denoted as element 143, paragraphs 73-74, 79, 155 and 165 of the specification. The element 143 interpret as a software unit embedded in a hardware unit. The “a score acquiring unit” can be found in the figure 12 denoted as element 251, paragraphs 156-157, 163, 165-166, 169-174, 176-177, 180-181, 184-185, 200, 204-208 and 211-218 of the specification. The element 251 interpret as a software unit embedded in a hardware unit. The “an output information acquiring unit” can be found in the figure 12 denoted as element 257, paragraphs 156, 182-186, 188, 191, 201, 215-218 and 231 of the specification. The element 257 interpret as a software unit embedded in a hardware unit. The “an output unit” can be found in the figure 12 denoted as element 260, paragraphs 156, 188 and 202 of the specification. The element 260 interpret as a software unit embedded in a hardware unit. The “a learning information acquiring unit” can be found in the figure 12 denoted as element 249, paragraphs 150, 156, 159, 161 and 163-164 of the specification. The element 249 interpret as a software unit embedded in a hardware unit. The “a measurement information storage unit” can be found in the figure 3 denoted as element 611, paragraph 88 of the specification. The element 611 interpret as a software unit embedded in a hardware unit.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-5 and 8-16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) a mental processes (concepts performed in the human mind, such as evaluation, comparison, and decision making) and abstract. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims directed to the mental process and abstract. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because those claims more likely disclose the abstract concept that can be done by human. Below is the analysis:
Claim 1 recited “An information processing apparatus comprising: a biological information acquiring unit that acquires measurement information on a status of a living body, based on measurement results of a bioelectric potential of a user at two or more points in time; and a score acquiring unit that acquires score information containing a score indicating a present or future physical condition of the user, based on the measurement information.”
Step 2A prong one: Yes, the claim is abstract ideal for the following limitation:
. “An information processing apparatus comprising: a biological information acquiring unit that acquires measurement information on a status of a living body, based on measurement results of a bioelectric potential of a user at two or more points in time; and a score acquiring unit that acquires score information containing a score indicating a present or future physical condition of the user, based on the measurement information.” is the step of collecting data which can be performed by human.
Step 2A prong two: Yes, the claim is abstract idea because the claim do not recite any additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claims more likely disclose the abstract concept that can be done by human.
Step 2B: No additional elements, individually or in combination, provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is ineligible under § 101.
Regarding claims 2-5 and 8-14 are further depend on claim 1 and the limitation do not recited any significantly more than the abstract idea as cited above for claim 1, therefore claims 2-5 and 8-14 are also reject for the same reason.
Claim 2 recited “The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the measurement information is time-series information.” is directed to abstract idea and do not add any technological improvement.
Claim 3 recited “The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the score information contains information indicating transition of the score.” is directed to abstract idea and do not add any technological improvement.
Claim 4 recited “The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: an output information acquiring unit that acquires output information on the score based on the score information; and an output unit that outputs the output information.” is directed to abstract idea and do not add any technological improvement.
Claim 5 recited “The information processing apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the output information acquiring unit acquires a largest value of a score of score information that may be acquired for the user, and acquires output information corresponding to a relationship between the largest value and the score information acquired by the score acquiring unit.” is directed to abstract idea and do not add any technological improvement.
Claim 8 recited “The information processing apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the output information acquiring unit acquires, as the output information, advice on eating-and-drinking behavior of a user to ensure that a score higher than the score of the score information acquired by the score acquiring unit is obtained in the future.” is directed to abstract idea and do not add any technological improvement.
Claim 9 recited “The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the score acquiring unit acquires the score information, based on information obtained by measuring at least one of a blood pressure, a pulse, a blood oxygen level, a body temperature, a respiratory rate, and an acceleration of a user.” is directed to abstract idea and do not add any technological improvement.
Claim 10 recited “The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the score acquiring unit acquires the score information, based on eating-and-drinking information on eating- and-drinking behavior of a user.” is directed to abstract idea and do not add any technological improvement.
Claim 11 recited “The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the score acquiring unit acquires future measurement information, based on input information on the measurement information, using learning information configured such that the input information is taken as input and the future measurement information is taken as output, and acquires the score information based on the acquired measurement information.” is directed to abstract idea and do not add any technological improvement.
Claim 12 recited “The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the score acquiring unit acquires information on the score, based on input information on the measurement information, using learning information configured such that the input information is taken as input and the information on the score is taken as output, and acquires the score information using the acquired information.” is directed to abstract idea and do not add any technological improvement.
Claim 13 recited “The information processing apparatus according to claim 12, wherein the score acquiring unit uses, as the learning information, learning information configured using input information containing measurement information obtained by measuring two or more users in the past.” is directed to abstract idea and do not add any technological improvement.
Claim 14 recited “The information processing apparatus according to claim 12, further comprising a learning information acquiring unit that acquires learning information obtained by performing re- learning using evaluation information corresponding to the score information acquired by the score acquiring unit and input information used to acquire the score information.” is directed to abstract idea and do not add any technological improvement.
Claim 15 recited “An information processing method performed using a measurement information storage unit in which measurement information on a status of a living body based on measurement results of a bioelectric potential of a user at two or more points in time is stored, comprising: a biological information acquiring step of acquiring the measurement information from the measurement information storage unit; and a score acquiring step of acquiring score information containing a score indicating a present or future physical condition of the user, based on the measurement information.”
Step 2A prong one: Yes, the claim is abstract ideal for the following limitation:
. “An information processing method performed using a measurement information storage unit in which measurement information on a status of a living body based on measurement results of a bioelectric potential of a user at two or more points in time is stored, comprising: a biological information acquiring step of acquiring the measurement information from the measurement information storage unit; and a score acquiring step of acquiring score information containing a score indicating a present or future physical condition of the user, based on the measurement information.” is the step of collecting data which can be performed by human.
Step 2A prong two: Yes, the claim is abstract idea because the claim do not recite any additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claims more likely disclose the abstract concept that can be done by human.
Step 2B: No additional elements, individually or in combination, provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is ineligible under § 101.
Claim 16 recited “A non-transitory computer readable medium storing a program for causing a computer capable of accessing a measurement information storage unit in which measurement information on a status of a living body based on measurement results of a bioelectric potential of a user at two or more points in time is stored, to function as: a biological information acquiring unit that acquires the measurement information from the measurement information storage unit; and a score acquiring unit that acquires score information containing a score indicating a present or future physical condition of the user, based on the measurement information.”
Step 2A prong one: Yes, the claim is abstract ideal for the following limitation:
. “A non-transitory computer readable medium storing a program for causing a computer capable of accessing a measurement information storage unit in which measurement information on a status of a living body based on measurement results of a bioelectric potential of a user at two or more points in time is stored, to function as: a biological information acquiring unit that acquires the measurement information from the measurement information storage unit; and a score acquiring unit that acquires score information containing a score indicating a present or future physical condition of the user, based on the measurement information.” is the step of collecting data which can be performed by human.
Step 2A prong two: Yes, the claim is abstract idea because the claim do not recite any additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claims is using generic computer storage for storing the program to execute step to collect data, well understood, routine, and conventional in the art.
Step 2B: The additional element is a generic computer storage, well known, routine and convention in the art, individually or in combination, provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is ineligible under § 101.
Claim 6 recited “The information processing apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the measurement information is information obtained by measuring a bioelectric potential of a user using a measuring device having two or more electrodes that are in contact with a body surface of the user.” is eligible under § 101 because the claim include an addition element “a measuring device having two or more electrodes that are in contact with a body surface of the user”. This element help to detect the biological signal from the user which is directing to a practical experience which cannot be performed my human.
Claim 7 is further depend on the dependent claim 6, therefore claim is eligible under § 101 for the same reason.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-7, 11-12 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto et al. US 20180168514 in view of Sugiyama et al. US 20210287808.
Regarding claim 1, Matsumoto et al. teach An information processing apparatus comprising: a biological information acquiring unit that acquires measurement information on a status of a living body, based on measurement results of a bioelectric potential of a user at two or more points in time; (Matsumoto et al. US 20180168514 abstract; paragraphs [0004]-[0008]; [0049]; [0059]-[0060]; [0062]-[0065]; [0071]-[0072]; [0082]; [0084]-[0096]; [0117]-[0127]; [0174]; [0237]-[0240]; figures 1-30)
The headset 1 causes the operation input device 1a to receive user 10's operation input and causes the bioelectric potential measuring device 1b to measure a bioelectric potential and contact impedance of the user 10 at the time of the operation. Information including the bioelectric potential measured by the headset 1 is transmitted to the information processing apparatus 2 (Matsumoto et al. par. 82). The information processing apparatus 2 receives information from the headset 1 by causing the operation signal acquisition unit 21 to receive operation input information and causing the bioelectric potential acquisition unit 22 to receive a bioelectric potential (Matsumoto et al. par. 92). The user 10 wearing the headset 1 activates the headset 1 at a time t=t0 (a time at which the headset is attached may be used as a standard). Then, as illustrated in FIG. 22, the headset 1 starts measurement of contact impedance of the electrode 49 at a time t=t1, and thus the contact impedance Rc2 is obtained. Next, contact impedance of the electrode 48 is measured at a time t=t2, and thus the contact impedance Rc1 is obtained. Then, at a time t=t3, compensation of contact impedance and compensation of an amplitude of a bioelectric potential waveform are performed on the basis of the values of the contact impedance Rc1 and contact impedance Rc2. In this way, a bioelectric potential of the electrode 48 is obtained (Matsumoto et al. par. 237).
Matsumoto et al. do not explicitly teach a score acquiring unit that acquires score information containing a score indicating a present or future physical condition of the user, based on the measurement information.
Sugiyama et al. teach a score acquiring unit that acquires score information containing a score indicating a present or future physical condition of the user, based on the measurement information. (Sugiyama et al. US 20210287808 abstract; paragraphs [0009]-[0011]; [0029]-[0033]; [0037]-[0048]; [0053]-[0063]; [0089]; figures 1-12)
The generator 41 is configured to generate the condition information based on the physiological information of the subject acquired by the acquisition unit 2, the condition discrimination method and the reference value defined by the medical guideline and the like stored in the storage unit 3. The condition information refers to information on the condition of the subject. The information on the condition of the subject is, for example, a score calculated based on the condition discrimination method. The generator 41 can also generate the condition level information of the subject based on the condition information and the standardization table. The condition level information is, for example, a grade indicating a degree of the condition of the subject. The generator 41 transmits the generated condition information or condition level information to the output interface 5 (Sugiyama et al. par. 37). FIG. 3 illustrates the reference value of NEWS, which is another one condition discrimination method. NEWS is a discrimination method used to discriminate septicemia. When the acquired respiratory rate per minute is equal to or less than 8 or equal to or greater than 25, the score related to the respiratory rate is 3. When the respiratory rate is equal to or greater than 21 and equal to or less than 24, the score related to the respiratory rate is 2. When the respiratory rate is equal to or greater than 9 and equal to or less than 11, the score related to the respiratory rate is 1. When the respiratory rate is equal to or greater than 12 and equal to or less than 20, the score related to the respiratory rate is 0. Scores for remaining parameters are also calculated based on the reference value defined by the medical guideline or the like. The calculated scores are summed. In the present specification, a total score thereof is referred to as a total score B (another example of the condition information) (Sugiyama et al. par. 42). FIG. 4 illustrates a standardization table P of each discrimination method. The standardization table P is a table configured to display condition levels of the subject by classifying the condition levels into four color groups for each discrimination method. The four color groups in the present embodiment include a white group, a green group, an orange group, and a red group. The white group corresponds to a condition level indicating that the subject is in a normal state. The red group corresponds to a condition level indicating that the subject is in an abnormal state and is in a dangerous state. The orange group corresponds to a condition level indicating that the subject is not in the normal state though the subject is not as dangerous as the subject of the red group (Sugiyama et al. par. 45).
Therefore, it would have been obviously to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Matsumoto et al. reference by incorporate the physiological information based on the score calculated as taught by Sugiyama et al. reference in order to classify a user’s state as normal or abnormal, thereby improving health tracking and interpretation of physiological data.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. disclose The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the measurement information is time-series information.
See figure 7 of Sugiyama et al. reference the measurement collecting in time series.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. disclose The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: an output information acquiring unit that acquires output information on the score based on the score information; and an output unit that outputs the output information.
The generator 41 is configured to generate the condition information based on the physiological information of the subject acquired by the acquisition unit 2, the condition discrimination method and the reference value defined by the medical guideline and the like stored in the storage unit 3. The condition information refers to information on the condition of the subject. The information on the condition of the subject is, for example, a score calculated based on the condition discrimination method. The generator 41 can also generate the condition level information of the subject based on the condition information and the standardization table. The condition level information is, for example, a grade indicating a degree of the condition of the subject. The generator 41 transmits the generated condition information or condition level information to the output interface 5 (Sugiyama et al. par. 37).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. disclose The information processing apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the output information acquiring unit acquires a largest value of a score of score information that may be acquired for the user, and acquires output information corresponding to a relationship between the largest value and the score information acquired by the score acquiring unit.
FIG. 3 illustrates the reference value of NEWS, which is another one condition discrimination method. NEWS is a discrimination method used to discriminate septicemia. When the acquired respiratory rate per minute is equal to or less than 8 or equal to or greater than 25, the score related to the respiratory rate is 3. When the respiratory rate is equal to or greater than 21 and equal to or less than 24, the score related to the respiratory rate is 2. When the respiratory rate is equal to or greater than 9 and equal to or less than 11, the score related to the respiratory rate is 1. When the respiratory rate is equal to or greater than 12 and equal to or less than 20, the score related to the respiratory rate is 0 (Sugiyama et al. par. 42). For example, when the total score A of the score (qSOFA) indicating infectious disease suspicion is 0, a color group thereof is classified into the white group. When the total score A is 1, the color group is classified into the orange group. When the total score A is 2 or more, the color group is classified into the red group (Sugiyama et al. par. 46). For example, when the total score B of the early warning score (NEWS) is 0, a color group thereof is classified into the white group. When the total score B is equal to or greater than 1 and equal to or less than 4, the color group is classified into the green group. When the total score B is equal to or greater than 5 and equal to or less than 6, or at least one evaluation item of NEWS has a score of 3, the color group is classified into the orange group. When the total score B is 7 or more, the color group is classified into the red group (Sugiyama et al. par. 47).
According to the cited passages and figures, examiner interprets the score 3 is the largest value of the score information that obtain from the user. For example figure 3 show the hear rate less than or equal to 40 times/min as the score 3.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. disclose The information processing apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the measurement information is information obtained by measuring a bioelectric potential of a user using a measuring device having two or more electrodes that are in contact with a body surface of the user.
For example, when the respiration rate is measured by the impedance type method using the electrocardiogram, a plurality of electrodes and indifferent electrodes are attached to the subject. Each electrode is in contact with a measurement site of the subject and functions as a sensor configured to synthesize a potential change of the measurement site. The electrode is configured to synthesize a potential difference of the measurement site, and the indifferent electrode is configured to remove external noise induced in phase with the electrode (Sugiyama et al. par. 30).
According to the cited passages and figures, examiner interpret a plurality of electrodes as at least two electrode that attach to the subject (user body).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. disclose The information processing apparatus according to claim 6, wherein the output information acquiring unit acquires output information for outputting a sound from the measuring device.
The information processing apparatus 2 includes an operation signal acquisition unit 21, a bioelectric potential acquisition unit 22, a bioelectric potential processor 23, an application processor (app processor) 26, a display information output unit 27, and an audio information output unit 28 (Matsumoto et al. par. 91). A result of the processing performed by the application processor 26 is supplied from the application processor 26 to the display information output unit 27 and the audio information output unit 28. The display information output unit 27 and the audio information output unit 28 supplies a visual or auditory signal to the display unit 3 in order to feed the result of the processing performed by the application processor 26 back to the user 10 (Matsumoto et al. par. 95).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. disclose The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the score acquiring unit acquires future measurement information, based on input information on the measurement information, using learning information configured such that the input information is taken as input and the future measurement information is taken as output, and acquires the score information based on the acquired measurement information.
In STEP 2, the medical worker determines whether it is necessary to confirm the condition of the subject. For example, when the ward nurse pays a round visit (9:40 on Jul. 10, 2017 in the present embodiment) to Kodentaro and determines that the condition of Kodentaro may have deteriorated and it is necessary to confirm the condition of Kodentaro, the ward nurse performs a predetermined input operation on a device such as a bedside monitor linked to Kodentaro. When the input operation is performed, condition confirmation information indicating that it is necessary to confirm the condition of the subject and information on the time (first target time) when the ward nurse determines that the condition of the subject may have deteriorated and performs the input operation are generated, and such pieces of information are transmitted to the condition information generation device 1 by wire or wirelessly. The condition information generation device 1 may be, for example, a device such as a bedside monitor which includes an operation unit configured to receive the input operation of the medical worker and generate an instruction signal corresponding to the input operation. In this case, the ward nurse performs the predetermined input operation on the operation unit provided in the condition information generation device 1. When the input operation is performed, the condition information generation device 1 generates the condition confirmation information and the information on the time (first target time) when the ward nurse determines that the condition of the subject may have deteriorated and performs the input operation. When the input operation is performed (YES in STEP 02), the controller 4 specifies the continuous measurement parameter and the discontinuous measurement parameter used in the first discrimination method based on the received condition confirmation information (STEP 03). On the other hand, when the controller 4 determines that it is not necessary to confirm the condition of Kodentaro (NO in STEP 02), the process returns to STEP 01 (Sugiyama et al. par. 55).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. disclose The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the score acquiring unit acquires information on the score, based on input information on the measurement information, using learning information configured such that the input information is taken as input and the information on the score is taken as output, and acquires the score information using the acquired information.
See figure 3 of Sugiyama et al. reference illustrate the score information corresponding to the measurement that include blood pressure, body temperature, oxygen level, heart rate (pulse) and respiratory rate.
According to the figure 3, examiner interpret the device acquiring measurement from a subject as the input information and the output show in the figure 3 of Sugiyama et al. reference.
Regarding claim 15, Matsumoto et al. teach An information processing method performed using a measurement information storage unit in which measurement information on a status of a living body based on measurement results of a bioelectric potential of a user at two or more points in time is stored, comprising: a biological information acquiring step of acquiring the measurement information from the measurement information storage unit; (Matsumoto et al. US 20180168514 abstract; paragraphs [0004]-[0008]; [0049]; [0059]-[0060]; [0062]-[0065]; [0071]-[0072]; [0082]; [0084]-[0096]; [0117]-[0127]; [0174]; [0237]-[0240]; figures 1-30)
One non-limiting and exemplary embodiment provides an electronic apparatus, an information processing apparatus, an information processing method, and a recording medium that make it possible to measure a bioelectric potential of certain signal quality without forcing a user to go to the trouble of attaching an electrode again (Matsumoto et al. par. 4). The headset 1 causes the operation input device 1a to receive user 10's operation input and causes the bioelectric potential measuring device 1b to measure a bioelectric potential and contact impedance of the user 10 at the time of the operation. Information including the bioelectric potential measured by the headset 1 is transmitted to the information processing apparatus 2 (Matsumoto et al. par. 82). The information processing apparatus 2 receives information from the headset 1 by causing the operation signal acquisition unit 21 to receive operation input information and causing the bioelectric potential acquisition unit 22 to receive a bioelectric potential (Matsumoto et al. par. 92). The user 10 wearing the headset 1 activates the headset 1 at a time t=t0 (a time at which the headset is attached may be used as a standard). Then, as illustrated in FIG. 22, the headset 1 starts measurement of contact impedance of the electrode 49 at a time t=t1, and thus the contact impedance Rc2 is obtained. Next, contact impedance of the electrode 48 is measured at a time t=t2, and thus the contact impedance Rc1 is obtained. Then, at a time t=t3, compensation of contact impedance and compensation of an amplitude of a bioelectric potential waveform are performed on the basis of the values of the contact impedance Rc1 and contact impedance Rc2. In this way, a bioelectric potential of the electrode 48 is obtained (Matsumoto et al. par. 237).
Matsumoto et al. do not explicitly teach a score acquiring step of acquiring score information containing a score indicating a present or future physical condition of the user, based on the measurement information.
Sugiyama et al. teach a score acquiring step of acquiring score information containing a score indicating a present or future physical condition of the user, based on the measurement information. (Sugiyama et al. US 20210287808 abstract; paragraphs [0009]-[0011]; [0029]-[0033]; [0037]-[0048]; [0053]-[0063]; [0089]; figures 1-12)
The generator 41 is configured to generate the condition information based on the physiological information of the subject acquired by the acquisition unit 2, the condition discrimination method and the reference value defined by the medical guideline and the like stored in the storage unit 3. The condition information refers to information on the condition of the subject. The information on the condition of the subject is, for example, a score calculated based on the condition discrimination method. The generator 41 can also generate the condition level information of the subject based on the condition information and the standardization table. The condition level information is, for example, a grade indicating a degree of the condition of the subject. The generator 41 transmits the generated condition information or condition level information to the output interface 5 (Sugiyama et al. par. 37). FIG. 3 illustrates the reference value of NEWS, which is another one condition discrimination method. NEWS is a discrimination method used to discriminate septicemia. When the acquired respiratory rate per minute is equal to or less than 8 or equal to or greater than 25, the score related to the respiratory rate is 3. When the respiratory rate is equal to or greater than 21 and equal to or less than 24, the score related to the respiratory rate is 2. When the respiratory rate is equal to or greater than 9 and equal to or less than 11, the score related to the respiratory rate is 1. When the respiratory rate is equal to or greater than 12 and equal to or less than 20, the score related to the respiratory rate is 0. Scores for remaining parameters are also calculated based on the reference value defined by the medical guideline or the like. The calculated scores are summed. In the present specification, a total score thereof is referred to as a total score B (another example of the condition information) (Sugiyama et al. par. 42). FIG. 4 illustrates a standardization table P of each discrimination method. The standardization table P is a table configured to display condition levels of the subject by classifying the condition levels into four color groups for each discrimination method. The four color groups in the present embodiment include a white group, a green group, an orange group, and a red group. The white group corresponds to a condition level indicating that the subject is in a normal state. The red group corresponds to a condition level indicating that the subject is in an abnormal state and is in a dangerous state. The orange group corresponds to a condition level indicating that the subject is not in the normal state though the subject is not as dangerous as the subject of the red group (Sugiyama et al. par. 45).
Therefore, it would have been obviously to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Matsumoto et al. reference by incorporate the physiological information based on the score calculated as taught by Sugiyama et al. reference in order to classify a user’s state as normal or abnormal, thereby improving health tracking and interpretation of physiological data.
Regarding claim 16, Matsumoto et al. teach A non-transitory computer readable medium storing a program for causing a computer capable of accessing a measurement information storage unit in which measurement information on a status of a living body based on measurement results of a bioelectric potential of a user at two or more points in time is stored, to function as: a biological information acquiring unit that acquires the measurement information from the measurement information storage unit; (Matsumoto et al. US 20180168514 abstract; paragraphs [0004]-[0008]; [0049]; [0059]-[0060]; [0062]-[0065]; [0071]-[0072]; [0082]; [0084]-[0096]; [0117]-[0127]; [0174]; [0237]-[0240]; figures 1-30)
One non-limiting and exemplary embodiment provides an electronic apparatus, an information processing apparatus, an information processing method, and a recording medium that make it possible to measure a bioelectric potential of certain signal quality without forcing a user to go to the trouble of attaching an electrode again (Matsumoto et al. par. 4). The headset 1 causes the operation input device 1a to receive user 10's operation input and causes the bioelectric potential measuring device 1b to measure a bioelectric potential and contact impedance of the user 10 at the time of the operation. Information including the bioelectric potential measured by the headset 1 is transmitted to the information processing apparatus 2 (Matsumoto et al. par. 82). The information processing apparatus 2 receives information from the headset 1 by causing the operation signal acquisition unit 21 to receive operation input information and causing the bioelectric potential acquisition unit 22 to receive a bioelectric potential (Matsumoto et al. par. 92). The user 10 wearing the headset 1 activates the headset 1 at a time t=t0 (a time at which the headset is attached may be used as a standard). Then, as illustrated in FIG. 22, the headset 1 starts measurement of contact impedance of the electrode 49 at a time t=t1, and thus the contact impedance Rc2 is obtained. Next, contact impedance of the electrode 48 is measured at a time t=t2, and thus the contact impedance Rc1 is obtained. Then, at a time t=t3, compensation of contact impedance and compensation of an amplitude of a bioelectric potential waveform are performed on the basis of the values of the contact impedance Rc1 and contact impedance Rc2. In this way, a bioelectric potential of the electrode 48 is obtained (Matsumoto et al. par. 237).
Matsumoto et al. do not explicitly teach a score acquiring unit that acquires score information containing a score indicating a present or future physical condition of the user, based on the measurement information.
Sugiyama et al. teach a score acquiring unit that acquires score information containing a score indicating a present or future physical condition of the user, based on the measurement information. (Sugiyama et al. US 20210287808 abstract; paragraphs [0009]-[0011]; [0029]-[0033]; [0037]-[0048]; [0053]-[0063]; [0089]; figures 1-12)
The generator 41 is configured to generate the condition information based on the physiological information of the subject acquired by the acquisition unit 2, the condition discrimination method and the reference value defined by the medical guideline and the like stored in the storage unit 3. The condition information refers to information on the condition of the subject. The information on the condition of the subject is, for example, a score calculated based on the condition discrimination method. The generator 41 can also generate the condition level information of the subject based on the condition information and the standardization table. The condition level information is, for example, a grade indicating a degree of the condition of the subject. The generator 41 transmits the generated condition information or condition level information to the output interface 5 (Sugiyama et al. par. 37). FIG. 3 illustrates the reference value of NEWS, which is another one condition discrimination method. NEWS is a discrimination method used to discriminate septicemia. When the acquired respiratory rate per minute is equal to or less than 8 or equal to or greater than 25, the score related to the respiratory rate is 3. When the respiratory rate is equal to or greater than 21 and equal to or less than 24, the score related to the respiratory rate is 2. When the respiratory rate is equal to or greater than 9 and equal to or less than 11, the score related to the respiratory rate is 1. When the respiratory rate is equal to or greater than 12 and equal to or less than 20, the score related to the respiratory rate is 0. Scores for remaining parameters are also calculated based on the reference value defined by the medical guideline or the like. The calculated scores are summed. In the present specification, a total score thereof is referred to as a total score B (another example of the condition information) (Sugiyama et al. par. 42). FIG. 4 illustrates a standardization table P of each discrimination method. The standardization table P is a table configured to display condition levels of the subject by classifying the condition levels into four color groups for each discrimination method. The four color groups in the present embodiment include a white group, a green group, an orange group, and a red group. The white group corresponds to a condition level indicating that the subject is in a normal state. The red group corresponds to a condition level indicating that the subject is in an abnormal state and is in a dangerous state. The orange group corresponds to a condition level indicating that the subject is not in the normal state though the subject is not as dangerous as the subject of the red group (Sugiyama et al. par. 45).
Therefore, it would have been obviously to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Matsumoto et al. reference by incorporate the physiological information based on the score calculated as taught by Sugiyama et al. reference in order to classify a user’s state as normal or abnormal, thereby improving health tracking and interpretation of physiological data.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto et al. US 20180168514 in view of Sugiyama et al. US 20210287808 and further in view of Rodriguez-Liorente et al. US 20140073869.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. teach all the limitation in the claim 1.
The combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. do not explicitly teach The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the score information contains information indicating transition of the score.
Rodriguez-Liorente et al. teach The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the score information contains information indicating transition of the score. (Rodriguez-Liorente et al. US 20140073869 abstract; paragraphs [0007]; [0031]; [0137]; [0246]-[0252]; [0259]; [0555]; figures 1-12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 29, 31, 33, 38 and 44-46)
In some embodiments, the processing equipment manages one or more status flags such as a gain change status flag. In some embodiments, a status indicator (e.g., a gain change indicator or high noise indicator) may be received while the physiological data is being received. For example, a gain change indicator may be a change in gain in an analog amplifier. The processing equipment may set a period of time during which received values of the physiological data are not added to the window of data in response to receiving the status indicator. The period of time may be, for example, a multiple of a period associated with a physiological rate of the subject. Artifacts associated with, for example, a gain change may be mitigated by omitting that data from the buffer. In some embodiments, the processing equipment may use a window of data having values taken before and after the period of time. In some such embodiments, the processing equipment may modify some of the values in the window of data to smooth the transition between values of the physiological data received prior to receiving the status indicator and values of the physiological data received after the period of time is over (Rodriguez-Liorente et al. par. 7).
According to the cited passages, and figures, examiner interprets the transition values (score) of the physiological data receiver prior to receiving the status indicator and values of the physiological data received after the period of time is over as the transition of the value (score).
Therefore, it would have been obviously to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. reference by apply smooth transition between values of physiological data as taught by Rodriguez-Liorente et al. reference in order to identify the transition point between the two different times.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto et al. US 20180168514 in view of Sugiyama et al. US 20210287808 and further in view of Hanlon et al. US 20120072233.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. teach all the limitation in the claim 4.
The combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. do not explicitly teach The information processing apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the output information acquiring unit acquires, as the output information, advice on eating-and-drinking behavior of a user to ensure that a score higher than the score of the score information acquired by the score acquiring unit is obtained in the future.
Hanlon et al. teach The information processing apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the output information acquiring unit acquires, as the output information, advice on eating-and-drinking behavior of a user to ensure that a score higher than the score of the score information acquired by the score acquiring unit is obtained in the future. (Hanlon et al. US 20120072233 abstract; paragraphs [0014]-[0012]; [0116]-[0119]; [0241]-[0243]; figures 1-11)
In the illustrative embodiment of the present invention, nutritional data supplied by the user is analyzed using various algorithms to perform an overall nutritional health assessment of the patient. The nutritional health assessment tool manipulates the data to output a nutrition score (based on a 100-point scale), an estimated and recommended value of total caloric intake, an estimated and recommended number of servings per food group along, and estimated and recommended value of caloric intake per food group, etc. For example, the information and assessment can be based on one or more of the predictive models already described or incorporated by reference herein. This information, along with other informative text and recommendations, is included in one or more nutrition summary pages that are presented to the user. FIG. 4 shows an example nutrition summary page containing a nutritional score. FIG. 5 shows a second example nutrition summary page showing serving size and caloric intake for various food groups. FIG. 6 is a third example nutrition summary page providing informational text on nutrition and a more detailed write up of the analysis based on division of food groups (Hanlon et al. par. 118).
According to the cited passages and figures, examiner interprets the user nutrition score is 61 (poor diet) as illustrate in the figure 4 and figure 5 is a list of nutrition (eating and drinking) advice user to take for improving the nutrition score in the future.
Therefore, it would have been obviously to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. reference by incorporate the nutrition information based on the score assigned as taught by Hanlon et al. reference in order to classify the food that have a good nutrition, thereby improving user nutrition score.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto et al. US 20180168514 in view of Sugiyama et al. US 20210287808 and further in view of Shirai et al. US 20170258407.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. teach The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the score acquiring unit acquires the score information, based on information obtained by measuring at least one of a blood pressure, a pulse, a blood oxygen level, a body temperature, a respiratory rate,
See figure 3 of Sugiyama et al. reference illustrate the score information corresponding to the measurement that include blood pressure, body temperature, oxygen level, heart rate (pulse) and respiratory rate.
The combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. do not explicitly teach an acceleration of a user.
Shirai et al. teach an acceleration of a user. (Shirai et al. US 20170258407 abstract; paragraphs [0002]-[0006]; [0009]-[0018]; [0020]-[0022]; [0036]; [0065]-[0074]; [0092]-0096]; [0106]; [0110]-[0112]; [0135]-[0138]; figures 1-16;)
The body motion sensor 300 (body motion sensor device) is a sensor which is provided in the wearable device 500 worn by the subject and which can acquire body motion information of the subject. For example, the body motion information is information indicating body motions of the subject acquired from the body motion sensor 300. The body motion information is information indicating the distance travelled by the subject, number of steps taken, stride, time of movement, moving speed, acceleration, absolute amount of change in acceleration, frequency of change in acceleration, amount of exercise, details of exercise (details of activity), difference in elevation above sea level per unit time, elevation above sea level, information acquired from a gyro sensor, absolute amount of change in angular velocity, frequency of change in angular velocity, information acquired from a geomagnetic sensor, absolute amount of change in geomagnetism, frequency of change in geomagnetism, information acquired from a barometric pressure sensor signal, or the like. In this embodiment, it is recommended that such information should be handled as multidimensional vectors. However, similar information may be omitted in order to reduce the amount of information (Shirai et al. par. 69).
Therefore, it would have been obviously to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. reference by apply the motion sensor as taught by Shirai et al. reference in order to tracking the movement of the user.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto et al. US 20180168514 in view of Sugiyama et al. US 20210287808 and further in view of Ofir et al. US 20210015415.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. teach all the limitation in the claim 1.
The combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. do not explicitly teach The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the score acquiring unit acquires the score information, based on eating-and-drinking information on eating- and-drinking behavior of a user.
Ofir et al. teach The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the score acquiring unit acquires the score information, based on eating-and-drinking information on eating- and-drinking behavior of a user. (Ofir et al. US 20210015415 abstract; paragraphs [0005]-[0007]; [0023]; [0034]-[0035]; figures 1-9;)
In another example, a psychological score may be determined based on features which may comprise eating, drinking, taking medication, brushing teeth, walking (e.g., number of steps, time and duration), sleeping (e.g., duration and/or quality of the sleep), showering, washing hands, active time in a day, number of times a day a user visits POI, speaking detection (using microphone), total time in a day a user is speaking (detected using microphone), number and duration of phone calls, time and duration in a day a user is using smart phone, time an duration in a day a user spends outside, blood pressure, heart rate, GSR, transferring to or from a given location, lying in bed, and/or explicit feedback from user answers (Ofir et al. par. 35).
Therefore, it would have been obviously to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. reference by apply a psychological score based on eating, drinking, taking medication, sleep, walking and daily hygiene as taught by Ofir et al. reference in order to understand user behavior, thereby improving user health monitoring.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto et al. US 20180168514 in view of Sugiyama et al. US 20210287808 and further in view of Inaba et al. US 20220148703.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. teach all the limitation in the claim 12.
The combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. do not explicitly teach The information processing apparatus according to claim 12, wherein the score acquiring unit uses, as the learning information, learning information configured using input information containing measurement information obtained by measuring two or more users in the past.
Inaba et al. teach The information processing apparatus according to claim 12, wherein the score acquiring unit uses, as the learning information, learning information configured using input information containing measurement information obtained by measuring two or more users in the past. (Inaba et al. US 20220148703 abstract; paragraphs [0051]-[0057]; [0071]; [0077]; [0081]; figures 1-8)
In the food providing system 1 of (1) or (2), the base recipe suggestion unit 21d may include a state observation unit 101 that acquires data relating to at least one of age/sex/medical history/allergy information of the user, a schedule for the user, fatigue of the user, gene information of the user, biological information and lifestyle information of the user, weather/temperature/atmospheric pressure, a social event, and a history of recent recipe selections, as input data, a label acquisition unit 102 that acquires a recipe selected in a past as a label, and a learning unit 103 that constructs a learning model for suggesting a recipe by performing supervised learning using a pair of input data acquired by the state observation unit 101 and the label acquired by the label acquisition unit 102 as teaching data. This makes it possible to infer output (base recipe) for input information of the user, based on the past statistics of a plurality of users (Inaba et al. par. 77).
Therefore, it would have been obviously to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. reference by apply a learning model based on the past data as taught by Inaba et al. reference in order to improve an accuracy of predicting an outcome.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto et al. US 20180168514 in view of Sugiyama et al. US 20210287808 and further in view of Yoshida et al. US 20240266061.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. teach all the limitation in the claim 12.
The combination of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. do not explicitly teach The information processing apparatus according to claim 12, further comprising a learning information acquiring unit that acquires learning information obtained by performing re- learning using evaluation information corresponding to the score information acquired by the score acquiring unit and input information used to acquire the score information.
Yoshida et al. teach The information processing apparatus according to claim 12, further comprising a learning information acquiring unit that acquires learning information obtained by performing re- learning using evaluation information corresponding to the score information acquired by the score acquiring unit and input information used to acquire the score information. (Yoshida et al. US 20240266061 abstract paragraphs [0024]; [0120]-[0128]; figures 1-18)
The recording medium according to an aspect of the invention, stores the computer program causing a computer to execute processing of receiving correction of the sensitivity information from the user, and relearning the learning model by using training data including the corrected sensitivity information and the biological data measured for the user as a data set (Yoshida et al. par. 24).
Therefore, it would have been obviously to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the system of Matsumoto et al. and Sugiyama et al. reference by apply a relearning the learning model as taught by Yoshida et al. reference in order to make a correction on the data.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANG D TRAN whose telephone number is (408)918-7546. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:30 pm (pacific time).
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 A 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.
/THANG D TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2686
/BRIAN A ZIMMERMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2686
Prosecution Insights