DETAILED ACTION
This is a first office action in response to application 19/241,475 filed 06/18/2025, in which claims 1-8 are presented for examination. Currently claims 1-8 are pending.
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.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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: “first stimulating unit”, “second stimulating unit”, “second stimulus sensation intensity measuring unit”, “stimulation intensity ratio calculating unit”, “actuation control unit” used throughout claims 1-8.
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 § 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 1-7 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.
Claim 1, 2, and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: The claim recites “a second stimulus sensation intensity measuring unit” however fails to provide “a first measuring unit” thus the claims are incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements.
Claims 7, 8 recites the limitation "a second stimulus sensation intensity" in line 1. It is unclear if this limitation is in reference to the “a second stimulus sensation intensity” of claim 1 or if this is intended to be an additional limitation. Thus, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Office recommends change “a” to “the” if this is intended to be referencing claim 1 to overcome this rejection.
Further depending claims not mentioned inherit the deficiencies of their respective base claims and are rejected under similar rationale.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Beyhs U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0303069 A1 hereinafter Beyhs.
Consider Claim 1:
Beyhs discloses a biological feedback detection device comprising: (Beyhs, See Abstract.)
a first stimulating unit that stimulates a skin sensation in a first body part of a biological object; a second stimulating unit that stimulates a skin sensation in a second body part of the biological object; (Beyhs, [0025] FIGS. 3A-3B illustrate a proximity and a contact, respectively, between a first body part and a second body part according to examples of the disclosure. FIGS. 4A-4B illustrate time-domain representations 400, 420 and frequency domain representations 402, 422 of the sensed signal corresponding to the proximity or the contact according to examples of the disclosure. With or without contact or proximity, the stimulation generated by wearable device 308A (e.g., corresponding to wearable device 150, drive circuitry 204 and electrode 202A) can propagate through the body via a first path 309A, and can be received by wearable device 308B (e.g., corresponding to wearable device 150, sense circuitry 203 and electrode 202B). A second path 309B can be formed between wearable devices 308A-308B due to contact or proximity between index finger 302 and/or right hand 304 and left hand 306. The second path 309B can cause changes to the sensed signal when contact or proximity between index finger 304 and hand 306 occurs compared with the expected sensed signal from first path 309A. FIG. 3A illustrates that a second path 309B can be formed between index finger 304 of right hand 302 in proximity to the palm of left hand 306 (e.g., a capacitive path). FIG. 3B illustrates that a second path 309B can be formed between index finger 304 of right hand 302 in contact with the palm of left hand 306. The differences in the sensed waveform can be used to distinguish between skin-to-skin touch and skin-to-skin proximity.”)
a second stimulus sensation intensity measuring unit that measures a second stimulus sensation intensity indicating intensity of sensation of a stimulation felt in the second body part; and (Behys, [0019], “FIG. 2 illustrates a block diagram of an example computing system 200 for skin-to-skin contact detection according to examples of the disclosure. Computing system 200 can include electrodes 202A-202B, sense circuitry 203, drive circuitry 204 to stimulate first body part with drive signals and measure sensed signals from a second body part.”)
a stimulation intensity ratio calculating unit that calculates a ratio regarding whether the second stimulus sensation intensity corresponds to a stimulation applied to the first body part or corresponds to a stimulation applied to the second body part. (Behys, [0025], [0028-0031], [0035], [0031], “In some examples, the width of the peak can be measured at a fixed point (e.g., at a fixed amplitude point). For example, the width can be measured at the amplitude threshold 406, 426, or at another fixed point. In some examples, the width measurement can be normalized according to the amplitude of the peak (because peaks may widen as the amplitude increases). The amplitude-normalized width of the peak can be used with the amplitude-normalized width threshold in a similar manner as described above. In some examples, the width can be measured at a midpoint of the amplitude of the peak. In some examples, the amplitude-normalized width can be a ratio of the width at a fixed amplitude point to the maximum amplitude at the peak (e.g., scaled according to maximum amplitude) that can be compared to an amplitude-normalized width threshold.”)
Consider Claim 7:
Behys discloses the biological feedback detection device according to claim 1, wherein based on a second stimulus sensation intensity in case in which a stimulation is applied only to the first body part, and based on a second stimulus sensation intensity in case in which a stimulation is applied to the first body part and a stimulation is applied to the second body part, the stimulation intensity ratio calculating unit calculates a ratio regarding whether the second stimulus sensation intensity corresponds to a stimulation applied to the first body part or corresponds to a stimulation applied to the second body part. (Behys, [0025], [0028-0031], [0035], [0031], “In some examples, the width of the peak can be measured at a fixed point (e.g., at a fixed amplitude point). For example, the width can be measured at the amplitude threshold 406, 426, or at another fixed point. In some examples, the width measurement can be normalized according to the amplitude of the peak (because peaks may widen as the amplitude increases). The amplitude-normalized width of the peak can be used with the amplitude-normalized width threshold in a similar manner as described above. In some examples, the width can be measured at a midpoint of the amplitude of the peak. In some examples, the amplitude-normalized width can be a ratio of the width at a fixed amplitude point to the maximum amplitude at the peak (e.g., scaled according to maximum amplitude) that can be compared to an amplitude-normalized width threshold.”)
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) 2-6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beyhs U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0303069 A1 and further in view of Yokoyama et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0004132 A1 hereinafter Yokoyama.
Consider Claim 4:
Beyhs discloses a biological sensation expansion method comprising: (Beyhs, See Abstract.)
stimulating a skin sensation in a first body part of a biological object; stimulating a skin sensation in a second body part of the biological object; (Beyhs, [0025] FIGS. 3A-3B illustrate a proximity and a contact, respectively, between a first body part and a second body part according to examples of the disclosure. FIGS. 4A-4B illustrate time-domain representations 400, 420 and frequency domain representations 402, 422 of the sensed signal corresponding to the proximity or the contact according to examples of the disclosure. With or without contact or proximity, the stimulation generated by wearable device 308A (e.g., corresponding to wearable device 150, drive circuitry 204 and electrode 202A) can propagate through the body via a first path 309A, and can be received by wearable device 308B (e.g., corresponding to wearable device 150, sense circuitry 203 and electrode 202B). A second path 309B can be formed between wearable devices 308A-308B due to contact or proximity between index finger 302 and/or right hand 304 and left hand 306. The second path 309B can cause changes to the sensed signal when contact or proximity between index finger 304 and hand 306 occurs compared with the expected sensed signal from first path 309A. FIG. 3A illustrates that a second path 309B can be formed between index finger 304 of right hand 302 in proximity to the palm of left hand 306 (e.g., a capacitive path). FIG. 3B illustrates that a second path 309B can be formed between index finger 304 of right hand 302 in contact with the palm of left hand 306. The differences in the sensed waveform can be used to distinguish between skin-to-skin touch and skin-to-skin proximity.”)
measuring a second stimulus sensation intensity indicating intensity of sensation of a stimulation felt in the second body part; (Behys, [0019], “FIG. 2 illustrates a block diagram of an example computing system 200 for skin-to-skin contact detection according to examples of the disclosure. Computing system 200 can include electrodes 202A-202B, sense circuitry 203, drive circuitry 204 to stimulate first body part with drive signals and measure sensed signals from a second body part.”)
calculating ratio regarding whether the second stimulus sensation intensity corresponds to a stimulation applied to the first body part or corresponds to a stimulation applied to the second body part; and (Behys, [0025], [0028-0031], [0035], [0031], “In some examples, the width of the peak can be measured at a fixed point (e.g., at a fixed amplitude point). For example, the width can be measured at the amplitude threshold 406, 426, or at another fixed point. In some examples, the width measurement can be normalized according to the amplitude of the peak (because peaks may widen as the amplitude increases). The amplitude-normalized width of the peak can be used with the amplitude-normalized width threshold in a similar manner as described above. In some examples, the width can be measured at a midpoint of the amplitude of the peak. In some examples, the amplitude-normalized width can be a ratio of the width at a fixed amplitude point to the maximum amplitude at the peak (e.g., scaled according to maximum amplitude) that can be compared to an amplitude-normalized width threshold.”)
Behys however does not specify performing control, based on the ratio, to maintain intensity of a stimulation applied to the first body part, and at same time to reduce at least either intensity or frequency of a stimulation applied to the second body part and to enhance stimulus sensation intensity occurring in the second body part due to a tactile stimulation applied to the first body part.
Yokoyama however teaches that it was a known technique in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide control of tactile stimulation applied and therefore teaches performing control, based on the ratio, to maintain intensity of a stimulation applied to the first body part, and at same time to reduce at least either intensity or frequency of a stimulation applied to the second body part and to enhance stimulus sensation intensity occurring in the second body part due to a tactile stimulation applied to the first body part. (Yokoyama, [0062-0071], [0070], “For example, the sensory position/intensity deciding unit 201 can decide the output intensity of the first tactile stimulation unit 100 and the output intensity of the second tactile stimulation unit 100 in such a way that the total value of the output intensity of the first tactile stimulation unit 100 and the output intensity of the second tactile stimulation unit 100 increases in inverse proportion to the distance between the intermediate position and the target sensory position. Alternatively, if the target sensory position is closer to the contact position of the first tactile stimulation unit 100 than to the contact position of the second tactile stimulation unit 100, then the sensory position/intensity deciding unit 201 can decide the output intensity of the first tactile stimulation unit 100 in such a way that the output intensity of the first tactile stimulation unit 100 increases in proportion to the distance between the contact position of the first tactile stimulation unit 100 and the target sensory position. The same is the case regarding the second tactile stimulation unit 100 too (i.e., the converse relation also holds true).”)
It therefore would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide tactile stimulation adjustments as this was a known technique in view of Yokoyama and would have been utilized for the purpose of by specifying the actual feeling (i.e., specifying how much intensity at which position), it becomes possible to eliminate the user control of the individual tactile stimulation units 100 and to achieve automation. (Yokoyama, [0054])
Consider Claim 2:
Beyhs discloses a biological sensation expansion device comprising: (Beyhs, See Abstract.)
a first stimulating unit that stimulates a tactile sensation in a first body part of a biological object; a second stimulating unit that stimulates a tactile sensation in a second body part of the biological object; (Beyhs, [0025] FIGS. 3A-3B illustrate a proximity and a contact, respectively, between a first body part and a second body part according to examples of the disclosure. FIGS. 4A-4B illustrate time-domain representations 400, 420 and frequency domain representations 402, 422 of the sensed signal corresponding to the proximity or the contact according to examples of the disclosure. With or without contact or proximity, the stimulation generated by wearable device 308A (e.g., corresponding to wearable device 150, drive circuitry 204 and electrode 202A) can propagate through the body via a first path 309A, and can be received by wearable device 308B (e.g., corresponding to wearable device 150, sense circuitry 203 and electrode 202B). A second path 309B can be formed between wearable devices 308A-308B due to contact or proximity between index finger 302 and/or right hand 304 and left hand 306. The second path 309B can cause changes to the sensed signal when contact or proximity between index finger 304 and hand 306 occurs compared with the expected sensed signal from first path 309A. FIG. 3A illustrates that a second path 309B can be formed between index finger 304 of right hand 302 in proximity to the palm of left hand 306 (e.g., a capacitive path). FIG. 3B illustrates that a second path 309B can be formed between index finger 304 of right hand 302 in contact with the palm of left hand 306. The differences in the sensed waveform can be used to distinguish between skin-to-skin touch and skin-to-skin proximity.”)
a second stimulus sensation intensity measuring unit that measures a second stimulus sensation intensity indicating intensity of sensation of a stimulation felt in the second body part; (Behys, [0019], “FIG. 2 illustrates a block diagram of an example computing system 200 for skin-to-skin contact detection according to examples of the disclosure. Computing system 200 can include electrodes 202A-202B, sense circuitry 203, drive circuitry 204 to stimulate first body part with drive signals and measure sensed signals from a second body part.”)
a stimulation intensity ratio calculating unit that calculates a ratio regarding whether the second stimulus sensation intensity corresponds to a stimulation applied to the first body part or corresponds to a stimulation applied to the second body part. (Behys, [0025], [0028-0031], [0035], [0031], “In some examples, the width of the peak can be measured at a fixed point (e.g., at a fixed amplitude point). For example, the width can be measured at the amplitude threshold 406, 426, or at another fixed point. In some examples, the width measurement can be normalized according to the amplitude of the peak (because peaks may widen as the amplitude increases). The amplitude-normalized width of the peak can be used with the amplitude-normalized width threshold in a similar manner as described above. In some examples, the width can be measured at a midpoint of the amplitude of the peak. In some examples, the amplitude-normalized width can be a ratio of the width at a fixed amplitude point to the maximum amplitude at the peak (e.g., scaled according to maximum amplitude) that can be compared to an amplitude-normalized width threshold.”)
Behys however does not specify providing a training unit that, based on the ratio, performs control to maintain intensity of a stimulation applied by the first stimulating unit, and at same time to reduce at least either intensity or frequency of a stimulation applied by the second stimulating unit and to enhance stimulus sensation intensity occurring in the second body part due to a tactile stimulation applied to the first body part by the first stimulating unit.
Yokoyama however teaches that it was a known technique in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a training unit and thus discloses a training unit that, based on the ratio, performs control to maintain intensity of a stimulation applied by the first stimulating unit, and at same time to reduce at least either intensity or frequency of a stimulation applied by the second stimulating unit and to enhance stimulus sensation intensity occurring in the second body part due to a tactile stimulation applied to the first body part by the first stimulating unit. (Yokoyama, [0054], [0062-0071], [0117-0123], [0139], [0109], “Furthermore, in the present embodiment, when it can be expected to have an excessive output, it is possible to display a warning so as to ensure that the tactile presentation device 10 does not malfunction. For example, in the present embodiment, the output control signals are generated for the purpose of settling the specified sensory position and the specified sensory intensity. However, the output can be auto-corrected in such a way that, regarding the issues causing any burden to the human body, such as the tactile presentation period being too long or too strong, or the driving period being too long thereby producing heat, or low temperature burn injury or high temperature burn injury being caused due to a temperature presentation device; advance simulation is performed and accordingly a warning is displayed in the setting screen so as to avoid any burden to the user.”)
It therefore would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a training unit for provide tactile stimulation adjustments as this was a known technique in view of Yokoyama and would have been utilized for the purpose of by specifying the actual feeling (i.e., specifying how much intensity at which position), it becomes possible to eliminate the user control of the individual tactile stimulation units 100 and to achieve automation. (Yokoyama, [0054])
Consider Claim 3:
Behys in view of Yokoyama disclose the biological sensation expansion device according to claim 2, further comprising an actuation control unit that controls actuation of at least either the first stimulating unit or the second stimulating unit, wherein when a stimulation occurring in the second body part due to a stimulation applied to the first body part by the first stimulating unit becomes equal to or greater than a predetermined value, the actuation control unit controls the second stimulating unit to reduce intensity of a stimulation applied by the second stimulating unit. (Yokoyama, [0062-0071], [0070], “For example, the sensory position/intensity deciding unit 201 can decide the output intensity of the first tactile stimulation unit 100 and the output intensity of the second tactile stimulation unit 100 in such a way that the total value of the output intensity of the first tactile stimulation unit 100 and the output intensity of the second tactile stimulation unit 100 increases in inverse proportion to the distance between the intermediate position and the target sensory position. Alternatively, if the target sensory position is closer to the contact position of the first tactile stimulation unit 100 than to the contact position of the second tactile stimulation unit 100, then the sensory position/intensity deciding unit 201 can decide the output intensity of the first tactile stimulation unit 100 in such a way that the output intensity of the first tactile stimulation unit 100 increases in proportion to the distance between the contact position of the first tactile stimulation unit 100 and the target sensory position. The same is the case regarding the second tactile stimulation unit 100 too (i.e., the converse relation also holds true).”)
Consider Claim 5:
Behys in view of Yokoyama disclose the biological sensation expansion device according to claim 2, wherein a stimulation of a skin sensation applied by the first stimulating unit and the second stimulating unit is either a tactile sensation, or a pressure sensation, or a pain sensation, or a cold sensation, or a warmth sensation. (Yokoyama, [0093] Each tactile stimulation unit 100 is an actuator that offers tactile stimulation to the user. For example, the tactile stimulation unit 100 generates vibrations as tactile stimulation. However, the tactile stimulation offered by the tactile stimulation unit 100 is not limited to vibrations, and it is alternatively possible to think of, for example, stimulation of coldness, warmth, wind, water, or pressure.”)
Consider Claim 6:
Behys in view of Yokoyama disclose the biological sensation expansion device according to claim 5, wherein, based on a ratio that is calculated by the stimulation intensity ratio calculating unit and that is related to whether the second stimulus sensation intensity corresponds to a stimulation applied to the first body part or corresponds to a stimulation applied to the second body part, type of stimulation is selected regarding skin sensation applied by the first stimulating unit and the second stimulating unit. (Behys, [0025], [0028-0031], [0035], [0031], “In some examples, the width of the peak can be measured at a fixed point (e.g., at a fixed amplitude point). For example, the width can be measured at the amplitude threshold 406, 426, or at another fixed point. In some examples, the width measurement can be normalized according to the amplitude of the peak (because peaks may widen as the amplitude increases). The amplitude-normalized width of the peak can be used with the amplitude-normalized width threshold in a similar manner as described above. In some examples, the width can be measured at a midpoint of the amplitude of the peak. In some examples, the amplitude-normalized width can be a ratio of the width at a fixed amplitude point to the maximum amplitude at the peak (e.g., scaled according to maximum amplitude) that can be compared to an amplitude-normalized width threshold.”)
Consider Claim 8:
Behys in view of Yokoyama disclose the biological sensation expansion device according to claim 2, wherein based on a second stimulus sensation intensity in case in which a stimulation is applied only to the first body part, and based on a second stimulus sensation intensity in case in which a stimulation is applied to the first body part and a stimulation is applied to the second body part, the stimulation intensity ratio calculating unit calculates a ratio regarding whether the second stimulus sensation intensity corresponds to a stimulation applied to the first body part or corresponds to a stimulation applied to the second body part. (Yokoyama, [0062-0071], [0063], “The sensory position/intensity deciding unit 201 functions as a generating unit that, according to the specified sensory position and the specified sensory intensity, decides on (calculates) the vibrational intensity with respect to the tactile stimulation units 100 corresponding to the target sensory position (in such a way that the specified sensory intensity is sensed at the specified sensory position); and generates output control signals to be output to the tactile stimulation units 100. Herein, the specified sensory position also includes the movement path of the sensory position.”)
Conclusion
Prior art made of record and not relied upon which is still considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is cited in a current or previous PTO-892. The prior art cited in a current or previous PTO-892 reads upon the applicants claims in part, in whole and/or gives a general reference to the knowledge and skill of persons having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention. Applicant, when responding to this Office action, should consider not only the cited references applied in the rejection but also any additional references made of record.
In the response to this office action, the Examiner respectfully requests support be shown for any new or amended claims. More precisely, indicate support for any newly added language or amendments by specifying page, line numbers, and/or figure(s). This will assist The Office in compact prosecution of this application. The Office has cited particular columns, paragraphs, and/or line numbers in the applied rejection of the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within each claim, however other passages and figures may apply. Applicant, in preparing a response, should fully consider the cited reference(s) in its entirety and not only the cited portions as other sections of the reference may expand on the teachings of the cited portion(s).
Applicant Representatives are reminded of CFR 1.4(d)(2)(ii) which states “A patent practitioner (§ 1.32(a)(1) ), signing pursuant to §§ 1.33(b)(1) or 1.33(b)(2), must supply his/her registration number either as part of the S-signature, or immediately below or adjacent to the S-signature. The number (#) character may be used only as part of the S-signature when appearing before a practitioner’s registration number; otherwise the number character may not be used in an S-signature.” When an unsigned or improperly signed amendment is received the amendment will be listed in the contents of the application file, but not entered. The examiner will notify applicant of the status of the application, advising him or her to furnish a duplicate amendment properly signed or to ratify the amendment already filed. In an application not under final rejection, applicant should be given a two month time period in which to ratify the previously filed amendment (37 CFR 1.135(c) ).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J JANSEN II whose telephone number is (571)272-5604. The examiner can normally be reached Normally Available Monday-Friday 9am-4pm EST.
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, Temesghen Ghebretinsae can be reached on 571-272-3017. 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.
/Michael J Jansen II/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626