Application No.: 15/437,666
`
`REMARKS
`
`Claims 1-14 are pending in the present application upon entry of the amendment.
`
`Claims 1-2, and 4-7 are presently under consideration as a result of a previous
`
`restriction requirement. Claims 1 and 7 have been amended in the same manner as set
`
`forth in the previous response of December 27, 2019. Claims 8-14 have been newly
`
`added. Favorable reconsideration of the application, as amended, is respectfully
`
`requested.
`
`I.
`
`CLAIM OBJECT/ON
`
`As discussed in the previous response of December 27, 2019, claim 1
`
`is
`
`objected to because of informalities. Applicant has amended claim 1 to address the
`
`issue, and therefore respectfully requests withdrawal of the objection.
`
`II.
`
`CLAIM INTERPRETATION
`
`As discussed in the previous response of December 27, 2019, the Examiner
`
`indicates features in claim 7 is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. §112(f). Applicant has
`
`amended claim 7 to recite “the biological noise sensor” and “the environmental noise
`
`sensor” in the same manner as claim 1 not pointed out as invoking means-plus-function
`
`under 35 U.S.C. §112(f). Applicant respectfully submits that claim 7 does not invoke
`
`means-plus-function under 35 U.S.C. §112(f) for at least the same reason as claim 1.
`
`III.
`
`REJECTION OF CLAIMS 4, 6 AND 7 UNDER 35 us. C. §112(b)
`
`As discussed in the previous response of December 27, 2019, claim 7 is rejected
`
`under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) as being indefinite. As described above, applicant has
`
`amended claim 7 to be consistent with language of claim 1. Applicant respectfully
`
`requests withdrawal of the rejection.
`
`IV.
`
`REJECTION OF CLAIMS 1, 2, 4, 5 AND 7 UNDER 35 U.S.C. §103
`
`Claims 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being
`
`unpatentable over Shin (US 2015/0080675) in view of Nakamura (US 4,716,907).
`
`Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of the rejection for at least following reasons.
`
`Claim 1, as amended, recites:
`
`Page 7 of 13
`
`

`

`Application No.: 15/437,666
`
`A biological signal measurement system comprising:
`a processor;
`a biological sensor, which is combined with the processor, is configured to
`measure a biological signal including external noise of biological noise and of
`environmental noise;
`a biological noise sensor, which is combined with the processor, is
`configured to measure a signal including the biological noise, the signal
`not including the environmental noise; and
`an environmental noise sensor, which is combined with the
`processor, is configured to measure a signal including the environmental
`noise, the signal not including the biological noise;
`wherein the processor is configured to:
`estimate the biological noise from the signal measured by the biological
`noise sensor;
`estimate the environmental noise from the signal measured by the
`environmental noise sensor; and
`calculate a biological signal in consideration of an effect of the external
`noise, using the biological signal measured by the biological sensor, the
`estimated biological noise and the estimated environmental noise.
`(Emphasis
`Added)
`
`Support for the amendment can be found, for example, in the Specification, page
`
`6, line 27 — page 7, line 11, and FIGS. 3, 10, 12 and 14.
`
`For example, the present application describes that “[t]he external noise includes
`
`biological noise which is originating from a living body, and environmental noise which is
`
`not originating from a living body” (See, Spec. page 6, line 27 — page 7, line 11). More
`
`specifically, the present application describes the biological noise measurer (sensor)
`
`may measure at least one of a myoelectric potential of a living body, a fingertip
`
`temperature, a nose temperature, an instep temperature, a foot fingertip temperature, a
`
`change in absorbance of whole brain, or an amount of emotional sweating due to
`
`change in body temperature. The environmental noise measurer (sensor) may
`
`measure at least one of magnetic or radio noise generated by peripheral equipment, a
`
`temperature, a humidity, an air current, a radiant heat, a change in lighting in
`
`measurement environment, a change in incidence angle to measuring probe, or a wind
`
`speed (See, FIGS. 3, 10, 12 and 14).
`
`Page 8 of 13
`
`

`

`Application No.: 15/437,666
`
`i. Shin Fails to Teach Environmental Noise Sensor Which Measures
`
`Environmental Noise
`
`In rejecting claim 1, the Examiner relies on Shin as teaching a biological noise
`
`sensor and an environmental noise sensor as recited in claim 1.
`
`Shin discloses a system including a brainwave detector 100, a biological detector
`
`200 and a camera 500. The brainwave detector 100 may measure the brainwave of a
`
`subject. The detector 200 may measure bio signals of the subject. The bio signals
`
`include a Galvanic skin response of the subject, heart rate, body temperature,
`
`respiration, and facial electromyogram (See, paragraphs [0033], [0034] and [0051]).
`
`The camera 500 may take an image of the subject. The image of the camera 500 may
`
`be filtered to remove undesired noise, such as, drowsiness, unconscious movements,
`
`reflex movements, and the like of the subject, from the measured bio signals and/or
`
`brainwaves (See, paragraphs [0038] and [0039]).
`
`The Examiner asserts that the detector 200 measures both biological noise and
`
`environmental noise since the bio signals (GSR, HR, body temp, respiration, and facial
`
`electromyogram) can be influenced by environment and thereby constitute
`
`environmental noise. The Examiner also asserts that the camera 500 measures both
`
`biological noise and environmental noise since the movements (drowsiness,
`
`unconscious movements, reflex movements) can be influenced by environment (See,
`
`OA, page 4).
`
`However, applicant notes that the detector 200 and the camera 500 are not
`
`configured to measure environmental noise. Even if the detected bio signals are
`
`influenced by environment as proposed by the Examiner, the detector 200 is still
`
`detecting the bio signals (GSR, HR, body temp, respiration, and facial
`
`electromyogram). The detector 200 may detect the bio signals influenced by the
`
`environment, but it does not detect environment itself. Similarly, the camera 500 may
`
`detect the movements influenced by the environment, but it does not detect the
`
`environment itself.
`
`Thus, both the detector 200 and the camera 500 may measure a signal including
`
`biological noise, but neither measures a signal including environmental noise. While
`
`Page 9 of 13
`
`

`

`Application No.: 15/437,666
`
`arguably a signal including biological noise may be influenced by environment, this does
`
`not mean that the detector 200 and the camera 500 are “environmental noise sensors”.
`
`The term “environmental noise sensor” itself defines a sensor designed to measure
`
`environmental noise. For example, a body temperature sensor is a sensor designed or
`
`optimized to measure a body temperature. As described above, Shin teaches the
`
`detector 200 designed to measure bio signals (GSR, HR, body temp., respiration, and
`
`facial electromyogram), and the camera 500 designed to measure movements
`
`(drowsiness, unconscious movements, reflex movements). However, Shin does not
`
`describe such detector 200 and camera 500 are designed to measure environmental
`
`noise, such as magnetic or radio noise, temperature, humidity, wind speed, radiation
`
`heat, or brightness in the environment of measurement. Shin, therefore, does not teach
`
`an “environmental noise sensor” recited in claim 1.
`
`Accordingly, Shin fails to teach an environmental noise sensor, which combined
`
`with the processor, is configured to measure a signal including the environmental noise,
`
`the signal not including the biological noise, as recited in amended claim 1.
`
`ii. Examiner’s Interpretation Results in Shin Not Teaching Biological Noise
`Sensor nor Environmental Noise Sensor
`
`As described above, the Examiner asserts that Shin teaches the detector 200
`
`and the camera 500, each of which measures not only the biological noise but also the
`
`environmental noise. According to the Examiner’s interpretation, Shin fails to teach a
`
`sensor configured to measure a signal including the biological noise but not including
`
`the environmental noise. Shin also fails to teach a sensor configured to measure a
`
`signal including the environmental noise but not including the biological noise.
`
`On the other hand, claim 1 includes a biological noise sensor configured to
`
`measure a signal including the biological noise and not including the environmental
`
`noise, and an environmental noise sensor configured to measure a signal including the
`
`environmental noise and not including the biological noise. This configuration makes it
`
`possible to obtain signal having a high signal to noise ratio.
`
`Accordingly, Shin fails to teach a biological noise sensor, which is combined with
`
`the processor, is configured to measure a signal including the biological noise, the
`
`Page100f13
`
`

`

`Application No.: 15/437,666
`
`signal not including the environmental noise; and an environmental noise sensor, which
`
`is combined with the processor, is configured to measure a signal including the
`
`environmental noise, the signal not including the biological noise as recited in amended
`
`claim 1.
`
`Nakamura is cited for merely showing the estimation of the bio signals, and does
`
`not make up for the above deficiencies.
`
`For at least above reasons, applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of the
`
`rejection of claim 1. Claims 2, 4, 5 and 7 depend from claim 1, and may be patentably
`
`distinguished for the same reasons as claim 1, as well as based on particular features
`
`recited therein.
`
`V.
`
`REJECTION OF CLAIM 6 UNDER 35 U.S.C. §103
`
`Claim 6 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Shin
`
`in view of Nakamura, Kato (US 2014/0107494) and Sutin (US 2018/0070831). Claim 6
`
`depend from claim 1, and may be patentably distinguished for the same reasons as
`
`claim 1, as well as based on particular features recited therein.
`
`VI.
`
`NEW CLAIMS
`
`Claim 8 recites, inter alia, “the environmental noise sensor configured to
`
`measure, independently of the living body, the environmental noise to generate a signal
`
`including the environmental noise”.
`
`Shin fails to teach such features. Shin discloses the detector 200 which detects
`
`the Galvanic skin response, heart rate, body temperature, respiration, and facial
`
`electromyogram (See, paragraph [0051]). Shin also discloses the camera 500 which
`
`detects drowsiness, unconscious movements reflex movements and the like of test
`
`subject (See, paragraph [0039]). Thus, the detector 200 and camera 500 both detect
`
`such signals based on the living body.
`
`As described above, the Examiner asserts that the signals detected by the
`
`detector 200 and camera 500 can be influenced by the environment, and thus the
`
`signals detected by the detector 200 and camera 500 can include the environmental
`
`noise. However, applicant notes that the detector 200 and camera 500 both detect the
`
`Page11of13
`
`

`

`Application No.: 15/437,666
`
`signals based on the living body, not independently of the living body. Even if the
`
`Examiner’s assertion is correct, the detector 200 and camera 500 at best detect, based
`
`on the living body, the signals influenced by the environment. Neither the detector 200
`
`nor camera 500 detects environmental noise independently of the living body.
`
`Accordingly, Shin fails to teach an environmental noise sensor being separate
`
`from the biological sensor, and configured to measure, independently of the living body,
`
`the environmental noise to generate a signal including the environmental noise, as
`
`recited in claim 8. Nakamura cannot make up for such deficiencies in Shin.
`
`For at least the above reason, applicant respectfully submits that claim 8 is
`
`patentably distinguished over the cited references.
`
`Claim 9 recites “the environmental noise sensor measures at least one of
`
`magnetic or radio noise generated by peripheral equipment; a temperature; a humidity;
`
`an air current; a radiant heat; a change in lighting in measurement environment; a
`
`change in an incident angle to measuring probe; and a wind speed”.
`
`Claim 9 depends from claim 8, and may be patentably distinguished over the
`
`cited references for at least the same reasons as claim 8, as well as based on particular
`
`features recited therein.
`
`Claims 10-14 recite the same features as claims 2, 4-7, respectively. Claims 10-
`
`14 depend from claim 8, and may be patentably distinguished over the cited references
`
`for at least the same reasons as claim 8, as well as based on particular features recited
`
`therein.
`
`VII.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`Accordingly, all claims 1-14 are believed to be allowable and the application is
`
`believed to be in condition for allowance. A prompt action to such end is earnestly
`
`solicited.
`
`Applicant notes the absence in this reply of any comments on the other
`
`contentions set forth in the Office Action should not be construed to be an acquiescence
`
`therein. Rather, no comment is needed since the rejections should be withdrawn for at
`
`least the foregoing reasons.
`
`Page12of13
`
`

`

`Application No.: 15/437,666
`
`Should the Examiner feel that a telephone interview would be helpful to facilitate
`
`favorable prosecution of the above-identified application, the Examiner is invited to
`
`contact the undersigned at the telephone number provided below.
`
`Should a petition for an extension of time be necessary for the timely reply to the
`
`outstanding Office Action (or if such a petition has been made and an additional
`
`extension is necessary), petition is hereby made and the Commissioner is authorized to
`
`charge any fees (including additional claim fees) to Deposit Account No. 18-0988.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`RENNER, OTTO, BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP
`
`/Mark D. Saralino/
`
`Mark D. Saralino
`
`Reg. No. 34,243
`
`DATE:
`
`January 29, 2020
`
`The Keith Building
`1621 Euclid Avenue
`
`Nineteenth Floor
`
`Cleveland, Ohio 44115
`(216) 621-1113
`
`2020_01_29_niipp189RCE
`
`Page130f13
`
`