Appeal Number: 2007-0133
Application Number: 10/223,466
been interpreted by case law, (ii) they seek to patent an abstract idea, and (iii) the
useful, concrete, and tangible result test does not apply here, but, even if it did, the
claims nevertheless do not meet that test
FACTS
Claim 1 is as follows:
1. A method of predicting sleep and activity levels, comprising
providing a chart, providing lines and shapes representing personal
daily wake drives and a sleep drive, providing on the chart indications
of time of day at a starting location, providing on the chart indications
of time of day at a destination location, displaying on the chart
personal daily wake drives and sleep drives related to the time of day
at the starting location and the time of day at the destination.
Claim 35 is as follows:
35. A method for predicting and planning activity levels after rapid
changes in time zones comprising providing representations of wake
drives in relation to representations of time of day at destination and
time zones east and west and providing representations of wake nadirs
at lower portions of the wake drive curve, slopes and arrows leading
and pointing toward the wake nadirs representing respectively photo
zones west and east and effects of exposure to light during times of
the photo zones.
The Specification teaches use of the charts by moving parts of a chart. The
Specification does not recite how to translate the chart representations into
predictions of sleep and activity levels after moving parts of the chart, although the
Specification provides general advice on sleep and nap times. Neither claims 1 nor
35 recite moving parts of a chart, nor do they recite a step that results in the
preamble prediction or planning, nor do they recite anything having to do with
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013