DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on February 9, 2026 has been entered. By this amendment, claim 1 is amended and claims 1, 3, 6, 13, and 16-20 are now pending in the application.
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 6 is 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 6 recites the limitation "said ruminant animal" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 6, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stein et al. (U.S. 2011/0319755), herein Stein. Regarding claim 1, Stein discloses a bolus (broadest reasonable interpretation is “a rounded mass”, satisfied by the rounded devices shown in Figures 3 and 4), comprising: an antenna 107/310/2302/2402 comprising a pair of electrically conductive loops 2404 and a non-electrically conductive substrate 2406 disposed between said pair of electrically conductive loops (see Figure 24 and “the integrated loop antenna 2402 comprises circuit traces 2404 on a top (or bottom) layer of the substrate of the circuit board 2406. The traces 2404 act as a portion of the radiating and receiving body of the integrated loop antenna 2402”, paragraph [0236]); one or more sensors (“the sensing assemblage 303 can include piezoelectric, capacitive, optical or temperature sensors or transducers to measure the compression or displacement”, paragraph [0084] and “Module 200 incorporates one or more sensors”, paragraph [0117]); a power source 126/330 (“The power supply 126 can be a battery, a charging device, a capacitor, a power connection, or other energy source for generating wireless power signals to power the sensing insert device 100”, paragraph [0058] and “The energy storage 330 provides power to electronic components of the sensing module”, paragraph [0089]); a microcontroller 307 comprising a non-transitory memory element, said non-transitory memory element containing a power management module 1412 comprising i) an activation element, ii) a timer element, and iii) a power sensor element, said power sensor element executable to determine the remaining amount of energy in the power source, and said power management module executable to compare the remaining amount of energy in the power source with the amount of energy required to power the bolus through a pre-determined period of time (“In a fifth step, the sensing module 200 determines its communications mode based on operating mode and priority level. The operating mode indicates whether the sensing module 200 is operating in a power saving mode (e.g., standby) or other power management mode and takes into account information such as remaining battery life and drain”, paragraph [0111] and “Power management circuitry 1412 continues to monitor the level of charge on capacitive energy storage device 1410. The power management circuitry 1412 powers down the sensing module 200 including the operational circuitry 1414 when the charge or voltage level falls below a predetermined threshold”, paragraph [0186]); and a processor in communication with said non-transitory memory element (“In another arrangement, the electronic circuitry can comprise a controller such as a programmable processor, a Digital Signal Processor (DSP), a microcontroller, or a microprocessor, with associated storage memory and logic”, paragraph [0093]).
Regarding claim 3, Stein discloses that said one or more sensors is selected from the group consisting of: a temperature sensor, an accelerometer (“The accelerometer 302 can measure acceleration and static gravitational pull”, paragraph [0085]), a microphone, an inductance sensor, or combinations thereof (“the sensing assemblage 303 can include piezoelectric, capacitive, optical or temperature sensors or transducers to measure the compression or displacement”, paragraph [0084]).
Regarding claim 6, Stein discloses that said non-transitory memory element contains encoded physiological data corresponding to one or more physiological parameters (“ More than one measurement can be performed and stored”, paragraph [0126]). It is respectfully submitted that the recitation “of said ruminant animal” fails to further define the claimed invention over that of the prior art due to the lack of antecedent basis and as Stein discloses that the physiological parameters may be from animals (“Many physiological parameters within animal or human bodies may be measured”, paragraph [0133]).
Regarding claim 13, Stein discloses matching elements (“In a sixth step, the architected design of the ASIC includes matching such that the input-output channels matches the input and output requirements of external signals”, paragraph [0209]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stein (U.S. 2011/0319755). Stein discloses a housing 204/212 providing an outermost external surface of said bolus (see Figures 3 and 4), wherein said outermost external surface of said housing has a length disposed between a pair of ends and said outermost external surface of said housing has a width (see Figures 3 and 4). Stein further discloses that said housing comprises a “substantially spherical” external surface (the rounded ends in Figures 3 and 4 are considered to be a “substantially spherical” external surface) and a “substantially cylindrical external surface” (see Figures 3 and 4). However, Stein fails to disclose that the width is between about 13 mm and about 32 mm, that the diameter of the external surface is between about 13 mm and about 32 mm, or that the bolus density is between about 2.3 grams per centimeter cubed to about 3.3 grams per centimeter cubed ("g/cm3") and selected from the group consisting of about 2.3 g/cm3 to about 2.5 g/cm3, about 2.4 g/cm3 to about 2.6 g/cm3, about 2.5 g/cm3 to about 2.7 g/cm3, about 2.6 g/cm3 to about 2.8 g/cm3, about 2.7 grams g/cm3 to about 2.9 g/cm3; about 2.8 g/cm3 to about g/cm3, about 2.9 g/cm3 to about 3.1 g/cm3; about 3.0 g/cm3 to about 3.2 g/cm3, and about 3.1 g/cm3 to about 3.3 g/cm3. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Stein such that the width and diameter are between about 13 mm and about 32 mm and the bolus density is between about 2.3 grams per centimeter cubed to about 3.3 grams per centimeter cubed ("g/cm3") and selected from the group consisting of about 2.3 grams per centimeter cubed to about 3.3 grams per centimeter cubed ("g/cm3") and selected from the group consisting of about 2.3 g/cm3 to about 2.5 g/cm3, about 2.4 g/cm3 to about 2.6 g/cm3, about 2.5 g/cm3 to about 2.7 g/cm3, about 2.6 g/cm3 to about 2.8 g/cm3, about 2.7 grams g/cm3 to about 2.9 g/cm3; about 2.8 g/cm3 to about g/cm3, about 2.9 g/cm3 to about 3.1 g/cm3; about 3.0 g/cm3 to about 3.2 g/cm3, and about 3.1 g/cm3 to about 3.3 g/cm3, since it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Furthermore, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claims 1, 3, 6, 13, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brune (U.S. Patent No. 5,984,875, previously cited) in view of Weinstein (US 2013/0231550, previously cited) and Stein (U.S. 2011/0319755). Regarding claim 1, Brune discloses a bolus 2/20/50, comprising: an antenna 10; one or more sensors 8 (see Figure 2, col. 5, ln. 36-37, and col. 6, ln. 39); a power source 13 (see Figure 2); a microcontroller 11 comprising a non-transitory memory element (see col. 6, ln. 31-37), said non-transitory memory element containing a power management module U1 comprising i) an activation element (time control chip U3, col. 7, ln. 14-16) and ii) a timer element (programmable timer chip U6, col. 10, ln. 42-50); and a processor 7 in communication with said non-transitory memory element (see Abstract and Figure 2). However, Brune fails to disclose that the antenna comprises a pair of electrically conductive loops and a non-electrically conductive substrate disposed between said pair of electrically conductive loops or the power management module comprising a power sensor element, said power sensor element executable to determine the remaining amount of energy in the power source, and said power management module executable to compare the remaining amount of energy in the power source with the amount of energy required to power the bolus through a pre-determined period of time. Weinstein teaches an implantable radio-frequency sensor that includes an antenna 42 comprising a pair of electrically conductive loops and a non-electrically conductive substrate disposed between said pair of electrically conductive loops (see paragraph [0054], which describes the pair of electrically conductive loops and that cavity antennas of this type are described in WO 2011/067623, which describes a dielectric [read: non-electrically conductive substrate] is disposed between a pair of electrically conductive loops [page 13, lines 8-15]), which assures good coverage of the entire region of interest in the patient’s body with constant antenna gain. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Brune to include the antenna design of Weinstein, in order to assure good coverage with constant antenna gain.
Further, Stein teaches a sensing device for use within a human or animal body (“sensing modules or devices may be placed on or within…animal and human bodies”, paragraph [0132]) that includes a power management module 1412 comprising i) an activation element, ii) a timer element, and iii) a power sensor element, said power sensor element executable to determine the remaining amount of energy in the power source, and said power management module executable to compare the remaining amount of energy in the power source with the amount of energy required to power the bolus through a pre-determined period of time (“In a fifth step, the sensing module 200 determines its communications mode based on operating mode and priority level. The operating mode indicates whether the sensing module 200 is operating in a power saving mode (e.g., standby) or other power management mode and takes into account information such as remaining battery life and drain”, paragraph [0111] and “Power management circuitry 1412 continues to monitor the level of charge on capacitive energy storage device 1410. The power management circuitry 1412 powers down the sensing module 200 including the operational circuitry 1414 when the charge or voltage level falls below a predetermined threshold”, paragraph [0186]). Stein teaches the use of the power management module provides the advantage of preventing “unreliable, intermittent, or erratic operation of the operational circuitry 1414” (see paragraph [0186]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Brune in view of Weinstein to include the power management module comprising a power sensor element, said power sensor element executable to determine the remaining amount of energy in the power source, and said power management module executable to compare the remaining amount of energy in the power source with the amount of energy required to power the bolus through a pre-determined period of time, as taught by Stein, in order to prevent unreliable, intermittent, or erratic operation.
Regarding claim 3, Brune discloses that said one or more sensors is selected from the group consisting of: a temperature sensor (see col. 6, ln. 23), an accelerometer, a microphone, an inductance sensor (see col. 6, ln. 26-28, because the controller is inductively programmed, it is submitted that the receiver of the inductive programming is considered an inductance sensor, as it senses the inductive field used for programming), or combinations thereof.
Regarding claim 6, Brune discloses that said non-transitory memory element contains encoded physiological data corresponding to one or more physiological parameters of said ruminant animal (see col. 6, ln. 31-37, where the encoded temperature data is considered “encoded physiological data corresponding to one or more physiological parameters of said ruminant animal”).
Regarding claim 13, Brune discloses a matching element (see col. 7, ln. 52-60).
Regarding claims 16-20, Brune discloses a housing 20 providing an outermost external surface of said bolus, wherein said outermost external surface of said housing has a length disposed between a pair of ends and said outermost external surface of said housing has a width (see Figure 5). Brune further discloses that said housing comprises a “substantially spherical” external surface (the rounded ends in Figures 5 and 7 are considered to be a “substantially spherical” external surface), a “substantially cylindrical external surface” (see Figures 5 and 7), and has a bolus density (see col. 4, ln. 35-37). However, Brune fails to disclose that the width is between about 13 mm and about 32 mm, that the diameter of the external surface is between about 13 mm and about 32 mm, or that the bolus density is between about 2.3 grams per centimeter cubed to about 3.3 grams per centimeter cubed ("g/cm3") and selected from the group consisting of about 2.3 g/cm3 to about 2.5 g/cm3, about 2.4 g/cm3 to about 2.6 g/cm3, about 2.5 g/cm3 to about 2.7 g/cm3, about 2.6 g/cm3 to about 2.8 g/cm3, about 2.7 grams g/cm3 to about 2.9 g/cm3; about 2.8 g/cm3 to about g/cm3, about 2.9 g/cm3 to about 3.1 g/cm3; about 3.0 g/cm3 to about 3.2 g/cm3, and about 3.1 g/cm3 to about 3.3 g/cm3. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brune such that the width and diameter are not greater than about 20 millimeters and the bolus density is between about 2.3 grams per centimeter cubed to about 3.3 grams per centimeter cubed ("g/cm3") and selected from the group consisting of about 2.3 grams per centimeter cubed to about 3.3 grams per centimeter cubed ("g/cm3") and selected from the group consisting of about 2.3 g/cm3 to about 2.5 g/cm3, about 2.4 g/cm3 to about 2.6 g/cm3, about 2.5 g/cm3 to about 2.7 g/cm3, about 2.6 g/cm3 to about 2.8 g/cm3, about 2.7 grams g/cm3 to about 2.9 g/cm3; about 2.8 g/cm3 to about g/cm3, about 2.9 g/cm3 to about 3.1 g/cm3; about 3.0 g/cm3 to about 3.2 g/cm3, and about 3.1 g/cm3 to about 3.3 g/cm3, since it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Furthermore, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAMMIE K MARLEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1986. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 8 am until 4 pm.
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, Carl Layno can be reached on 571-272-4949. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TAMMIE K MARLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796