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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 11/13/2025. As directed by the amendment: Claims 1, 23, and 28-31 have been amended, claims 6 and 10-22 have been cancelled, and no claims have been added. No claims were previously withdrawn due to a Restriction Requirement. Thus, claims 1-5, 7-9, and 23-33 are presently under consideration in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, filed 11/13/2025, with respect to 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of the claims has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-8, filed 11/13/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of the claim(s) under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered.
Applicant argues on pages 7-8 that “The Examiner has concluded that Foxlin discloses the claimed electrode/detection element arranged, when viewed in a top view of the sensor device, between the emitters and the detectors of claims 1, 23, and 28. However, the broad interpretation used by the Examiner is clearly not what was intended by the claim language and is different from what is claimed.
That is, in Foxlin, the field comprising the LEDs and photodetectors partially surrounds the electrodes 205 (cf. Figs. 2B, 2D of Foxlin) and given the size of the electrodes, they cannot actually be between them. On the other hand, in the present invention, the electrode has parts that are arranged between an LED (emitter) and a photodetector (detector) that is directly adjacent to said LED, i.e., positioned in the same row or same column as the LED. Put differently, the electrode has parts that are arranged between an LED and a photodetector of an "LED-Photodetector pair". The cited references do not disclose or render obvious such an arrangement of the electrode relative to the emitters and detectors.”
The amendments to the claims, although changing the scope of the invention, provides additional 112(b) issues highlighted below, which fail to claim Applicant’s invention of Fig. 5. Claim 28’s amendments obviate the rejection. A new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Foxlin et al. (US 20180296136)(Hereinafter Foxlin) in view of Wroblewski et al. (US 20210345929)(Hereinafter Wroblewski).
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-9, and 23-27 are 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.
Regarding claims 1, 23, and 28, the phrase “said electrode have a plurality of electrodes areas”, it is unclear if the plurality is referring to a plurality of electrodes, or electrode areas. Furthermore, it is unclear how a single electrode can be a plurality of electrodes or have a plurality of electrode areas when there is only one electrode. It is also unclear how the electrode can be arranged in a column or row structure when there is only one electrode.
Regarding claims 1, 23, and 28, it is unclear if the “column and row structure” of line 8 is the same or different than the “column and row structure” of line 14. Examiner suggests clarifying the column and row structure of the electrodes with the phrase “associated column and row structure corresponding to the column and rows structure of the emitter and detectors…”
Claims 1, 23, and 28 recite the limitation “the column and rows structure” in lines 14-15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner notes that in reference to the emitters and detectors, line 8 recites “column and row structure” and having equal intervals in the “columns and rows”.
Regarding claims 1, 23, and 28, it is unclear the phrase “at least a part thereof” of line 15, in reference to the electrode area, would be any other location other than between a respective pair of emitters and detectors. In other words, how is it possible for a part of the electrode areas to not between emitters and detectors when the claim requires that “the emitters and detectors are arranged in a column and row structure in which all of the emitters and detectors alternate with each other at substantially equal intervals in both the columns and rows and between the columns and rows” while the “plurality of electrodes areas arranged in a column and row structure corresponding to the column and rows structure of the emitters and detectors”. There is no other location the electrode areas can be, except for between the emitters and detectors.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding claims 1, 23, and 28, due to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issues presented above, Examiner interprets the claim to contain a single electrode arranged between a pair of emitters and detectors, which is considered as the “arranged” column and row of the electrode area(s), because the two electrodes are found in the between the column and row structured photodetectors and emitters, in which the electrode are found in between them, since there is only one electrode that is claimed. In the instant case, Foxlin teaches an electrode area found between a pair of LED and photodetectors in Fig. 2D, in which the electrodes are found.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 28-29, and 32-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foxlin et al. (US 20180296136)(Hereinafter Foxlin) in view of Wroblewski et al. (US 20210345929)(Hereinafter Wroblewski).
Regarding claim 28, Foxlin teaches An examination apparatus for medical examination of an animal (Fig. 2D foot pad 190), comprising:
a sensor device for the optical examination of arterial blood flow of the animal, the sensor device having a plurality of emitters for emitting electromagnetic radiation and a plurality of detectors for detecting radiation emitted by the emitters, the emitters and detectors being arranged in a periodic structure (Fig. 2D shows the photodiodes and LEDs in a periodic structure as the photodiodes and LEDs are alternating. [0042] “the foot pads also include one or more LED-photo detector pairs 210 arranged therein such that when the user placing blood-perfused area of the foot (for example, the big toe) over the one or more LED-photo detector pairs 210, the biometric monitoring device 100 may implement or perform photo plethysmography to calculate, assess and/or determine blood pressure and/or arterial stiffness.” [0039] “a PPG sensor may generate an optical signal which is applied to the user's feet and may measure the light reflected from the user.”), and
said electrode having a plurality of cardiogram detection elements arranged in a column and row structure corresponding to columns and rows of the periodic structure of the emitters and detectors with each electrode area or at least a part thereof being arranged, when viewed in a top view of the sensor device, between a respective pair of the emitters and the detectors and being exposed at the support surface (Fig. 2D shows electrodes 205 in between the emitters and detectors. See the left and right side which contain LED/detectors and in the center/ in between the LED and detectors are the electrodes. [0041] “The bio-impedance sensor(s) 162 may comprise the BIA electrodes 205, from which a small current may be applied to the user's body and the characteristics of the return current measured in the electrodes may be representative of the body fat composition of the user.” The claim to contain a single electrode arranged between a pair of emitters and detectors, which is considered as the “arranged” column and row of the electrode area(s), because the two electrodes are found in the between the column and row structured photodetectors and emitters, in which the electrode are found in between them, since there is only one electrode that is claimed. In the instant case, Foxlin teaches an electrode area found between a pair of LED and photodetectors in Fig. 2D, in which the electrodes are found.).
However, Foxlin do not teach wherein the cardiogram detection elements are transparent to the radiation emitted by the emitters. Wroblewski, in the same field of endeavor, teaches an electrode patch that collects ECG and attached on the skin (Abstract), and further teaches an electrode adapted for recording a cardiogram ([0040] “electrode patch, in particular for performing electrocardiography”) and wherein the cardiogram detection elements are transparent to the radiation emitted by the emitters ([0076] “at least 80% of the electrode patch (referring to its surface area) can be at least 15% to 90% optically transparent, preferably at least 40% optically transparent, i.e. can have light transmission from 15% to 90%, preferably at least 40%, for visible light with a wave length between 370 nm to 700 nm.”) to allow for light transmission through the electrode ([0076). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify the examination apparatus of Foxlin, with the cardiogram detection elements are transparent to the radiation emitted by the emitters of Wroblewski, because such a modification allows to allow for light transmission through the electrode.
Regarding claim 29, Foxlin teaches wherein the cardiogram detection element is an electrode ([0041] “The bio-impedance sensor(s) 162 may comprise the BIA electrodes 205, from which a small current may be applied to the user's body and the characteristics of the return current measured in the electrodes may be representative of the body fat composition of the user.”).
Regarding claim 32, Foxlin teaches wherein the emitters and detectors are arranged in a matrix with at least one of (a) more than two columns or (b) more than two rows (Fig. 2D. See the matrix with more than 2 rows and columns.).
Regarding claim 33, the invention of claim 28 is obvious over Foxlin in view of Wroblewski. Although Foxlin teaches an emitters and detectors in rows and columns between the rows and columns from column to column and row to row, Foxlin does not explicitly teach equidistant spacing between the emitters and detectors. Nevertheless, equidistant spacing between the emitters and detectors would be optimizing the spacing ranges and values, thereby maximizing the space used for the emitters and detectors. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have equidistant emitters and detectors, since 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).
Claim 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foxlin et al. (US 20180296136)(Hereinafter Foxlin) in view of Wroblewski et al. (US 20210345929)(Hereinafter Wroblewski).
Regrading claim 31, claim 28 is obvious over Foxlin and Wroblewski. Foxlin in view of Wroblewski does not teach the sensor device has a cover that is transparent to the radiation emitted by the emitters, and wherein said electrode is arranged on a side of the cover facing away from the emitters and detectors. Putila, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a heart activity sensor with photoplethysmogram sensor with LED and detector, similar to the device of Foxlin in view of Wroblewski, and further teaches wherein the sensor device has a cover that is transparent to the radiation emitted by the emitters, and wherein said electrode is arranged on a side of the cover facing away from the emitters and detectors ([0042] “a substrate 300 of optically transparent material arranged to face a skin 208 of a user when the sensor device is worn by the user; at least one LED 302 arranged on the substrate 300 and arranged to emit light through the substrate 300; at least one photo sensor 304 arranged on the substrate 300 as spatially separated from the at least one LED 302 and arranged to absorb light through the substrate, wherein the at least one LED and the at least one photodiode are comprised in a PPG sensor of the heart activity sensor device” See Fig. 5 where substrate/cover 300 that is optically transparent contains an electrode on the opposite side of the photodiode and LEDs.) to improve the accuracy of the measurements ([0080]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify the examination apparatus of Foxlin in view of Wroblewski, with the sensor device has a cover that is transparent to the radiation emitted by the emitters, and wherein said electrode is arranged on a side of the cover facing away from the emitters and detectors of Putila, because such a modification allows to improve the accuracy of the measurements.
Claim 1-3, 5, 7-8, and 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foxlin et al. (US 20180296136)(Hereinafter Foxlin) in view of Putila et al. (US 20200205681)(Hereinafter Putila).
Regarding claims 1 and 23, Foxlin teaches an examination apparatus for medical examination of an animal (Fig. 2D foot pad 190.), comprising:
a support surface for the animal to be examined (Fig. 2D foot pad 190.),
a photoplethysmography sensor device for determination of blood pressure of the animal ([0042] “the foot pads also include one or more LED-photo detector pairs 210 arranged therein such that when the user placing blood-perfused area of the foot (for example, the big toe) over the one or more LED-photo detector pairs 210, the biometric monitoring device 100 may implement or perform photo plethysmography to calculate, assess and/or determine blood pressure and/or arterial stiffness.” [0039] “a PPG sensor may generate an optical signal which is applied to the user's feet and may measure the light reflected from the user.”),
wherein the sensor device has a plurality of emitters for emitting electromagnetic radiation and a plurality of detectors for detecting the radiation emitted by the emitters ([0042] “the foot pads also include one or more LED-photo detector pairs 210 arranged therein such that when the user placing blood-perfused area of the foot (for example, the big toe) over the one or more LED-photo detector pairs 210, the biometric monitoring device 100 may implement or perform photo plethysmography to calculate, assess and/or determine blood pressure and/or arterial stiffness.” The wavelengths emitted from the light emission elements are electromagnetic radiation because each wavelength corresponds to a different region in the electromagnetic spectrum. See the plurality of emitter and detectors in Fig. 2D (210).), and
wherein the emitters and detectors are arranged in a column and row structure in which all of the emitters and detectors alternate with each other at … in both the columns and rows and between the columns and rows/from column to column and row to row (Figs. 2D where the LED and detectors are alternating in rows and columns in relatively/substantially equal intervals. [0042] “the foot pads also include one or more LED-photo detector pairs 210 arranged therein such that when the user placing blood-perfused area of the foot (for example, the big toe) over the one or more LED-photo detector pairs 210, the biometric monitoring device 100 may implement or perform photo plethysmography to calculate, assess and/or determine blood pressure and/or arterial stiffness. For example, an array of LED-photo detector pairs 210 may be employed to adaptively determine which location on the foot provides the best plethysmography signal.”),
an electrode adapted for recording a …, said electrode having a plurality of cardiogram detection elements arranged in a column and row structure corresponding to columns and rows of the periodic structure of the emitters and detectors with each electrode area or at least a part thereof being arranged, when viewed in a top view of the sensor device, between a respective pair of the emitters and the detectors and being exposed at the support surface (Fig. 2D shows electrodes 205 in between the emitters and detectors. See the left and right side which contain LED/detectors and in the center/ in between the LED and detectors are the electrodes. [0041] “The bio-impedance sensor(s) 162 may comprise the BIA electrodes 205, from which a small current may be applied to the user's body and the characteristics of the return current measured in the electrodes may be representative of the body fat composition of the user.” The claim to contain a single electrode arranged between a pair of emitters and detectors, which is considered as the “arranged” column and row of the electrode area(s), because the two electrodes are found in the between the column and row structured photodetectors and emitters, in which the electrode are found in between them, since there is only one electrode that is claimed. In the instant case, Foxlin teaches an electrode area found between a pair of LED and photodetectors in Fig. 2D, in which the electrodes are found.).
Foxlin does not teach an electrode records cardiogram and is exposed on the support surface. Putila, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a heart activity sensor with photoplethysmogram sensor with LED and detector, similar to the device of Foxlin, and further teaches an electrode adapted for recording a cardiogram, … (Fig. 5 (304, 302, 500) and [0062] “The skin measurement electrode 500 may be an electrode for an ECG sensor…The skin measurement electrode may be assembled on the substrate in step 406.” The electrode is perpendicular and opposite side of the plane of the emitters and detectors as it is found below the laser diode on the substrate.) and being exposed at the support surface ([0042] and Fig. 5 teaches the substrate 300 is in facing and in contact with the skin and in [0062] that the electrode and emitters and detectors are facing and exposed to the skin.) to improve the accuracy of the measurements ([0080]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify the examination apparatus of Foxlin, with the electrode records cardiogram and is exposed on the support surface of Putila, because such a modification allows to improve the accuracy of the measurements.
Although Foxlin teaches an emitters and detectors in rows and columns between the rows and columns from column to column and row to row, Foxlin does not explicitly teach equidistant spacing between the emitters and detectors. Neverthess, equidistant spacing between the emitters and detectors would be optimizing the spacing ranges and values, thereby maximizing the space used for the emitters and detectors. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have equidistant emitters and detectors, since 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).
Regarding claims 2 and 24, Foxlin teaches wherein several emitters are associated with each detector (Fig. 2D and [0042] “the foot pads also include one or more LED-photo detector pairs 210 arranged therein such that when the user placing blood-perfused area of the foot (for example, the big toe) over the one or more LED-photo detector pairs 210” ).
Regarding claim 3, Foxlin teaches wherein the emitters and detectors are arranged in a matrix with at least one of (a) more than two columns or (b) more than two rows (Fig. 2D. See the matrix with more than 2 rows and columns.).
Regarding claim 7, Foxlin does not teach the photoplethysmography sensor device comprising more than 20 detectors. Nevertheless, Foxlin teaches the use of multiple detectors (photodetectors and emitters)(this can be as many as needed)(Fig. 23) used to locate different areas of a subject ([0163]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify the examination apparatus of Foxlin, with the more than 20 detectors, because such a modification allows to locate different areas of a subject.
Regrading claim 5 and 27, the invention of claim 1 is obvious over Foxlin in view of Putila. Foxlin does not teach an electrode on a side of a transparent cover opposite of the emitters and detectors. Putila, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a heart activity sensor with photoplethysmogram sensor with LED and detector, similar to the device of Foxlin, and further teaches wherein the sensor device has a cover that is transparent to the radiation emitted by the emitters, and wherein said electrode is arranged on a side of the cover facing away from the emitters and detectors ([0042] “a substrate 300 of optically transparent material arranged to face a skin 208 of a user when the sensor device is worn by the user; at least one LED 302 arranged on the substrate 300 and arranged to emit light through the substrate 300; at least one photo sensor 304 arranged on the substrate 300 as spatially separated from the at least one LED 302 and arranged to absorb light through the substrate, wherein the at least one LED and the at least one photodiode are comprised in a PPG sensor of the heart activity sensor device” See Fig. 5 where substrate/cover 300 that is optically transparent contains an electrode on the opposite side of the photodiode and LEDs.) to arrange the electrode on the substrate opposite of the photo sensor ([0062]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify the examination apparatus of Foxlin, with the electrode on a side of a transparent cover opposite of the emitters and detectors of Putila, because such a modification allows to arrange the electrode on the substrate opposite of the photo sensor.
Regarding claim 25, Foxlin teaches further comprising a support for the animal or a paw during the examination, and wherein the sensor device is integrated in the support ([0006] “operating a biometric monitoring device, the device comprising a platform configured to receive at least one foot of a user, a plurality of sensors”).
Claim 4, 9, and 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foxlin et al. (US 20180296136)(Hereinafter Foxlin) in view of Putila et al. (US 20200205681)(Hereinafter Putila), and Wiard et al. (US 20130310700)(Hereinafter Wiard).
Regarding claim 4, the invention of claim 1 is obvious over Foxlin in view of Putila. Foxlin does not teach a cardiogram simultaneously recorded with the optical detection of animal paw fitted. Wiard, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a heart and vascular characteristic of a user to determine a blood pressure (Abstract) including PPG sensor including LEDs and photodiodes ([0069]) teaches wherein the examination apparatus has at least one cardiogram detection element for recording a cardiogram, wherein one of the detection elements is arranged in such a way that an animal paw enables a cardiogram to be recorded by said at least one cardiogram detection element and wherein the optical examination can be carried out simultaneously by the sensor device (Wiard teaches foot pads for biometric monitoring (examination apparatus) of human feet (humans are animals and feet are paws) ([0007]) containing an LED and detector (that emit and detect radiation) (which composes the PPG sensor device) ([0069], [0074]) for obtaining PPG and electrodes for collecting BCG (cardiogram detection element) ([0077], Fig. 1A) both from the feet in order to collect a simultaneous cardiogram (BCG) and PPG signal for estimating PWV (which requires the comparison of both signals to determine pulse wave velocity) ([0076], [0086]).) to increase the sensitivity of measurement ([0076]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify the examination apparatus of Foxlin, with the cardiogram simultaneously recorded with the optical detection of animal paw fitted of Wiard, because such a modification allows to increase the sensitivity of measurement.
Regarding claim 9, the invention of claim 1 is obvious over Foxlin in view of Putila. Foxlin does not teach a sensor device integrated in support for an animal paw. Wiard, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a heart and vascular characteristic of a user to determine a blood pressure (Abstract) including PPG sensor including LEDs and photodiodes ([0069]) teaches further comprising a support for the animal or a paw during the examination, and wherein the sensor device is integrated in the support (Fig. 1A [0076] “The bathroom scale is configured to measure the ballistocardiogram (BCG) and the photoplethysmograph (PPG), both from the feet.”) to increase the sensitivity of measurement ([0076]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify the examination apparatus of Foxlin, with the cardiogram simultaneously recorded with the optical detection of animal paw fitted of Wiard, because such a modification allows to increase the sensitivity of measurement.
Regarding claim 26, the invention of claim 1 is obvious over Foxlin in view of Putila. Foxlin does not teach a cardiogram simultaneously recorded with the optical detection of animal paw fitted. Wiard, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a heart and vascular characteristic of a user to determine a blood pressure (Abstract) including PPG sensor including LEDs and photodiodes ([0069]) teaches foot pads for biometric monitoring (examination apparatus) of human feet (humans are animals and feet are paws) ([0007]) containing an LED and detector (that emit and detect radiation) (which composes the PPG sensor device) ([0069], [0074]) for obtaining PPG and electrodes for collecting BCG (cardiogram detection element) ([0077], Fig. 1A) both from the feet in order to collect a simultaneous cardiogram (BCG) and PPG signal for estimating PWV (which requires the comparison of both signals to determine pulse wave velocity) ([0076], [0086]) to increase the sensitivity of measurement ([0076]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify the examination apparatus of Foxlin, with the cardiogram simultaneously recorded with the optical detection of animal paw fitted of Wiard, because such a modification allows to increase the sensitivity of measurement.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foxlin et al. (US 20180296136)(Hereinafter Foxlin) in view of Putila et al. (US 20200205681)(Hereinafter Putila) and Wiard et al. (US 20130310700)(Hereinafter Wiard).
Regarding claim 30, the invention of claim 28 is obvious over Foxlin in view of Putila. Foxlin does not teach a cardiogram simultaneously recorded with the optical detection of animal paw fitted. Wiard, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a heart and vascular characteristic of a user to determine a blood pressure (Abstract) including PPG sensor including LEDs and photodiodes ([0069]) teaches wherein the examination apparatus has at least one cardiogram detection element for recording a cardiogram, wherein one of the detection elements is arranged in such a way that an animal paw enables a cardiogram to be recorded by said at least one cardiogram detection element and wherein the optical examination can be carried out simultaneously by the sensor device (Wiard teaches foot pads for biometric monitoring (examination apparatus) of human feet (humans are animals and feet are paws) ([0007]) containing an LED and detector (that emit and detect radiation) (which composes the PPG sensor device) ([0069], [0074]) for obtaining PPG and electrodes for collecting BCG (cardiogram detection element) ([0077], Fig. 1A) both from the feet in order to collect a simultaneous cardiogram (BCG) and PPG signal for estimating PWV (which requires the comparison of both signals to determine pulse wave velocity) ([0076], [0086]).) to increase the sensitivity of measurement ([0076]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify the examination apparatus of Foxlin, with the cardiogram simultaneously recorded with the optical detection of animal paw fitted of Wiard, because such a modification allows to increase the sensitivity of measurement.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foxlin et al. (US 20180296136)(Hereinafter Foxlin) in view of Putila et al. (US 20200205681)(Hereinafter Putila), further in view of Kwon et al. (US 20170000350)(Hereinafter Kwon).
Regarding claim 8, claim 1 is obvious over Foxlin and Putila. Foxlin does not teach emitting a wavelength that is the same as the detection from the detector. Kwon, in the same field of endeavor, teaches detecting biological information from light sources and detectors, similar to the device of Foxlin, and further teaches wherein the emitters emit radiation of a wavelength that is the same and wherein the detectors detect at the same wavelength (Fig. 17 and [0154] “In an example, the first light receiving device 200a may be a device receiving an optical signal in a red R region, and the second light receiving device 200b may be a device receiving an optical signal in a green G region. In this case, one of the first and second light emission elements 10 and 20 may be a red light source, and the other one may be a green light source.” The coloring emitted and received represent a specific wavelength in the electromagnetic radiation spectrum.) to optimally position the array over a radial artery ([0162]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the device of Foxlin, with the emitting a wavelength that is the same as the detection from the detector of Kwon, because such a modification would allow to optimally position the array over a radial artery.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOUSSA M HADDAD whose telephone number is (571)272-6341. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8:00-6:00.
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, Jennifer McDonald can be reached at (571) 270-3061. 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.
/MOUSSA HADDAD/Examiner, Art Unit 3796
/ALLEN PORTER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796