DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 30 April 2026 has been entered.
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.
The “means for displaying, storing, processing and analyzing encrypted data” in claim 17, as defined by the Specification, may be, but is not limited to, a computer, a cellular telephone, a smart-phone and/or iPad or any other remote display device.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 12-14 and 17-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The originally filed disclosure fails to provide support for a physiological data acquisition assembly comprising at least one electrode snap connector assembly for use on at least one active electrode, wherein encrypted data corresponding to physiological data generated from at least one active electrode and at least one reference electrode is collected from the at least one electrode snap connector assembly for use on the at least one active electrode. At most, the specification, in paragraph [0026] of its published form, discloses that encrypted “data” is collected from the electrode snap connector assembly for use on an active electrode. The data is not physiological data that has been generated using at least one active electrode and at least one reference electrode. Furthermore, while the specification discloses that the electrode snap connector assemblies include noise reducing or cancelling amplifiers at the electrode connection level, there is no written description of the electrode snap connector assemblies comprising circuitry configured to encrypt data collected from the at least one electrode snap connector assembly.
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 12-14 and 17-24 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.
Claims 12, 17, and 21 each recite that “encrypted data corresponding to the physiological data from the singular sensor patch is collected from the at least one electrode snap connector assembly for use on the at least one active electrode”. Earlier in each claim, however, it is stated that the physiological data is generated from both at least one active electrode and at least one reference electrode. It is unclear how encrypted data corresponding to physiological data would be collected from the at least one electrode snap connector assembly for use on the at least one active electrode when the physiological data is generated from both the at least one active electrode and the at least one reference electrode. Clarification is requested.
Claims 13, 14, and 18-24 are rejected due to their dependence on either claim 12, 17, or 21.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 30 April 2026, have been fully considered. While the amendments have overcome the prior art of record, as noted in paragraphs 6 and 8 above, they have warranted new rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, and 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Guillory et al.’089 (US Pub No. 2008/0091089 – previously cited) in view of Vesely et al.’597 (US Pub No. 2006/0116597 – previously cited) further in view of Bibian et al.’512 (USPN 8,538,512 – previously cited), as evidenced by KenKnight et al.’419 (US Pub No. 2007/0219419 – previously cited), as discussed in the Final Rejection mailed out 01 August 2024, is the closest prior art of record.
Imran’934 (USPN 5,479,934 – cited by Applicant) provides motivation to modify the physiological data acquisition assembly of Guillory et al.’089 in view of Vesely et al.’597 further in view of Bibian et al.’512 such that it includes at least one electrode snap connector assembly for use on the at least one active electrode and at least one electrode snap connector assembly for use on the at least one reference electrode.
Dacey, Jr. et al.’694 (US Pub No. 2009/0149694 – cited by Applicant) provides motivation to encrypt acquired data before transmitting it to a different device.
Fadem et al.’916 (US Pub No. 2005/0215916 – cited by Applicant) provides motivation to perform signal processing (including encryption of data) at an electrode level.
Each of the following references teach that data may be wirelessly transmitted from one electronic component to another within a single device: Stahmann et al.’905 (US Pub No. 2005/0076905 – previously cited), Yeo et al.’691 (US Pub No. 2006/0009691 – previously cited), McGinnis’702 (US Pub No. 2006/0276702 – previously cited), Brister et al.’384 (US Pub No. 2007/0027384 – previously cited), and Freer et al.’827 (US Pub No. 2009/0318827 – previously cited).
McGinnis’702 also provides motivation to perform signal processing at an electrode level.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ETSUB D BERHANU whose telephone number is (571)270-5410. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00am-5:30pm 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, Jennifer Robertson can be reached at (571) 272-5001. 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.
/ETSUB D BERHANU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights