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
The amendment filed September 29, 2025 has been entered. Claim 7 has been cancelled, and claim 1 has been amended. Claims 21-22 have been newly added. Claims 1-3, 6, and 8-22 remain pending in this application. The amendments to the claims have overcome the objections and the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112 previously submitted in the Non Final Office action mailed June 13, 2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed September 29, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually (Remarks pgs. 7-12), one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Additionally, Jo does teach an asymmetrical beam shaping element for a longer-wavelength light source (Fig. 5A; “first faces of the saw blade are 30 degrees and the second faces are 70 degrees in the first zone where the red LED is disposed…In the fourth zone in which the IR LED is disposed, the maximum amount of light may be increased by 157% if the first faces of the saw blade are 30 degrees and the second faces are 40 degrees,” par. 125), contrary to Applicant’s argument (see the sentence spanning pgs. 11-12 in Remarks).
To summarize the rejection under 35 USC 103, Lee teaches an integrated optical biosensor module that can comprise multiple light sources and detectors (optical sensor 122 and/or integrated sensor module 502; par. 40) and a first beam shaping element that is symmetrical with respect to an optical axis of the first light produced by the first light source at the first wavelength (Fig. 5). Esser teaches light sources with different wavelengths can have corresponding photodetectors (“detectors 21, 35 may have a color filter in order to, for example, be able to detect only the light originating from one of the light emitters 17, 63, and 65,” Esser par. 65). Trattler teaches beam-shaping elements over each light source and integrating processing components into the integrated circuit chip (Figs. 1A-1C, 3; “the sensor signal…can be demodulated inside the watch electronics or, alternatively in the microprocessor included in the circuit layout 300. The demodulated sensor signal is a measure of the heart rate,” pg. 19, lines 6-10). In combination, Lee, Esser, and Trattler suggest multiple light sources producing light at different wavelengths, each light source corresponding to a respective photodetector and beam-shaping element, and the integrated circuit chip processing signals from the photodetectors.
Regarding a second beam shaping element being asymmetrical with respect to an optical axis of the second light, Haiberger and Jo teach that a pattern of a lens may be modified to focus the light direction, improve optical efficiency, and reduce the size of the device (“the use of such optics can further reduce the space requirement of the sensor module,” Haiberger par. 21; “The various radiations are directed via optics 5 into the desired direction,” Haiberger par. 93; “the patterns formed on…the injection-molded lens may…improve optical efficiency depending on the light wavelength band of the at least one light-emitting device,” Jo par. 114; Jo par. 125 describes 4 different patterns to improve the optical efficiency of LEDs at 4 different wavelengths). Jo explicitly teaches an asymmetric pattern over longer wavelength light sources (par. 125). Finally, using a symmetric lens over a shorter wavelength light source and an asymmetric lens over a longer wavelength light source would be obvious to try. Thus, Lee in view of Esser, Trattler, Haiberger, and Jo teaches or suggests all limitations of claims 1 and 18.
Applicant alleges “Lee’s clear mold covering with light-transmissive windows…Jo’s electronics device with an optical sensor for PPG do not address the specific use of an asymmetrical beam shaping element for a longer wavelength light source to achieve compactness and reduced crosstalk” (Remarks paragraph spanning pgs. 13-14). However, Jo has already been indicated to teach this limitation (par. 125). Additionally, Applicant has not addressed any of the provided motivations in the rejection despite saying that there is no teaching or suggestion to combine these references (Remarks pg. 14, 3rd paragraph).
In response to applicant's argument that the claimed invention has advantages such as achieving compactness and reduced crosstalk (throughout the Remarks, particularly pg. 15), the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985). Haiberger and Jo also indicate that the use of certain symmetrical or asymmetrical lenses reduces the size of the optical sensing device (“the use of such optics can further reduce the space requirement of the sensor module,” Haiberger par. 21), direct light in the desired directions (“changes in the main directions of emission and main directions of reception may also be effected by optics 5,” Haiberger par. 66), and improve optical efficiency (“the patterns formed on…injection-molded lens…improve optical efficiency depending on the light wavelength band of the at least one light-emitting device,” Jo par. 114).
It is further noted that the features of compactness and reducing cross-talk are not explicitly recited in the claims, and while Applicant alleges compactness and reduced crosstalk are not predictable outcomes (Remarks pg. 15, last paragraph), there is no evidence of unexpected results since using an asymmetric lens is already known in the art to help reduce the size of an optical sensor (Haiberger par. 21) and improve optical efficiency (Jo pars. 114, 125).
Additionally, Applicant indicates that the combination render’s Lee’s method inoperable for its intended purpose because “asymmetrical beam shaping elements for a longer wavelength light source to achieve compactness and reduced crosstalk are not part of Lee’s methodology” and “Esser’s goal of an optical sensor…would be undermined by Lee’s clear mold covering…as it does not contribute to asymmetrical beam shaping elements” (Remarks, paragraph spanning pg. 14). Lee’s sensor works to measure PPG and heart rate (par. 2). The fact that the other references are also optical sensors measuring PPG and/or heart rate shows that they have the same intended purpose (see at least Jo par. 41 and Esser par. 4).
Finally, Applicant alleges the obvious to try rationale lacks support because the prior art does not identify a finite number of predictable solutions. One may argue that the possibilities for lenses include infinite patterns, but the question here is not about the particular lens pattern, but whether it would be obvious to try having a symmetric lens over first light source and an asymmetric lens over a longer-wavelength light source. Given that both symmetric (Lee Fig. 5; Haiberger Figs. 4, 6, 8, 9; Jo Fig. 4) and asymmetric lenses (Haiberger Figs. 5, 7; Jo Figs. 5-6) are known in the art, the number of solutions for focusing light from two different light sources are finite: symmetric lenses over both light sources; a symmetric lens over the first light source having a first wavelength and an asymmetric lens over the second light source having a second, longer wavelength; an asymmetric lens over the first light source and a symmetric lens over the second light source; or asymmetric lenses over both light sources. Both symmetric (Lee Fig. 5; Haiberger Figs. 4, 6, 8, 9; Jo Fig. 4) and asymmetric (Haiberger Figs. 5, 7; Jo Figs. 5-6) lenses have different advantages related to reducing the size of the device and improving optical efficiency (“at least one of the optics…is a multi-lens array…such optics are more space-saving…can further reduce the space requirement of the sensor module,” Haiberger par. 21 – it is noted this statement refers generally to both symmetric and asymmetric lenses; asymmetric lens allow for light focusing towards the detector, Haiberger pars. 24, 71; Jo par. 114), thus their combination over two light sources in the claimed manner would be obvious to try. Furthermore, Haiberger suggests the optics may be different (“at least one of the optics…has an optical axis oriented obliquely to the associated chip,” par. 24) and Jo teaches specific asymmetric patterns, which suggests that determining a lens pattern is within routine experimentation within the art (Jo par. 125).
Regarding the dependent claims, Applicant relies on the same arguments, and they are also rejected under new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 6, 8-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 2016/0029911, cited previously) in view of Esser (US 2021/0007604, cited previously), Trattler (WO 2016/066312, cited previously), Haiberger (US 2020/0129104, cited previously), and Jo (US 2020/0182688, cited previously).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches an integrated optical biosensor module (optical sensor 122 and/or integrated sensor module 502; “an integrated sensor module (e.g., 402, 502 or 602, but not limited thereto) of an embodiment described herein can be used as the optical sensor 122,” par. 78) comprising:
two or more light sources operable to produce light for emission from the module (packaged light source semiconductor device (PLSSD) 312, Fig. 3A; “The optical sensor 122 can alternatively include…two or three light emitting devices,” par. 40; “The PLSSD 312 is shown as including a light source die 314…can include more than one light emitting element 316,” par. 57);
an integrated circuit chip (substrate 412) including a photosensitive region, the photosensitive region including two or more photodetectors (packaged light detector semiconductor device (PLDSD) 332, Fig. 3A; “optical sensor 122 includes multiple light detecting devices 138,” par. 40; “light detector die 334…can include more than one light detecting element 336,” par. 57) operable to detect light produced by the light sources and reflected by a subject that is outside the module (“the light source of the optical sensor 122 emits light that is reflected or backscattered by patient tissue, and reflected/backscattered light is received by the light detector of the optical sensor 122,” par. 31);
a clear mold covering encapsulating the two or more light sources (the clear portion of cover structure 432 includes a window 444 which surrounds the PLSSD 312, Fig. 5; “the pre-molded cover structure 432 includes further pre-molded cavity 452…PLSSD 312 completely fits within the pre-molded cavity 442,” par. 68), wherein the clear mold covering includes beam shaping elements each of which is disposed so as to intersect a path of a light beam from one of the two or more light sources (“light emitting device(s)…are likely covered by light transmissive windows,” par. 40; Fig.5; “window 444 is shown as including an integrally formed convex lens 544 which can be used to focus the light emitted by the light emitting element(s) of the light emitter die 314 of the PLSSD 312,” par. 74), wherein a first beam shaping element is symmetrical with respect to an optical axis of the first light produced by the first light source at the first wavelength (Fig. 5); wherein the clear mold covering and the one or more beam shaping elements are formed of a same resin (“a window 444 formed of the light transmissive molding compound,” par. 68; “window 444 is shown as including an integrally formed convex lens 544,” par. 74; “the light transmissive modeling compound that is used to form the windows 444 and 454 can be a light transmissive epoxy,” par. 70); and
a housing (104) defining an interior region that includes the clear mold covering (Fig. 1C; Figs. 10B-10C show that the sensors and cover structures do not protrude out of the housing, so they must be contained within the interior of the housing; an opening in the housing over the windows further supports that the components are within the housing - “a caseback of the housing 104 includes one or more openings that are intended to be aligned with the windows (e.g., 444, 454) of one of the integrated sensor modules described herein,” par. 78).
Lee explicitly teaches all limitations of claim 1 except for the two or more light sources producing light at different wavelengths, the photodetectors operable to detect light from a respective light source, two or more beam shaping elements each disposed to intersect a path of a light beam from one of the two or more light sources, the integrated circuit chip being operable to determine a physiological condition of the subject based on signals from the two or more photodetectors, and wherein a second beam shaping element of the two or more beam shaping elements is asymmetrical with respect to an optical axis of the second light produced by the second light source at the second wavelength.
Regarding the light produced at different wavelengths, Lee teaches multiple light sources and that the optical sensor can produce light of various wavelengths (“the optical sensor 122 includes a light source that emits light of two different wavelengths,” par. 31; par. 40). Esser teaches an analogous optical sensor that can be used for measuring a heart rate (par. 4). The optical sensor includes multiple light sources emitting light at difference wavelengths (“light emitters 17, 63, and 65 may be designed to emit light at different wavelengths,” Esser par. 65).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lee such that each light source is operable to produce light of a different wavelength. Since Lee teaches that there can be multiple light sources and multiple photodetectors but doesn’t explicitly show such an arrangement, one would be motivated to look at known optical sensors such as Esser’s Fig. 2 and description in paragraph 65. The result of such a modification should be predictable since Lee already teaches multiple light sources, detectors, and optical filters (par. 40; “the light transmissive molding compound may have a pigment or other property that filters out light of certain wavelengths that are not of interest,” par. 62).
Regarding corresponding photodetectors, light sources, and beam shaping elements, Lee teaches multiple light sources and photodetectors that may be protected by light transmissive windows (par. 40). Trattler teaches an analogous optical sensor arrangement provided in a wrist watch (Abstract). Trattler teaches an optical sensor arrangement comprising two light emitting devices 121, 123 and two optical lenses 161, 163 aligned with the light emitting devices (Figs. 1A-1C). Esser teaches multiple light sources and photodetectors, and the light detectors can be configured with filters to only detect light from one of the sources (“light emitters 17, 63, and 65 may be designed to emit light at different wavelengths. One of the detectors 21, 35 may have a color filter in order to, for example, be able to detect only the light originating from one of the light emitters 17, 63, and 65,” Esser par. 65).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lee and Esser such that the clear mold covering includes a respective beam shaping element disposed over each of the light sources, as taught by Trattler, and each photodetector is operable to detect light produced by a respective one of the light sources and reflected by the subject, as taught by Esser. Lee teaches there can be a plurality of light sources and each light source can be covered by a light transmissive window (par. 40) but doesn’t explicitly show such an arrangement. Thus, one would be motivated to look at known optical sensor arrangements such as Trattler’s teaching of an optical lens disposed over each light source and Esser’s teaching of a light detector corresponding to each light source, and the results of such a modification would yield light from different light sources focused towards the subject and detected by the device.
Regarding the integrated circuit chip determining the physiological condition based on signals from the photodetectors, Trattler further teaches “the optical sensor arrangement is integrated into an integrated circuit” and shows that the optical sensor includes a microprocessor 340 within the integrated circuit layout 300, which is operable to determine a physiological condition of the subject (pg. 5, lines 28-29; Figure 3; “the sensor signal…can be demodulated inside the watch electronics or, alternatively in the microprocessor included in the circuit layout 300. The demodulated sensor signal is a measure of the heart rate,” pg. 19, lines 6-10).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lee, Esser, and Trattler to form the sensor module as an integrated circuit chip that is operable to determine a physiological condition of the subject. One would be motivated to do so in order to miniaturize the device, which Lee indicates is desired (“it is desirable that such optical sensors are compact, since they are often included in portable devices in which small size and light weight are preferred,” par. 2). Trattler’s Figure 3 shows an integrated circuit layout comprising the light detector, signal processing circuitry, and processor which would be simpler and smaller than Lee’s integrated sensor modules being mounted on a separate PCB (see Trattler’s Fig. 3 to Lee’s Fig. 2; “the integrated sensor modules described herein can be mounted to a printed circuit board (PCB) to which is also mounted other electrical components of a device, such as a processor (e.g., 204), memory (e.g., 206) and wireless interface (208), and/or a microcontroller (e.g., 202),” Lee par. 92). Lee teaches that signal processing circuitry can be integrated into a sensor module (die 422 can include signal processing circuitry and be embedded within a substrate of the sensor module, par. 73, Fig. 4B), so further including circuitry on the integrated circuit chip to determine a physiological condition of the subject based on the photodetector signals should yield an integrated circuit chip with more functionality.
Regarding a second beam shaping element being asymmetrical with respect to an optical axis of the second light, Haiberger teaches an analogous optical sensor arrangement for pulse oximetry (Fig. 15A; “the sensor module can be used to measure both pulse and oxygen saturation in the blood,” par. 27). Haiberger teaches that optics 5 comprising lenses may be placed over light sources (Fig. 3B; “several optics are present, which are clearly assigned to each of the chips,” par. 20; “all of the optics is a multi-lens array,” par. 21), and the lenses may be symmetric or asymmetric or relative to the optical axis of the respective light source (“according to FIG. 6, the lens elements 56 are formed by symmetrical prisms. FIG. 7 illustrates that the lens elements 56 can also be formed by asymmetrical prisms,” par. 72; “lens elements 56 of Fig. 5 are asymmetrically shaped so that an optical axis is obliquely oriented,” par. 71). Jo also teaches an analogous optical sensor comprising multiple light sources with different wavelengths and lenses over each light source (“light-emitting elements 230 that emit various wavelength bands or colors,” par. 63; “patterns formed integrally with the injection-molded lens 660 may be formed differently depending on the light wavelength of the light-emitting element 630,” par. 124). Jo teaches that the patterned lenses may improve optical efficiency (“the patterns formed on…the injection molded lens may…improve optical efficiency depending on the light wavelength band of the at least one light-emitting device,” par. 114).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lee, Esser, and Trattler to use a lens that is asymmetric with respect to an optical axis of the light beam produced by a respective light source in addition to a lens that is symmetric with respect to an optical axis of the second light. The problem brought up by the prior art is how to direct light towards a photodetector, which can be solved by changing the shape of the lenses (“changes in the main directions of emission and main directions of reception may also be effected by optics 5,” Haiberger par. 66). Thus, using a symmetric or an asymmetric lens may be obvious to try based on the placement of the light emitting devices relative to the light detectors. One may further be motivated to use differently shaped lenses in order direct light in the desired directions, improve optical efficiency, and reduce the size of the device (“the use of such optics can further reduce the space requirement of the sensor module,” Haiberger par. 21; “the patterns formed on…the injection-molded lens may…improve optical efficiency depending on the light wavelength band of the at least one light-emitting device,” Jo par. 114; Jo par. 125 describes 4 different patterns to improve the optical efficiency of LEDs at 4 different wavelengths). Lee already teaches a symmetrically shaped lens relative to the light source (lens 544, Fig. 5), so modifying a second lens for a second light source emitting a different wavelength to be asymmetric will reduce the size of the device and improve the optical efficiency of light transmission, as taught by Haiberger and Jo (Haiberger par. 21; Jo par. 114).
Regarding claim 2, Lee teaches the one or more beam shaping elements is a molded lens (“window 444 is shown as including an integrally formed convex lens 544,” par. 74).
Regarding claim 3, Lee teaches the clear mold covering and the one or more beam shaping elements are composed of an epoxy resin (“a pre-molded cover structure includes a portion…molded from a light transmissive molding compound,” Abstract; “the light transmissive modeling compound that is used to form the windows 444 and 454 can be a light transmissive epoxy,” par. 70).
Regarding claim 6, Lee teaches the use of multiple light sources but does not explicitly teach or suggest the positioning of the multiple light sources (“The optical sensor 122 can alternatively include …two or three light emitting devices, or more than four light emitting device,” par. 40). Trattler teaches that the light sources are on opposite sides of the detector such that the light needs to travel in different directions from each light source in order to reach the detector (Figs. 1-3; “it may also be beneficial to arrange the optical lens so that a large amount of light can be focused or guided onto the light detector,” pg. 8, lines 6-7). Haiberger teaches that beam shaping elements can direct the optical axes of the light sources towards the detectors (“the optical axes of the semiconductor transmitter chips are inclined towards the optical axis of the semiconductor detector chip,” par. 24; “changes in the main directions of emission and main directions of reception may also be effected by optics 5,” par. 66)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lee in view of Esser, Trattler, Haiberger, and Jo to configure the optical sensor such that the lens direct light beams from respective light sources in different directions. Lee does not explicitly teach or suggest an arrangement of multiple light sources, thus one would be motivated to look at known prior art arrangements, such as Trattler’s Figs. 1-3. In this arrangement, light would have to be directed in different directions in order for the reflected light to reach the light detector, thus one would be motivated to use a lens above each light source to better direct the light from the light source towards the light detector, as taught by Trattler and Haiberger (“it may also be beneficial to arrange the optical lens so that a large amount of light can be focused or guided onto the light detector,” Trattler pg. 8, lines 6-7; “the optical axes of the semiconductor transmitter chips are inclined towards the optical axis of the semiconductor detector chip, so that the optical axes of the chips may intersect,” Haiberger par. 24). The result of repositioning the light sources around the light detector should yield predictable results based on the arrangements in the prior art (Trattler Figs. 1-3; Haiberger Figs. 2-3).
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Lee indicates that at least one of the light sources is operable to produce infrared light and visible light, and the optical sensor can be used as a pulse oximeter (“While infrared (IR) light sources are often employed in optical sensors, because the human eye cannot detect IR light, the light source can alternatively produce light of other wavelengths,” par. 30; “enables the optical sensor 122 to be used as a pulse oximeter,” par. 31). Haiberger teaches a pulse oximetry sensor that has three light sources of different wavelengths (940 nm, 660 nm, and 535 nm, par. 26; “The measurement principle of sensor module 1 based on the three different wavelengths,” par. 95). Jo also teaches visible and infrared light sources (par. 125).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lee in view of Esser, Trattler, Haiberger, and Jo to include infrared and visible light sources. Lee teaches that the optical sensor 122 can be used as a pulse oximeter with emitted light at two different wavelengths but doesn’t explicitly teach what wavelengths should be used (par. 31). Thus, one would be motivated to look at prior art arrangements such as Haiberger or Jo teaching light sources emitting near infrared and visible light. This modification should yield predictable results since the use of both infrared and visible light wavelengths for pulse oximetry was known in the art (Haiberger par. 95; Jo pars. 66, 125).
Regarding claim 10, Lee teaches the clear mold covering is transparent to the light produced by the one or more light sources (“the light transmissive modeling compound that is used to form the windows 444 and 454 can be a light transmissive epoxy,” par. 70).
Regarding claim 11, Lee teaches the one or more light sources and the integrated chip are disposed in the interior region (Fig. 1C; Figs. 10B-10C show that the sensors do not protrude out of the housing, so they must be contained within the interior of the housing; an opening in the housing further suggests that the sensor components are within the housing - “a caseback of the housing 104 includes one or more openings that are intended to be aligned with the windows (e.g., 444, 454) of one of the integrated sensor modules described herein,” par. 78).
Regarding claims 12-13, Lee teaches the housing has a first aperture over the clear mold covering and a second aperture over the integrated circuit chip (“a caseback of the housing 104 includes one or more openings that are intended to be aligned with the windows (e.g., 444, 454) of one of the integrated sensor modules described herein,” par. 78).
Regarding claims 14-16, Lee teaches the integrated circuit chip is operable to determine an oxygen saturation level and pulse rate of the subject based on the signals from the one or more photodetectors (“optical sensor 122 can also be used to detect heart rate…optical sensor 122 to be used as a pulse oximeter, in which case the optical sensor 122 can non-invasively monitor the arterial oxygen saturation of a user wearing the user-wearable device 102,” par. 31).
Regarding claim 17, Lee teaches a host computing device (user-wearable device 102 and/or base station 252) comprising:
a module (optical sensor 122) according to claim 1 disposed adjacent the cover glass (see rejection of claim 1 above over Lee in view of Esser, Trattler, Haiberger, and Jo);
an application executable on the host computing device (“the user-wearable device 102 can be a standalone device which gathers and processes data and displays results to a user. Alternatively, the user-wearable device 102 can wirelessly communicate with a base station (252 in FIG. 2), which can…include a health and fitness software application,” par. 24) and operable to cause the module to perform a physiological measurement on the subject based on light produced by the one or more light sources, reflected by the subject, and sensed by the one or more photodetectors (“the microcontroller 202 is shown as receiving signals from each of the aforementioned sensors 122,” par. 42; “software code that is stored in the memory 206 and is executed by the processor 204,” par. 45); and
a display screen (108) operable to display data indicative of the physiological condition of the subject based on the signals from the one or more photodetectors (“The digital display 108 can also be used to display activity and/or physiological metrics, such as, but not limited to, heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (HRV),” par. 25).
Regarding a cover glass, Jo teaches a cover glass as a housing over the sensor module (housing 670, Fig. 6).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lee in view of Esser, Trattler, Haiberger, and Jo to include a cover glass. One would be motivated to do so because Jo teaches this was a known arrangement for an optical sensor and the cover glass protects the optical sensor from the surrounding environment when the sensor is disposed in an electronic device (“light sensor 210 is mounted inside the electronic device 101…so as to be disposed to the external environment through the housing (or the cover glass) of the electronic device,” par. 73). Since Lee also teaches the sensor module is mounted inside of a electronic device (user wearable device 102, Fig. 1C), Lee in view of Esser, Trattler, Haiberger, and Jo can be improved in the same way.
As to Claim 18, because the subject matter of claims 1-3 and 6-16 directed to an integrated optical biosensor module is not distinct from the subject matter of claim 18 directed to a system comprising an integrated optical biosensor module, Lee in view of Trattler, Esser, Haiberger, and Jo teach claim 18 for the same reasons as that provided for the rejection of claims 1-3 and 6-16 above. Lee further teaches the system (Fig. 2) including a processor (204) coupled to the integrated circuit chip (Fig. 2; “the integrated sensor modules described herein can be mounted to a printed circuit board (PCB) to which is also mounted other electrical components of a device, such as a processor (e.g., 204),” Lee par. 92) and operable to determine a physiological condition of the subject based on signals from the two or more photodetectors (“The optical sensor 122 can alternatively include…two or three light emitting devices,” par. 40; HR detector 218 and HRV detector 220 are implemented using software code executed by processor 204, par. 45).
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Lee teaches that there is an air gap (tolerance) between the PLSSD 312 and the lens 544 and that the lenses are shaped to focus light in the desired manner (“pre-molded cavity 442 has dimensions that are equal to dimensions of the PLSSD 312 plus a tolerance,” par. 68; “lens 544 which can be used to focus the light emitted by the light emitting element(s) of the light emitter die 314 of the PLSSD 312…other shapes for the lens(es) is/are also possible,” par. 74). Trattler also teaches modifying the lens shape to achieve the desired light emission based on an airgap (“the focal length of the optical lens can be adjusted such that most of the light emitted by the light emitting device reaches a certain depth in the biological probe, e.g. once there is a distance between the skin and the optical lens (airgap)…Various optical parameters can be adjusted by the optical design of the light guiding element or the optical lens,” pg. 7, lines 31-33; pg. 8, lines 1-14). Lee, Trattler, Esser, and Haiberger do not explicitly teach the shape of the lenses are defined based on an optical stack corresponding to an air gap between the cover glass and the integrated optical biosensor module and a thickness of the cover glass
Jo teaches an analogous optical sensor device comprising an optical sensor 510, a molded lens 560 covering the sensor device, and a window or cover glass 570 above the lens (Figs. 5A-5B, 6). Jo further teaches that the lens are shaped to improve optical efficiency and the cover glass 570 may be substantially transparent (paras. 102, 105)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lee in view of Trattler, Esser, Haiberger, and Jo to define the lens shape based on the air gap between the cover glass and optical biosensor module and based on the thickness of the cover glass. Trattler teaches that focal length of a lens can be adjusted to achieve the desired light coupling even with an airgap between the optical sensor and skin (pg. 7, lines 31-33; pg. 8, lines 1-7). Since the air gap and cover glass thickness affect the optical light path, one would be motivated to use routine experimentation to modify the shape of the lens so that the lens can properly focus the light out from the light source through the components of the optical stack. Lee, Trattler, and Jo all explicitly teach or suggest that lenses can be shaped to achieve the desired focusing effect through an airgap or cover glass (Lee par. 74; Trattler pg. 7, lines 31-33; pg. 8, lines 1-14; Jo paras. 102, 105). This indicates that optimizing the shape of the lens based on the components in the optical path (i.e., airgap and cover glass) in order to improve optical efficiency is a design consideration known within the art.
Regarding claim 21, Lee teaches the clear mold covering and the one or more beam shaping elements are integrally formed in one piece (“window 444 is shown as including an integrally formed convex lens 544,” par. 74), such that the first beam shaping element is part of the same resin structure encapsulating the two or more light sources (“The PLSSD 312 is shown as including a light source die 314…can include more than one light emitting element 316,” par. 57).
Since Lee teaches that the clear window 444 comprising integral lens 544 encapsulates the PLSSD 312 comprising multiple light sources, and Trattler teaches two optical lenses 161, 163 aligned with the two light emitting devices (Trattler Figs. 1A-1C) it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lee in view of Esser, Trattler, Haiberger, and Jo to integrally form a second lens in the clear window 444 to align with the second light source on the PLSSD 312. One would be motivated to do so in order to guide light from different light sources encapsulated on PLSSD 312 within window 444 (Trattler Figs. 4A-4B show advantages of having lenses over the light sources; “window 444 is shown as including an integrally formed convex lens 544 which can be used to focus the light emitted by the light emitting element(s) of the light emitter die 314 of the PLSSD 312,” par. 74).
Regarding claim 22, Lee in view of Esser, Trattler, Haiberger, and Jo teaches the second beam shaping element, being asymmetrical with respect to the optical axis of the second light produced by the second light source at the second wavelength, redirects the second light away from an unintended photodetector of the two or more photodetectors (generally, lenses help focus light in the intended direction: “light guiding elements 161, 162, 163…increase the signal-to noise ratio. This improvement is depicted in Figure 4B,” Trattler pg. 19, lines 18-22; “at least one of the optics or all of the optics has an optical axis oriented obliquely to the associated chip…so that the optical axes of the chips may intersect or at least approach each other,” Haiberger par. 24; “optics 5 can be mounted eccentrically on the chips 21, 22, 23, 3. This allows the main emission and main reception directions of the chips 21, 22, 23, 3 to be set by means of optics 5,” Haiberger par. 66; “The various radiations are directed via optics 5 into the desired direction,” Haiberger par. 93).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Chu (US 2016/0240721) and Baek (US 2017/0372152) teach symmetrical and asymmetrical lenses to improve the optical efficiency (“The present technology improves the performance of the optical sensor module 10 achieved by enhancing the light extraction efficiency, directing the light path, or reducing the stray light,” Chu par. 107; “light receiving efficiency and the signal-to-noise ratio of the light receiving unit 220 may be improved,” Baek par. 60).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ALICE L ZOU whose telephone number is (571)272-2202. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-6 ET.
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, Robert (Tse) Chen can be reached on (571) 272-3672. 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.
/ALICE LING ZOU/Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/TSE W CHEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791