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 02 Feb 2026. As directed by the amendment: claims 1, 20, and 31 have been amended, claims 7-9, 14-15, 19, 24-25, and 28-29 have been canceled, and no claims have been added. Thus, claims 1-6, 10-13, 16-18, 20-23, 26-27, and 30-32 are presently pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Claim Objections
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 02 Feb 2026, with respect to the objection to claim 20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection to claim 20 has been withdrawn.
Claim Interpretation
The claim interpretations under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) are maintained below.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 02 Feb 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 31 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Rogers et al. (US 20200129077 A1), hereinafter Rogers, as explained in further detail below.
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are:
“a plurality of modules for physiological monitoring, at least two of the plurality of modules including one or more optical sensors for physiological monitoring” in claims 1 (line 2) and 31 (line 2) – paragraph [0243]
“an infrastructure component coupled to the garment for using the module in a physiological monitoring system” in claims 1 (line 13) and 31 (line 14) – paragraph [0240]
“a synchronization component for synchronizing signals among two or more of the plurality of modules” in claims 1 (line 15) and 31 (line 16) – paragraph [0303]
“two or more modules …configured to monitor a different physiological parameter “ in claim 8 – paragraph [0243]
“a communication system” in claim 12 – paragraphs [0231]-[0233]
“a timing device for synchronizing signals from two or more modules” in claim 16 – paragraph [0249], “a beacon or clock for synchronizing signals among multiple modules”
“a corresponding attachment mechanism” in claim 31 – paragraph [0182], “the pocket 1002 may be removeable from the article of clothing 1004, and retained in a removable and replaceably manner on the article of clothing using an attachment mechanism such hook-and-loop fasteners, adhesive tapes, zippers, snaps, buckles, cuff links, and the like.”
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-6, 10-13, 16-18, 20-23, 26-27, and 30-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Connor (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0307314 A1, previously cited) in view of Rogers et al. (US 20200129077 A1), hereinafter Rogers.
Regarding claim 1, Connor discloses a system (Fig. 1, circumferential array of electromyographic sensors) comprising:
a plurality of modules for physiological monitoring (Fig. 1, paragraph [0060], electromyographic sensors 101-106), the plurality of modules including one or more optical sensors for physiological monitoring (paragraph [0121] lists examples of types of optical sensors);
a garment (paragraphs [0074], [0189], electromyographic clothing) having a plurality of mounting fixtures each shaped and sized to removably and replaceably receive one of the plurality of modules (paragraphs [0086], [0089], [0189]), wherein
each of the plurality of mounting fixtures is positioned to retain one of the plurality of modules at a location on a wearer of the garment (paragraph [0189]), and
each of the plurality of mounting fixtures is configured to retain the one of the plurality of modules with a predetermined contact force against a skin of the wearer (paragraphs [0176], [0199], [0223]);
an infrastructure component coupled to the garment for using the plurality of modules in a physiological monitoring system (paragraph [0064], energy source 203, data processor 204, data transmitter 205; paragraphs [0079], [0086], [0093]-[0094] electroconductive material; paragraph [0213], battery; paragraph [0124], wireless data receiver and wireless data transmitter; paragraph [0124], data processor; paragraphs [0119], [0125], [0213]); and
a processor coupled in a communicating relationship with the plurality of modules (Fig. 2, paragraph [0064], data processor 204) and configured to adapt a data acquisition algorithm applied to data from the one or more optical sensors based on the location (paragraphs [0021], [0054], [0061]; “pattern recognition” and "virtually correct[ing]" (paragraph [0061]) are analogous to “adapt[ing] processing”).
Connor does not specifically disclose that at least two of the plurality of modules includes one or more optical sensors. Connor also does not disclose that the infrastructure component includes a synchronization component for synchronizing signals among two or more of the plurality of modules that include optical sensors, and that are positioned at different body locations. Connor does not disclose that the processor is configured to obtain synchronous optical measurements from the two or more modules based on the synchronization component and to perform a differential analysis of a physiological parameter based on the synchronous optical measurements from the two or more of the plurality of modules.
However, Rogers teaches an apparatus and a method that reliably and accurately determine blood pressure in a living animal using patch-like sensors systems (paragraph [0008]) comprising:
one or more optical sensors (Fig. 2B, paragraph [0115], sensor member 163 including an optical PPG sensor);
a synchronization component (Fig. 2B, paragraph [0099], MCU 190) configured to:
synchronize a local clock for each of the plurality of modules to timing data from a timing reference (paragraph [0127], "The secondary radio protocol will allow one of the sensors to act as the central hub to broadcast the local clock based on its crystal oscillator to create a common clock within the network. Every sensor can have a local clock running and will adjust the local clock value based on the broadcasted clock value. The central hub can additionally communicate with the base station (including, for example, a remote reader or a receiver) to synchronize its local clock to the base station's clock."), and
add time stamps to measurements from each of the plurality of modules based on synchronization of corresponding local clocks for each of the plurality of modules to the timing reference (paragraph [0127], "The common clock can timestamp all of the signals captured through the sensors that the private star network uses allowing novel algorithms that depend on a common clock to be used in our sensor system"); and
a processor (Fig. 2B, paragraph [0099], MCU 190) configured to:
obtain optical measurements from the two or more of the plurality of modules (paragraph [0099], "each of the first sensor system 110 and the second sensor system 150 is in wireless communication with the MCU 190 via a wireless transmission protocol")
synchronize the optical measurements based on the time stamps provided by the synchronization component (paragraph [0099], "a first sensor system 110 and a second sensor system 150 that are time-synchronized to each other ... Specifically, the term “time-synchronized” (or “time-synced”) refers to measurement of a parameter by different sensors, at different locations, that are synchronized in time to allow for measurement of novel physiological parameters. Examples include master-slave linked sensor systems that allow for time-synced measurements. Any of a range of time-synched methods are compatible, so long at the ability to measure ?T, and the PAT, from two spatially-separated systems, is preserved. Examples include time-stamped data, mother-daughter and master-slave."), and
perform a differential analysis of a physiological parameter based on synchronous optical measurements from the two or more of the plurality of modules (paragraph [0100], "The MCU 190 is configured to receive output signals of the first sensor system 110 and the second sensor system 150, process the output signals to determine a pulse arrival time (PAT) as a time delay ?t between detection of the first signal (e.g., the heartbeat signal) and detection of the second signal (e.g., the pulse signal). Once the PAT is determined, the MCU 190 may then determine a PWV based on the PAT and a pulse arrival distance L between the first 410 and the second position 420.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Connor with the teachings of Rogers to include one or more optical sensors; a synchronization component configured to synchronize a local clock for each of the plurality of modules to timing data from a timing reference, and add time stamps to measurements from each of the plurality of modules based on synchronization of corresponding local clocks for each of the plurality of modules to the timing reference; and a processor configured to obtain optical measurements from the two or more of the plurality of modules, synchronize the optical measurements based on the time stamps provided by the synchronization component, and to perform a differential analysis of a physiological parameter based on synchronous optical measurements from the two or more of the plurality of modules, because doing so provides an improved analytical model for blood pressure in applications including consumer health and clinical medicine (Rogers, paragraphs [0182]-[0194]).
Regarding claim 2, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that at least one of the plurality of modules includes a fixture for attaching to an adjustable wrist strap configured to secure the one of the plurality of modules as a wrist-worn physiological monitor (paragraphs [0020], [0027]-[0028], [0065], [0189]).
Regarding claim 3, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that at least one of the plurality of modules with optical sensors detects the location and adapts a data acquisition algorithm applied to data from the one or more optical sensors based on the location (paragraphs [0021], [0054], [0061]; “a data acquisition algorithm” is analogous to “assigning different sensing roles to different electromyographic sensors around the circumference of the selected body member” (paragraph [0054]); “detecting the location” is analogous to “pattern recognition…in order to identify which sensors are at which polar coordinates around a person’s arm” (paragraph [0061])).
Regarding claim 4, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that at least one of the mounting fixtures includes a window facilitating direct physical contact between a sensing region of one of the plurality of modules and the wearer (paragraphs [0188], “one or more holes or openings…allow an attachable electromyographic sensor to have direct contact with a person's skin when the sensor is attached over the hole”; paragraph [0192], “one or more openings, holes, or discontinuities in the interior surface of a fabric channel which enable a sensor within the channel to be in direct contact with the wearer's skin at one or more selected locations”).
Regarding claim 5, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that at least one of the plurality of mounting fixtures is positioned within an elastic band of the garment (paragraph [0192]).
Regarding claim 6, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that at least one of the plurality of mounting fixtures is positioned over an artery of the wearer (paragraphs [0020]-[0021], [0060], device can be worn around a person’s wrist), suitable for acquiring photoplethysmography data (paragraphs [0121], [0141]).
Regarding claim 10, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that the garment further includes a location identifier for each of the plurality of mounting fixtures (paragraph [0082]).
Regarding claim 11, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that the garment further includes a power supply for one or more of the plurality of modules (paragraph [0213], battery).
Regarding claim 12, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that the garment further includes a communication system (paragraph [0124], wireless data receiver and wireless data transmitter).
Regarding claim 13, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that the garment further includes a wired intra-garment network (paragraphs [0079], [0093]-[0094]).
Regarding claim 16, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that the synchronization component includes a timing device for synchronizing signals from the two or more of the plurality of modules that include optical sensors (paragraphs [0119], [0125], [0213]).
Regarding claim 17, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Although Connor discloses recording measurements from multiple locations, which requires synchronizing signals (paragraph [0125]), Connor does not disclose that the synchronization component includes a beacon for synchronizing signals from the two or more of the plurality of modules that include optical sensors.
However, Rogers further teaches that the synchronization component includes a beacon for synchronizing signals among the two or more of the plurality of modules that include optical sensors (paragraph [0127], " the time synchronization between the first and second sensor systems 110 and 150 can be achieved utilizing a multiprotocol functionality that incorporates a secondary 2.4 Ghz radio protocol other than Bluetooth to create a private star network among the network of sensors. The secondary radio protocol will allow one of the sensors to act as the central hub to broadcast the local clock based on its crystal oscillator to create a common clock within the network. Every sensor can have a local clock running and will adjust the local clock value based on the broadcasted clock value.").
Regarding claim 18, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that the physiological monitoring system monitors one or more of a heart rate (paragraph [0122], electrocardiogram sensor; paragraph [0123], cardiovascular sensor, pulse sensor, heart rate sensor), a body temperature (paragraph [0123], body and skin temperature sensors), a muscle activity (paragraphs [0009], [0020], [0027], [0060], [0078]), and a respiration rate (paragraph [0122], breathing rate monitor, respiration rate monitor, respiratory function monitor).
Regarding claim 20, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses a remote processing resource coupled in a communicating relationship with the plurality of modules in the garment (paragraph [0217], data transmitting unit transmits data to a remote data processing unit), the remote processing resource configured to receive data from the plurality of modules including the location of each of the plurality of modules and physiological data from one or more optical sensors for each of the two or more modules with optical sensors (paragraph [0217]), the remote processing resource further configured to adapt processing of the physiological data from the one or more optical sensors based on the location of each of the two or more modules with optical sensors (paragraphs [0021], [0054], [0061]; “pattern recognition” and "virtually correct[ing]" (paragraph [0061]) are analogous to “adapt[ing] processing”); paragraphs [0217], remote data processing unit analyze both motion data and electromagnetic energy data).
Regarding claim 21, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses a plurality of garments each providing data from at least one garment-coupled module to the processor (paragraphs [0216]-[0217], one or more articles of clothing or clothing accessories and a plurality of motion and electromyographic sensors attached to the articles of clothing and clothing accessories).
Regarding claim 22, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses the processor is configured to detect the location of the module (paragraphs [0021], [0054], [0061]) and adapt processing of data from one or more optical sensors of each of the two or more modules with optical sensors according to the location (paragraphs [0021], [0054], [0061]).
Regarding claim 23, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that the processor is configured to detect the location of the module (paragraphs [0021], [0054], [0061]) and select a motion-based activity recognition model based on the location (paragraph [0211]).
Regarding claim 26, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that the plurality of modules include modules configured to monitor two or more different physiological parameters (paragraph [0144]), each one of the plurality of modules including one or more of an optical sensor (paragraph [0121]), a light emitting diode (paragraph [0215]), an accelerometer (paragraph [0120]), a gyroscope (paragraph [0120]), a conductivity sensor (paragraph [0122], bioimpedance sensor, impedance sensor, skin conductance sensor, skin impedance sensor), a capacitive sensor (paragraph [0104], cEMG sensor), a skin temperature sensor (paragraph [0123]), and an environmental sensor (paragraph [0122], last sentence; paragraph [0158], environmental moisture and/or humidity level).
Regarding claim 27, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that one of the plurality of modules includes the infrastructure component (Fig. 3, paragraph [0066], primary electronics housing 303).
Regarding claim 30, the system of claim 1 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that the plurality of mounting fixtures includes at least one pocket configured to retain one of the plurality of modules in a position (paragraphs [0086], [0089], [0189]) for monitoring during physical activity of the wearer (paragraphs [0082]-[0083], [0192].
Regarding claim 31, Connor discloses a system (Fig. 1, circumferential array of electromyographic sensors) comprising:
a plurality of modules for physiological monitoring (Fig. 1, paragraph [0060], electromyographic sensors 101-106), the plurality of modules including one or more optical sensors for physiological monitoring (paragraph [0121] lists examples of types of optical sensors);
a garment (paragraphs [0074], [0189], electromyographic clothing) having a plurality of mounting fixtures each shaped and sized to removably and replaceably receive one of the plurality of modules (paragraphs [0086], [0089], [0189]), wherein
each of the plurality of mounting fixtures is positioned to retain one of the plurality of modules at a location on a wearer of the garment (paragraph [0189]), and
each of the plurality of mounting fixtures is configured to retain the one of the plurality of modules with a predetermined contact force against a skin of the wearer (paragraphs [0176], [0199], [0223]);
each of the one or more mounting fixtures is removable from and replaceable to one of the one or more garments with a corresponding attachment mechanism (paragraph [0170], "the location of the second portion can be moved with respect to the first portion ... the second portion can be reversibly-attached to the first portion ... the second portion can be attached to the first portion by one or more attachment mechanisms");
an infrastructure component coupled to the garment for using the plurality of modules in a physiological monitoring system (paragraph [0064], energy source 203, data processor 204, data transmitter 205; paragraphs [0079], [0086], [0093]-[0094] electroconductive material; paragraph [0213], battery; paragraph [0124], wireless data receiver and wireless data transmitter; paragraph [0124], data processor; paragraphs [0119], [0125], [0213]); and
a processor coupled in a communicating relationship with the plurality of modules (Fig. 2, paragraph [0064], data processor 204) and configured to adapt a data acquisition algorithm applied to data from the one or more optical sensors based on the location (paragraphs [0021], [0054], [0061]; “pattern recognition” and "virtually correct[ing]" (paragraph [0061]) are analogous to “adapt[ing] processing”).
Connor does not specifically disclose that at least two of the plurality of modules includes one or more optical sensors. Connor also does not disclose that the infrastructure component includes a synchronization component for synchronizing signals among two or more of the plurality of modules that include optical sensors, and that are positioned at different body locations. Connor does not disclose that the processor is configured to obtain synchronous optical measurements from the two or more modules based on the synchronization component and to perform a differential analysis of a physiological parameter based on the synchronous optical measurements from the two or more of the plurality of modules.
However, Rogers teaches an apparatus and a method that reliably and accurately determine blood pressure in a living animal using patch-like sensors systems (paragraph [0008]) comprising:
one or more optical sensors (Fig. 2B, paragraph [0115], sensor member 163 including an optical PPG sensor);
a synchronization component (Fig. 2B, paragraph [0099], MCU 190) configured to:
synchronize a local clock for each of the plurality of modules to timing data from a timing reference (paragraph [0127], "The secondary radio protocol will allow one of the sensors to act as the central hub to broadcast the local clock based on its crystal oscillator to create a common clock within the network. Every sensor can have a local clock running and will adjust the local clock value based on the broadcasted clock value. The central hub can additionally communicate with the base station (including, for example, a remote reader or a receiver) to synchronize its local clock to the base station's clock."), and
add time stamps to measurements from each of the plurality of modules based on synchronization of corresponding local clocks for each of the plurality of modules to the timing reference (paragraph [0127], "The common clock can timestamp all of the signals captured through the sensors that the private star network uses allowing novel algorithms that depend on a common clock to be used in our sensor system"); and
a processor (Fig. 2B, paragraph [0099], MCU 190) configured to:
obtain optical measurements from the two or more of the plurality of modules (paragraph [0099], "each of the first sensor system 110 and the second sensor system 150 is in wireless communication with the MCU 190 via a wireless transmission protocol")
synchronize the optical measurements based on the time stamps provided by the synchronization component (paragraph [0099], "a first sensor system 110 and a second sensor system 150 that are time-synchronized to each other ... Specifically, the term “time-synchronized” (or “time-synced”) refers to measurement of a parameter by different sensors, at different locations, that are synchronized in time to allow for measurement of novel physiological parameters. Examples include master-slave linked sensor systems that allow for time-synced measurements. Any of a range of time-synched methods are compatible, so long at the ability to measure ?T, and the PAT, from two spatially-separated systems, is preserved. Examples include time-stamped data, mother-daughter and master-slave."), and
perform a differential analysis of a physiological parameter based on synchronous optical measurements from the two or more of the plurality of modules (paragraph [0100], "The MCU 190 is configured to receive output signals of the first sensor system 110 and the second sensor system 150, process the output signals to determine a pulse arrival time (PAT) as a time delay ?t between detection of the first signal (e.g., the heartbeat signal) and detection of the second signal (e.g., the pulse signal). Once the PAT is determined, the MCU 190 may then determine a PWV based on the PAT and a pulse arrival distance L between the first 410 and the second position 420.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Connor with the teachings of Rogers to include one or more optical sensors; a synchronization component configured to synchronize a local clock for each of the plurality of modules to timing data from a timing reference, and add time stamps to measurements from each of the plurality of modules based on synchronization of corresponding local clocks for each of the plurality of modules to the timing reference; and a processor configured to obtain optical measurements from the two or more of the plurality of modules, synchronize the optical measurements based on the time stamps provided by the synchronization component, and to perform a differential analysis of a physiological parameter based on synchronous optical measurements from the two or more of the plurality of modules, because doing so provides an improved analytical model for blood pressure in applications including consumer health and clinical medicine (Rogers, paragraphs [0182]-[0194]).
Regarding claim 32, the system of claim 31 is obvious over Connor and Rogers, as explained above. Connor further discloses that the corresponding attachment mechanism includes a hook-and-loop fastener (paragraph [0170], "the second portion can be attached to the first portion by one or more attachment mechanisms selected from the group consisting of: hook-and-eye (e.g. Velcro™)").
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 CHRISTINE SISON whose telephone number is (703)756-4661. The examiner can normally be reached 8 am - 5 pm PT, Mon - Fri.
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.
/CHRISTINE SISON/Examiner, Art Unit 3796
/Jennifer Pitrak McDonald/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights