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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 15 October 2025 has been entered.
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(s) 1, 4-9, 12-17, 20, 58-62 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mensinger (US 2014/0184423) in view of Mahalingam (US 2017/0181645).
Regarding claim 1, Mensinger discloses a system for third party analyte monitoring (a caretaker or practitioner (third party) remotely monitoring analytes of a host; abstract, fig 2A, para [0031]), the system comprising:
a sensor control device comprising an analyte sensor (a smart phone (control device) comprising a continuous sensor such as a glucose meter (analyte); paras [0031], [0042]); wherein at least a portion of the analyte sensor is configured to be in fluid contact with a bodily fluid of a monitored user (the glucose meter providing glucose level (bodily fluid) measurements of a host (monitored user); paras [0031], [0033], [0042]);
a first reader device configured to wirelessly receive data indicative of an analyte level of the monitored user from the sensor control device (a receiver 102 (first reader device) includes a display to wirelessly present information (analyte level) of the host from (receive) the continuous analyte sensor 10; fig 2A, para [0043]), wherein the first reader device is further configured to send the data indicative of the analyte level to a trusted computer system (receiver 102 wirelessly sends data to a secure (trusted) server 110; fig 2A, paras [0043]-[0044]);
a secondary display device (remote monitor 114 (secondary display device); fig 2A; para [0046]), comprising:
wireless communication circuitry configured to receive, from the trusted computer system, sensor type information of the sensor control device and the data indicative of the analyte level of the monitored user (secure server 110 sends blood glucose data of the host and metadata comprising type of device used (sensor type information) over wireless communication channel to the remote monitor 114; fig 2A, paras [0074], [0076], [0124], [0127]),
one or more processors coupled with a memory, the memory storing a third party analyte monitoring application installed on the secondary display device (remote monitor 114 includes a processor, and a computer-readable storage medium to store executable code comprising a remote monitoring application; para [0046]) that, when executed by the one or more processors, causes the one or more processors to
display one or more connection interfaces reflecting the data indicative of the analyte level of the monitored user (paragraph [0120], [0136]);
Mensinger further discloses the system comprising applications which cause processors to:
determine a type of the sensor control device based on the received sensor type information (paragraph [0051], [0118]),
in response to a determination that the type of the sensor control device is a first sensor control device type, displaying a first set of alarm notification settings interfaces (paragraph [0036], [0048], [0051], [0054]-[0056]), and
in response to a determination that the type of the sensor control device is a second sensor control device type, displaying a second set of alarm notification settings interfaces (paragraph [0036], [0051], [0054]-[0056]),
wherein the first sensor control device type is different from the second sensor control device type (paragraph [0042]-[0045], [0080]-[0081],[0103]), and wherein the first set of alarm notification settings interfaces is different from the second set of alarm notification settings interfaces (paragraphs [0048], [0054]-[0056]).
Mensinger does not explicitly call for the application stored in the memory of the secondary display device to comprise the instructions to cause the secondary display device’s processors to display the connection interfaces, determine the type of sensor, and display the alarm notification settings interfaces.
Mahalingam teaches a system for third party analyte monitoring which comprises a sensor control device comprising an analyte sensor (paragraph [0108]), a first reader device configured to receive data indicative of an analyte level from the sensor control device (element 502; paragraph [0135]) and to send the data to a trusted computer system (element 510); and a secondary display device (elements 508; paragraph [0135]) comprising circuitry and one or more processors (paragraphs [0120], [0121]), where tasks within the system can be hosted on any of the constituent devices including the trusted computer or the secondary display device (paragraph [0146], “Likewise, any functionality herein ascribed to Secure Server 504 can also be performed by a host monitoring device or remote monitoring device.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have made the system of Mensinger with the application installed on the secondary display device further including the programming to cause the processors of the secondary display device to display the connection interfaces, determine the type of sensor, and display the alarm notification settings interfaces, as taught by Mahalingam, as Mahalingam indicates that the necessary operations for use of an analyte monitoring system are equally useful regardless of which element of the system hosts those operations.
Regarding claim 4, Mensinger further discloses wherein the one or more connection interfaces reflecting the data indicative of the analyte level of the monitored user includes a first connection interface comprising a “profile card” section and an analyte graph section (displaying a name 1902 of the host and picture 1904 of the host (profile card section) and a trend graph 1914 of sensor data; fig 19; para [0065], [0225]).
Regarding claim 5, Mensinger further discloses wherein the profile card section includes a name of the monitored user (name 1902; fig 19; para [0225]).
Regarding claim 6, Mensinger discloses wherein the profile card section includes an analyte level value and a directional trend arrow based on the data indicative of the analyte level of the monitored user (in the section with the host name 1902, label 1906 shows the glucose level 1906 of the host and label 1908 shows a directional trend arrow; fig 19; para [0225]).
Regarding claim 7, Mensinger further discloses wherein the profile card section comprises a background color indicative of whether a current analyte level is within a target analyte range (different colors are provided showing glucose levels and to segregate riskier (outside a target range) host-patients; fig 18A; paras [0136], [0137]).
Regarding claim 8, Mensinger further discloses wherein the analyte graph section comprises an analyte trend line (trend line 1916; fig 19; para [0225]).
Regarding claim 9, Mensinger further discloses wherein the analyte graph section comprises one or more lines indicative of a low glucose alarm threshold or a high glucose alarm threshold (alarms are set based on a glucose level high threshold 1918 and a high threshold 1920; fig 19; paras [0169], [0225]; note: Mensinger incorrectly states the low threshold is label 1918 and high threshold is 1920, where fig 19 correctly shows 1918 is the high threshold, and the low threshold is not labeled).
Regarding claim 12, Mensinger further discloses wherein the profile card section and the analyte graph section are automatically updated at a predetermined frequency based on the data indicative of the analyte level of the monitored user (the secure server automatically sends sensor data of the host after the expiration of a 5 minute timer (predetermined frequency) to the remote monitor 114 having an updated set of sensor data generating the glucose level 1906 and the trend line 1916; fig 19; paras [0066], [0066], [0106]).
Regarding claim 13, Mensinger further discloses wherein the monitored user is a first monitored user (monitored host is Jake 1804a (first); fig 18A; para [0218]), wherein the one or more connection interfaces includes a multiple connections interface comprising one or more profile card sections (fig 18A shows multiple host names 1804a-1804d; para [0218]), and wherein the one or more profile card sections includes a first profile card section associated with the first monitored user (monitored host is Jake 1804a, shown as the first section in a dashboard view; fig 18A; para [0218]),.
Regarding claim 14, Mensinger further discloses wherein the one or more profile card sections further includes a second profile card section associated with a second monitored user (fig 18A shows a dashboard view with names of hosts 1804a-1804b (second profile card of second monitored user); para [0218]).
Regarding claim 15, Mensinger further discloses wherein the first profile card section is configured to display a first analyte level value based on the data indicative of the analyte level of the first monitored user (analyte level for Jake 1804a (first profile card section) is shown in 1806a (first analyte level value); fig 18A; paras [0218], [0219]), and wherein the second profile card section is configured to display a second analyte level value based on data indicative of an analyte of the second monitored user (analyte level for Emily 1804b (second profile card section) is shown as 152 mg/di (second analyte level value); fig 188; paras [0218], [0220]),
Regarding claim 16, Mensinger further discloses the trusted computer system, wherein the trusted computer system comprises a cloud-based server (secure server 110 is coupled to the cloud; para [0108]).
Regarding claim 17, Mensinger further discloses wherein the sensor control device is configured to wirelessly transmit the data indicative of the analyte level of the monitored user to the first reader device according to a Bluetooth, Bluetooth Low Energy, or Near Field Communication protocol (paras [0076], [0088]).
Regarding claim 20, Mensinger further discloses wherein first reader device is configured to wirelessly communicate with the sensor control device according to a first wireless communication protocol (wireless communication between the sensor and the receiver 102 is via Bluetooth or Bluetooth Low-Energy (first protocol); paras [0076], [0088]), and wherein the first reader device is further configured to wirelessly communicate with the trusted computer system according to a second wireless communication protocol that is different from the first wireless communication protocol (receiver 102 wirelessly sends data to the secure server 110 via cellular or radio frequency (second protocol that is different); paras [0072], [0088]).
Regarding claim 58, Mensinger further discloses that one of the alarm notification settings interfaces may include a glucose threshold setting that is not modifiable in the third party analyte monitoring application (paragraphs [0035], [0045], [0142], [0143]; the threshold may be a “predetermined” threshold, thus not modifiable via the application).
Regarding claim 59, Mensinger further discloses that one of the alarm notification setting interfaces may include a “no recent data” setting (paragraph [0142], [0143], [0251]; figure 17, element 1738).
Regarding claim 60, Mensinger further discloses that the received sensor type information comprises one or more of a version number, a version name, a model name, a model number, a serial number, a sensor code, or an identifier indicative of the type of the sensor control device (paras [0074], [0076], [0124], [0127]).
Regarding claims 61 and 62, Mensinger further discloses that the sensor types may include scan-based sensor control devices (paragraph [0042], glucose meter) and streaming sensor control devices (paragraphs [0042], [0082], continuous sensors).
Claim 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Mensinger, as modified by Mahalingam above, and further in view of Qing (US 2018/0263575).
Regarding claim 10, Mensinger further discloses wherein the secondary display device further comprises a touchscreen (remote monitor 114 touch screen; para [0067]), and wherein the third party analyte monitoring application (remote monitoring application; para [0135]), when executed by the one or more processors, causes the one or more processors to:
receive input from the touchscreen corresponding to a selected point on the analyte graph section (touching the screen of the remote monitor to over an area associated with a message 170 showing a trend graph; paras [0065], [0067]).
Mensinger does not disclose further updating the profile card section based on the received input causing the profile card section to reflect an analyte level at a time corresponding to the selected point on the analyte graph, where the updated “profile card” section remains in a stationary position relative to the analyte graph section. Qing teaches a monitoring system (paragraph [0023]) comprising a touchscreen (paragraph [0020]) and a connection interface which includes a monitored parameter graph section (element 602) and a “profile card” section which remains stationary relative to the graph section (element 604) and, where the system is configured to receive input from the touchscreen corresponding to a selected point on the graph section and to update the “profile card” section based on the received input from the touchscreen to reflect a parameter level at a time corresponding to the selected point on the graph (paragraph [0069]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have made the system of Mensinger, as modified above, with the system configured to update the “profile card” section of the connection interface to reflect an analyte level at a time corresponding to the selected touched point on the analyte graph section while ensuring the profile card maintains a stable position, as taught by Qing, in order to allow review of historical data without interfering with the remainder of displayed information in the graph section.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 15 October 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new grounds of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Regarding the argument that Mensinger does not specifically teach the application installed on the secondary display device as performing the various operations, this argument is moot in view of the teachings of Mahalingam as modifying Mensinger above.
Regarding claim 10, Applicant’s arguments directed to the newly presented limitation of the profile card remaining stationary are moot in light of Qing as applied above.
Regarding claim 58, Applicant argues that Mensinger does not disclose a threshold setting that is not modifiable via the application; as Mensinger discloses use of a predetermined value for a threshold, this is a threshold that cannot be modified, including being not modifiable via the application.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAREN E TOTH whose telephone number is (571)272-6824. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9a-6p.
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.
/KAREN E TOTH/Examiner, Art Unit 3791