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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 14 May 2025 has been entered.
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 14 May 2025. As directed by the amendment: claims 1, 5-8, 10, and 12-13 have been amended, claims 2, 4, and 11 have been canceled, and no claims have been added. Thus, claims 1, 3, 5-10, and 12-13 are presently pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
CLAIM OBJECTIONS
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 14 May 2025, with respect to the objection to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the claim amendments. The objection to claim 1 has been withdrawn.
However, new claim objections are made below.
CLAIM REJECTIONS
35 U.S.C. § 112 Rejections
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 14 May 2025, with respect to the rejections of claims 8 and 10 under 35 U.S.C. 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the claim amendments. The rejections of claims 8 and 10 under 35 U.S.C. 112 have been withdrawn.
However, new rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112 are made below.
35 U.S.C. § 103 Rejections
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 14 May 2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the claim amendments. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Chang et al. (US 20190365258 A1), hereinafter Chang.
No specific arguments regarding dependent claims 3, 5-10, and 12-13 and the previously cited prior art references were made. Therefore, claims 3, 5-10, and 12-13 are also rejected below.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [004]: “the pressure the sensing element applies on the skin” in lines 3-4 should read “the pressure sensing element applied on the skin”
Paragraph [018]: “by” in line 2 should read “be”
Paragraph [019]:
The comma after “such as” in line 1 should be omitted
“according to embodiment” in line 2 should read “according to an embodiment”
“devise” in line 5 should read “device”
“loos” in paragraphs [028] (line 10), and [030] (line 2) should read “loose”
Paragraph [030]: “are extract” in line 2 should read “are extracted”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
the comma after “alert” in line 17 should be omitted
the comma after “device” in line 18 should be omitted
“tighten of straps” in line 23 should read “tighten straps”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3, 5-10, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “an alert” (line 17), “a first alert” (line 20), and “a second alert” (line 22). It is unclear as to whether “a first alert” and “a second alert” are sent by the controller.
In claim 1, the use of “for” in the limitations “at least one displacement sensor for measuring displacement” (line 6) and “a second housing for holding the controller and a second sensing unit” (line 9) are unclear. It is unclear as to whether these limitations claim the functions that follow, or whether the elements only must be capable of performing the function. For the purposes of examination, “for” in the above limitation will be interpreted as “configured for” and the limitation above will be interpreted as being required to perform the function described.
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, 3, 5-10, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ko et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0055449 A1, previously cited), hereinafter Ko, Chang et al. (US 20190365258 A1), hereinafter Chang, and Rabinovich et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0184920 A1, previously cited), hereinafter Rabinovich.
Regarding claim 1, Ko discloses a wearable monitoring device (Fig. 1, paragraph [0039], wearable measurement apparatus 10) comprising:
a housing, having an opening on at least one side (Fig. 2, paragraph [0041], main body 100);
a sensing unit (Fig. 2, paragraph [0041], biometric signal sensor 300) attached to a moveable plate (Fig. 2, paragraph [0041], movable plate is part of biometric signal sensor 300), wherein the sensing unit comprises:
at least one light source (paragraph [0074], light source) and at least one light sensor (paragraph [0074], photodetector); and
at least one displacement sensor (Fig. 3, paragraphs [0086], [0107]-[0108], compression sensor 310) for measuring the displacement of the movable plate with respect to a predefined location in the housing (paragraph [0108]); and
a controller (paragraph [0079], controller 111); and
a second sensing unit attached to a second movable plate (Fig. 2, paragraph [0041], biometric signal sensor 300);
wherein the moveable plate is connected to one or more spring-like elements (Figs. 2-3, paragraph [0041], sensor elastic part 400), allowing the movable plate to move with respect to the housing so that when the one or more spring-like elements are extended, the sensing unit protrudes from the open side of the housing and when the one or more spring-like elements are compressed the sensing unit and the movable plate are retracted towards an internal space in the housing (Figs. 2-3, paragraphs [0063], [0072]),
wherein the controller is configured to send an alert to an external computing device (paragraphs [0086]-[0087], [0116]) when the displacement is one of: above a first threshold value (paragraph [0086], "if the pressing force is too high to measure the biometric signal") or under a second threshold value (paragraph [0087], "when the pressing force is too small to measure the biometric signal"), and
wherein a second alert includes instructions for a user to slightly tighten straps included in the device (paragraph [0087], "advise the wearer to increase the pressing force"; paragraphs [0041], [0067]-[0068], [0072]).
Ko does not explicitly disclose a second housing for holding the controller and the second sensing unit. However, Chang teaches a wearable device for monitoring blood pressure (Abstract) comprising two housings (Figs. 7A-7B, paragraph [0053], first movement detecting apparatus 150 and second movement detecting apparatus 200) with two sensing units (Fig. 3B, paragraph [0047], strain device 180) attached to two movable plates (Fig. 3B, paragraphs [0046]-[0047], contact member 152). The wearable device also sends signals to an external coputing device (paragraphs [0019], [0041], [0044]).
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 Ko with the teachings of Chang so that the wearable monitoring device further comprises a second housing for holding the second sensing unit, because the multiple apparatus configuration can be used to determine rotational error during positioning of the device (Chang, paragraph [0054]).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a second housing for holding the second sensing unit, for the purpose of collecting displacement data from a second site, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Although Chang does not explicitly disclose that the second housing holds a controller, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to contain the controller in the second housing, for the purpose of reducing the size of the device, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Ko does not explicitly disclose that a first alert comprises instructions for a user to adjust the placement of the wearable monitoring device. However, Rabinovich teaches a wearable blood pressure measurement device (Abstract) wherein a first alert comprises instructions for a user to adjust the placement of the wearable blood pressure measurement device (paragraphs [0013], [0101], [0115], [0128]).
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 Ko with the teachings of Rabinovich to provide a first alert comprising instructions for a user to adjust the placement of the wearable monitoring device, because doing so results in optimum placement of the device for the accurate collection of monitoring data (Rabinovich, Abstract, paragraph [[00012], 0115]).
Regarding claim 3, the wearable monitoring device of claim 1 is obvious over Ko, Chang, and Rabinovich, as explained above. Ko further discloses that a first alert includes instructions for a user to release a tightening of straps included in the device (paragraph [0086], "advise the wearer to reduce the pressing force"; paragraphs [0041], [0067]-[0068], [0072]).
Regarding claim 5, the wearable monitoring device of claim 1 is obvious over Ko, Chang, and Rabinovich, as explained above. Ko further discloses that the first housing is configured to hold the first sensing unit and the first movable plate (Fig. 2, paragraph [0041]).
Regarding claim 6, the wearable monitoring device of claim 1 is obvious over Ko, Chang, and Rabinovich, as explained above. Ko does not explicitly disclose a second housing comprising another displacement sensor. However, Chang teaches a wearable device for monitoring blood pressure (Abstract) comprising two housings (Figs. 7A-7B, paragraph [0053], first movement detecting apparatus 150 and second movement detecting apparatus 200) with two sensing units (Fig. 3B, paragraph [0047], strain device 180).
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 Ko with the teachings of Chang so that the wearable monitoring device further comprises a second housing for holding the second sensing unit, because the multiple apparatus configuration can be used to determine rotational error during positioning of the device (Chang, paragraph [0054]).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a second housing for holding the second sensing unit, for the purpose of collecting displacement data from a second site, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding claim 7, the wearable monitoring device of claim 1 is obvious over Ko, Chang, and Rabinovich, as explained above. Ko further discloses that the first housing further holds the controller (Fig. 2, paragraph [0079], controller 111).
Regarding claim 8, the wearable monitoring device of claim 1 is obvious over Ko, Chang, and Rabinovich, as explained above. Ko further discloses that the controller comprises a processor (paragraph [0079]) and a communication module (paragraph [0080]).
Regarding claim 9, the wearable monitoring device of claim 1 is obvious over Ko, Chang, and Rabinovich, as explained above. Ko further discloses that the spring-like element is a coil spring, leaf spring (paragraph [0065]), or an element made from an elastic material (paragraph [0066]).
Regarding claim 10, the wearable monitoring device of claim 1 is obvious over Ko, Chang, and Rabinovich, as explained above. Ko further discloses that the at least one displacement sensor is a sensing element comprising a light source and a light sensor (paragraph [0108], optical-type distance sensor), a force sensing resistor (paragraph [0108], resistive-type strain gauge), a strain gauge (paragraph [0108], resistive-type strain gauge), or a piezoelectric sensor (paragraph [0108]).
Regarding claim 12, the wearable monitoring device of claim 1 is obvious over Ko, Chang, and Rabinovich, as explained above. Ko further discloses that the first sensing unit is configured to apply a predefined pressure on a surface of a monitored user's body, wherein the predefined pressure is a function of a spring coefficient of the one or more spring-like elements (paragraph [0075]; “predefined pressure” is analogous to “the elastic force or the restoring force (i.e., F) of the sensor elastic part 400” and the “spring coefficient” is analogous to the “modulus of elasticity of the sensor elastic part 400”. Thus, the elastic force of the sensor part 400 is a function of the modulus of elasticity of the sensor elastic part 400. The modulus of elasticity of the sensor elastic part 400 is predetermined (paragraph [0063]), so the pressure that the sensing unit is configured to apply to a surface of a monitored user’s body is also predefined).
Regarding claim 13, the wearable monitoring device of claim 1 is obvious over Ko, Chang, and Rabinovich, as explained above. Ko further discloses that the spring coefficient of the one or more spring-like elements is selected such that the predefined pressure attaches the first sensing unit to the surface of the monitored user's body while avoiding blocking blood flow in blood vessels located beneath the surface (paragraphs [0063], [0086]-[0087]).
Conclusion
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
/REX R HOLMES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796