DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after 16 March 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 28 January 2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 10-16 and 18-20 is/are currently amended. Claim(s) 4-5, 7-9, 17 and 21 has/have been canceled. New claim(s) 23 has/have been added. Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 10-16, 18-20 and 22-23 is/are pending.
Priority
Applicant's claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120 as follows.
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application No. 15/147,293, fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application. The '293 application fails to disclose at least each of the main processor being located in and/or operating on an external device (claims 16 and 20); a data communication module for sending the screened signal to an external device immediately after the screened signal is received from the pre-processor (claims 16 and 20); the main processor being operable to periodically process screened signals based on a memory count or a period of time sufficient to permit the main processor to be, on average, in a sleep mode for a period of time greater than then amount of time it is operating (claim 23); etc. Accordingly, claims 16, 18-20 and 22-23 are not entitled to the benefit of the prior '293 application.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 28 January 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of USPN 11,272,864 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Objections and/or Rejections Withdrawn
Objections to the claims, rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph), rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph) and/or double patenting rejections present in the prior Office action (mailed 02 December 2025) that are not reproduced below has/have been withdrawn in view of the Applicant's amendments to the claims, Applicant's submitted remarks, and/or above-noted terminal disclaimer.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
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.
Claim(s) 16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2017/0071506 A1 (previously cited, Dwarika) in view of US 2020/0188697 A1 (previously cited, Kabrams).
Regarding claim 16, Dwarika discloses and/or suggests a respiratory and physiological monitoring system comprising:
a wearable (wearable 12, throughout document) that performs continuous monitoring for an event of interest measured in whole days (¶ [0080] wearable 12 monitors audio and/or motion events in real time; ¶ [0021] monitoring is measured in whole days), the wearable comprising:
at least one sensor for measuring a physiological parameter of a user (¶¶ [0014]-[0015]; sensors 42, ¶ [0065] where sensors 42 may include one or more of an accelerometer, a gyroscope, temperature sensor, vibration sensor, optical sensor; sensors for measuring the electrical potential of the body; etc.);
an acoustic sensor for receiving an acoustic signal (¶¶ [0014]-[0015]; sensors 42, ¶ [0065] where sensors 42 may include a microphone; etc.);
a pre-processor operable to receive data from the at least one sensor and the acoustic sensor (¶ [0015]; ¶ [0018]; pre-processor(s) 44; etc.), the pre-processor performing a basic screening algorithm on original signals from the at least one sensor and the acoustic sensor to detect the event of interest as a screened signal, the basic screening algorithm eliminating a portion of the original signals from the at least one sensor and the acoustic sensor that fail to meet predetermined criteria for detecting the event of interest, the screened signal being the original signals with the portion removed therefrom (e.g., ¶ [0070] pre-processor 44 only runs a basic screening algorithm; ¶ [0079] pre-processor(s) 44 run qualification or filtering algorithms that eliminate sensor information that has less than 50% to 80% resemblance to sensor data that is of use and requires significantly less power than a more accurate detection algorithm(s) to run); and
a buffer/memory for storing the screened signal after being processed by the preprocessor (¶ [0018]; buffer/memory 46; ¶ [0079]; etc.); and
a data communication module for sending data to an external device (¶ [0020]; data transmission module 56; etc.);
a main processor having a main processor algorithm operable to process the screened signals to verify that the screened signals include the event of interest, the main processor algorithm operating at greater accuracy for detecting the event of interest than the basic screening algorithm (¶ [0015]; ¶ [0019]; main processor 48; ¶ [0079] main processor 48, running a very accurate, more power-consuming algorithm, is periodically called into operation to process the pre-processed data stored in the buffer/memory 46).
Dwarika does not disclose the data communication module sends the screened signal to an external device in real-time immediately after the screened signal is received from the pre-processor, or the main processor is located in said external device.
Kabrams discloses a wearable comprising a pre-processor performing a basic screening algorithm to detect an event of interest as a screened signal (¶ [0212] wearable device running a lightweight, less computationally intensive algorithm(s)); a data communication module for sending the screened signal to an external device in real-time immediately after the screened signal is received from the pre-processor (¶ [0212] when output of the algorithm(s) exceeds a specified threshold, the wearable device transmits the relevant data to a mobile phone, server (e.g., cloud server), etc.; ¶ [0157] where real-time sensor readings are processed using the algorithm(s)); and a main processor, located in the external device, having a main processor algorithm operable to periodically process the screened signals to verify that the screened signals include the event of interest, the main processor algorithm operating at greater accuracy for detecting the event of interest than the basic screening algorithm (¶ [0212] mobile phone or server processing the relevant data (screened signal) via a heavyweight, more computationally intensive algorithm(s) with lower false-positive and false-negative rates), wherein the pre-processor operates at a first power consumption level and the main processor operates at a second power level, greater than the first power level (¶ [0212] where the lightweight algorithm on the wearable device may act as a filter that drastically reduces the amount of power consumed, e.g., by reducing computation power and/or the amount of data transmitted).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Dwarika with the data communication module sending the screened signal to the external device in real-time immediately after the screened signal is received from the pre-processor, and the main processor being located in said external device as disclosed/suggested by Kabrams in order to reduce the amount of power consumed by the wearable device, while maintaining the predictive performance of the system (Kabrams, ¶¶ [0209]-[0212]).
Regarding claim 18, Dwarika as modified discloses/suggests the system further comprises a main memory for storing a processed signal after being processed by the main processor (¶ [0019]; main memory 58; etc.).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dwarika in view of Kabrams as applied to claim(s) 16 above, and further in view of US 2015/0257654 A1 (previously cited, Bennett-Guerrero).
Regarding claim 19, Dwarika as modified discloses/suggests the limitations of claim 16, and further discloses the system can be utilized to detect a plurality of events, such as wheezing (¶ [0061]), rales (¶ [0061]), coughing (¶ [0101]), heart rate (¶ [0093]), other cardiology, fitness, and health/biometric events (¶ [0103]), another application that recognizes a particular sound (¶ [0103]), etc., thereby disclosing/suggesting different basic screening and main processor algorithms may be employed by the system for each of the disclosed events.
Bennett-Guerrero discloses a monitoring system configured to employ at least one of a plurality of algorithms based on a user-selected event of interest (Fig. 19, monitor function region 309; ¶ [0611]; claim 25; etc.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Dwarika with each of the basic screening and main processor algorithms being an algorithm for detecting a user-selected event of interest that is selected from a plurality of user-selectable algorithms as disclosed/suggested by Bennett-Guerrero in order to allow a user to configure the system to generate and monitor information, e.g., a specific event(s), that is of interest and/or medically-significant to the wearer.
Claim(s) 20 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dwarika in view of Kabrams and Bennett-Guerrero.
Regarding claim 20, Dwarika discloses/suggests a method for measuring physiological parameters of a user, the method comprising:
disposing a wearable that performs continuous monitoring measured in whole days on a user (¶ [0016] disposing a wearable (e.g., wearable 12, throughout document) on a user; ¶ [0080] wearable 12 monitors audio and/or motion events in real time; ¶ [0021] said monitoring is measured in whole days);
measuring at least one physiological parameter of the user with at least one sensor of the wearable (¶ [0016], ¶¶ [0064]-[0065] sensors 42 including a plurality of sensors for detecting various physiological parameters of a wearer, such as an accelerometer, a gyroscope; etc.);
measuring an acoustic signal from the user with an acoustic sensor of the wearable (¶ [0016], ¶¶ [0064]-[0065] sensors 42 including one or more acoustic sensors 50, such as a microphone);
analyzing data received from the at least one sensor and the acoustic sensor with a pre-processor integrated in the wearable (¶ [0016], ¶ [0018], ¶ [0064]), wherein analyzing said data comprises performing a basic screening algorithm with the pre-processor to detect events of interest from the data received from the at least one sensor and the acoustic sensor, the basic screening algorithm eliminating, in the data received, portions of the signal received from the at least one sensor and the acoustic sensor that fail to meet predetermined criteria for detecting the event of interest, thereby generating a screened signal (¶ [0070] pre-processor 44 only runs a basic screening algorithm; ¶ [0079] pre-processor(s) 44 runs a qualification or filtering algorithm that eliminate sensor information that has less than 50% to 80% resemblance to sensor data that is of use and requires significantly less power than a more accurate detection algorithm(s) to run and store selected data in buffer/memory 46);
sending data to an external device with a data communication module of the wearable (¶ [0071] wearable 12 can transmits data via a data transmission module 56 wirelessly according to a schedule; ¶ [0088]; etc.); and
processing, with a main processor, the screened signal to verify that the screened signals include the event of interest, the main processor algorithm operating at greater accuracy for detecting the event of interest than the basic screening algorithm (¶ [0016]; ¶ [0019]; ¶ [0079] main processor 48, running a very accurate, more power-consuming algorithm, is periodically called into operation to process the pre-processed data stored in the buffer/memory 46; ¶ [0088]; etc.),
wherein the pre-processor operates at a first power consumption level and the main processor operates at a second power level, greater than the first power level (e.g., ¶ [0079]).
Dwarika does not disclose the method comprises sending the screened signal to an external device with the data communication module, wherein the data communication module sends the screened signal to an external device in real-time immediately after the screened signal is received from the pre-processor, or the main processor operates the main processor algorithm on said external device.
Kabrams discloses a wearable comprising a pre-processor performing a basic screening algorithm to detect an event of interest as a screened signal (¶ [0212] wearable device running a lightweight, less computationally intensive algorithm(s)); a data communication module for sending the screened signal to an external device in real-time immediately after the screened signal is received from the pre-processor (¶ [0212] when output of the algorithm(s) exceeds a specified threshold, the wearable device transmits the relevant data to a mobile phone, server (e.g., cloud server), etc.; ¶ [0157] where real-time sensor readings are processed using the algorithm(s)); and a main processor, located in the external device, having a main processor algorithm operable to periodically process the screened signals to verify that the screened signals include the event of interest, the main processor algorithm operating at greater accuracy for detecting the event of interest than the basic screening algorithm (¶ [0212] mobile phone or server processing the relevant data (i.e., screened signal) via a heavyweight, more computationally intensive algorithm(s) with lower false-positive and false-negative rates), wherein the pre-processor operates at a first power consumption level and the main processor operates at a second power level, greater than the first power level (¶ [0212] where the lightweight algorithm on the wearable device may act as a filter that drastically reduces the amount of power consumed, e.g., by reducing computation power and/or the amount of data transmitted).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Dwarika with the data communication module sending the screened signal to the external device in real-time immediately after the screened signal is received from the pre-processor, and the main processor being located in said external device as disclosed/suggested by Kabrams in order to reduce the amount of power consumed by the wearable device, while maintaining the predictive performance of the system (Kabrams, ¶¶ [0209]-[0212]).
Dwarika as modified does not teach the method comprises selecting, by the user, a basic screening algorithm of the pre-processor and a main processor algorithm from one of a plurality of user selectable algorithms, the one of the plurality of user selected algorithms detecting a user-selected event of interest, depending on a selected one of the plurality of selected algorithms, and/or the basic screening algorithm of the pre-processor and main processor algorithm is provided by one of a plurality of user selected algorithms, the one of the plurality of user selected algorithms detecting a user-selected event of interest, depending on a selected one of the plurality of selected algorithms. However, Dwarika discloses the system can be utilized to detect a variety of events, such as wheezing (¶ [0061]), rales (¶ [0061]), coughing (¶ [0101]), heart rate (¶ [0093]), other cardiology, fitness, and health/biometric events (¶ [0103]), another application that recognizes a particular sound (¶ [0103]), etc., thereby disclosing and/or suggesting different basic screening and main processor algorithms may be employed by the system for each of the disclosed events.
Bennett-Guerrero discloses a method comprising selecting, by a user, at least one of a plurality of available monitoring algorithms, each algorithm being configured for monitoring a different event of interest (Fig. 19, monitor function region 309; ¶ [0611]; claim 25; etc.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Dwarika with the user selecting a basic screening algorithm of the pre-processor and a main processor algorithm from one of a plurality of user selectable algorithms, the one of the plurality of user selected algorithms detecting a user-selected event of interest, depending on a selected one of the plurality of selected algorithms, and/or the basic screening algorithm of the pre-processor and main processor algorithm being provided by one of a plurality of user selected algorithms, the one of the plurality of user selected algorithms detecting a user-selected event of interest, depending on a selected one of the plurality of selected algorithms, as disclosed/suggested by Bennett-Guerrero in order to enable a user to configure the system to generate and monitor information, e.g., a specific event(s), that is of interest and/or medically-significant to the wearer.
Regarding claim 22, Dwarika as modified discloses/suggests the event of interest is a cough of the user and the method further comprises analyzing the acoustic signal and a motion sensor of the wearable (¶ [0089]; ¶ [0101]; claim 23; etc.).
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dwarika in view of US 2021/0063434 A1 (previously cited, Laput).
Regarding claim 23, Dwarika discloses and/or suggests a physiological monitoring system comprising:
a wearable (wearable 12, throughout document) that performs continuous monitoring for an event of interest measured in whole days (¶ [0080] wearable 12 monitors audio and/or motion events in real time; ¶ [0021] monitoring is measured in whole days), the wearable comprising:
at least one sensor for measuring a physiological parameter of a user (¶¶ [0014]-[0015]; sensors 42, ¶ [0065] sensors 42 may include one or more of an accelerometer, a gyroscope, temperature sensor, vibration sensor, optical sensor; sensors for measuring the electrical potential of the body; etc.);
an acoustic sensor for receiving an acoustic signal (¶¶ [0014]-[0015]; sensors 42, ¶ [0065] where sensors 42 may include a microphone; etc.);
a pre-processor operable to receive data from the at least one sensor and the acoustic sensor (¶ [0015]; ¶ [0018]; pre-processor(s) 44; etc.), the pre-processor performing a basic screening algorithm on original signals from the at least one sensor and the acoustic sensor to detect the event of interest as a screened signal, the basic screening algorithm eliminating a portion of the original signals from the at least one sensor and the acoustic sensor that fail to meet predetermined criteria for detecting the event of interest, the screened signal being the original signals with the portion removed therefrom (e.g., ¶ [0070] pre-processor(s) 44 only runs a basic screening algorithm; ¶ [0079] pre-processor(s) 44 run qualification or filtering algorithms that eliminate sensor information that has less than 50% to 80% resemblance to sensor data that is of use); and
a buffer/memory for storing the screened signal after being processed by the pre-processor (¶ [0018]; buffer/memory 46; ¶ [0079]; etc.); and
a main processor having a main processor algorithm operable to periodically process, based on a memory count or a period of time, the screened signals to verify that the screened signals include the event of interest, the main processor algorithm operating at greater accuracy for detecting the event of interest than the basic screening algorithm (¶ [0015]; ¶ [0019]; main processor 48; ¶ [0079] main processor 48, running a very accurate, more power-consuming algorithm, is periodically called into operation to process the pre-processed data stored in the buffer/memory 46; ¶ [0070] where the main processor may come alive to process the signals after a period of time and/or memory count; etc.).
Dwarika does not disclose the period of time or the memory count is sufficient to permit the main processor to be, on average, in a sleep mode for a period of time greater than then amount of time it is operating. However, Dwarika does disclose the main processor "should run for the least amount of time possible" (¶ [0070]).
Laput discloses/suggests latency of processing (e.g., the period of time between processing of sensor data by a main, or host, processor) provides a quality that can be optimized. Specifically, Laput discloses as latency of processing increases, the amount of power consumed by the device decreases, and vice versa (¶ [0059]). Accordingly, since Laput discloses a tradeoff between processing latency and amount of power consumed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Dwarika with the period of time or the memory count being sufficient to permit the main processor to be, on average, in a sleep mode for a period of time greater than then amount of time it is operating (i.e., utilizing a period of time and/or memory count that results in the main processor being in a sleep mode more often than an operating mode) because it has been held that the discovery of optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (i.e., identifying a period and/or memory count that provides an optimum balance between processing latency and amount of power consumed) is not inventive. See MPEP 2144.05(II).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to claim 16, Applicant contends, "Claim 16 further recites how the wearable can operate over periods of whole days. Thus, the wearable achieves its goal of low power consumption (as shown by its ability to be used over periods measured in whole days), while being able to send data, in real-time, as it is received from the pre-processor, to the external main processor. Such a benefit, along with the claimed structure, is neither taught nor fairly suggested by the art of record" (pg. 11). Applicant further submits "there is no reasonable expectation of success that Dwarika would be able to operate in periods of whole days, as claimed, as Dwarika does not describe a device using an external processor, as instantly claimed" (pg. 11).
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Dwarika discloses operating the main processor algorithm "uses the most power" (¶ [0070]). Kabrams expressly discloses a wearable device configured for real-time wireless transmission of screened data identified as being indicative of an event by a pre-processor to an external main processor is a means/method for reducing power consumption of the wearable device, enabling a wearable device to function "with long durations in between battery charges" (¶¶ [0209]-[0212]), thereby suggesting the real-time transmission of events as they are identified by the pre-processor is a sufficient means and/or method for enabling a wearable device to operate for a sufficiently long time, or over a period of whole days, particularly as the component utilizing "the most power" (Dwarika, ¶ [0070]) is being powered by and/or operated on the external device. Further, there is no limit in the claim with respect to the battery size or capacity of the wearable. Dwarika discloses the wearable should continuously monitor for an event of interest over a period of whole days. How this capability is achieved is not limited by the claim to any one feature of the wearable or system. One of ordinary skill in the art would readily appreciate battery size/capacity affects the amount of time the wearable device can operate, as well as how often highly power-consumptive components of said device operate.
Applicant further contends, "[In] employing a pre-processor as instantly claimed, the system removes as much of the data as possible will be discarded between the spans of usable data (that detect an event of interest). So less of the unwanted data is therefore transferred as compared with the method of implementation by those skilled in the art. Conventional methods to compress the signal, and in the process lose usable data, are not employed in the present invention, as the claims recite how the preprocessor removes data and then the original data stream (with the data removed - the "screened data") is sent to the main processor. Hence the external system receives the full sensor data set around each datapoint that will be used. The art of record neither teaches nor fairly suggests such a system" (Remarks, pg. 12).
The examiner respectfully disagrees. There is no indication in Kabrams that data sent to the external device for processing by the main processor is compressed. Rather, Kabrams discloses:
[0212] In some embodiments, less computationally intensive algorithms may be run on the device, e.g., a wearable device, and when the output of the algorithm(s) exceeds a specified threshold, the device may, e.g., turn on the radio, and transmit the relevant data to a mobile phone or a server, a cloud server, for further processing via more computationally intensive algorithms. Taking the example of seizure detection, a more computationally intensive or heavyweight algorithm may have a low false-positive rate and a low false-negative rate. To obtain a less computationally intensive or lightweight algorithm, one rate or the other may be sacrificed. The inventors have appreciated that the key is to allow for more false positives, i.e., a detection algorithm with high sensitivity (e.g., never misses a true seizure) and low specificity (e.g., many false-positives, often labels data as a seizure when there is no seizure). Whenever the device's lightweight algorithm labels data as a seizure, the device may transmit the data to the mobile device or the cloud server to execute the heavyweight algorithm. The device may receive the results of the heavyweight algorithm, and display these results to the user. In this way, the lightweight algorithm on the device may act as a filter that drastically reduces the amount of power consumed, e.g., by reducing computation power and/or the amount of data transmitted, while maintaining the predictive performance of the whole system including the device, the mobile phone, and/or the cloud server.
Kabrams discloses/suggests a system that sends data determined by a pre-processor to be indicative of an event of interest, and only sends this data, so that less unwanted data is transferred, i.e., "the lightweight algorithm on the device may act as a filter that drastically reduces the amount of power consumed, e.g., by reducing computation power and/or the amount of data transmitted." Accordingly, Kabrams discloses/suggests the low-power pre-processor and high-power main processor arrangement as claimed and further discloses said arrangement enables drastically reducing the amount of power consumed by a wearable device.
With respect to claims 19 and 20, Applicant contends, "In the Bennett-Guerrero reference, there is a screen to select a monitoring function (see paragraph [0611]), but the reference states, 'Thus, selection of any or all of these types of monitoring enables access to data relating to the corresponding type of monitoring.' Thus, the selection of a monitoring function only provides access to the data related to this type - there does not appear to be any teaching that any algorithms are selectively provided for pre-processing/screening or for main processing that may be different for each type of monitoring" (Remarks, pgs. 13-14).
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Bennett-Guerrero discloses different types of monitoring can be selected by a user, wherein selection of a monitoring type enables the monitoring thereof, and therefore data related to said monitoring (¶ [0612]). Bennett-Guerrero discloses each type monitoring from which the user may select corresponds to different algorithms or processing algorithms applied to acquired sensor data to enable said monitoring (see ¶¶ [0035]-[0109]). Accordingly, as noted in the rejection(s) of record above, Dwarika discloses the system can be utilized to monitoring a variety of types of events, such as wheezing, rales, coughing, heart rate, other cardiology, fitness, and health/biometric events, another application that recognizes a particular sound, etc., thereby disclosing/suggesting different basic screening and main processor algorithms may be employed by the system for each of the disclosed events. Bennett-Guerroro discloses, for a system capable of different types of monitoring, said options may be presented to a user for selection of which type(s) of monitoring he/she desires, such that the corresponding algorithm(s) enabling said monitoring are selected by a user. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Dwarika with each of the basic screening and main processor algorithms being an algorithm for detecting a user-selected event of interest that is selected from a plurality of user-selectable algorithms as disclosed and/or suggested by Bennett-Guerrero in order to allow a user to configure the system or method to generate and monitor information, e.g., a specific event(s), that is of interest and/or medically-significant to the wearer, as noted in the rejection(s) of record above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 6 and 10-15 are allowed.
Parent application 15/147,293 provides adequate support and enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for the subject matter of claims 1-3, 6 and 10-15. Accordingly, claims 1-3, 6 and 10-15 are entitled to the benefit of the prior 15/147,293 application, and Pre-Grant Publication of said application, US 2017/0071506 A1 (i.e., the Dwarika reference), is not available as prior art with respect to claims 1-3, 6 and 10-15.
For at least the reasons noted in prior application 15/147,293 (now USPN 11,272,864), the prior art of record fails to disclose/suggest each and every limitation of independent claim 1 (see, e.g., 15/147,293 NOA mailed 02 November 2021, pgs. 6-7).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Meredith Weare whose telephone number is 571-270-3957. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9 AM - 5 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. Applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice to schedule an interview.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, 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.
/Meredith Weare/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791