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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. The Applicant's submission filed on 7/13/2026 has been entered.
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.
No claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claims 23, 29, and 34 are objected to because of the following informalities:
in claim 23, line 24: “the” should be inserted before “time”;
in claim 23, line 31: “the” should be inserted before “time”;
in claim 29, line 7: the semicolon before the comma should be deleted;
in claim 29, line 25: “the” should be inserted before “time”;
in claim 29, line 31: “the” should be inserted before “time”; and
in claim 34, line 27: “the” should be inserted before “time”.
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 23-25, 27, 29, 31-32, 34, 36, and 38 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 23 recites “the activated state” in line 18, but it is not clear if this recitation is the same as, related to, or different from “an active state” in claim 23, line 7. If they are the same, “the activated state” in line 18 should be “the active state”. If they are different, their relationship should be made clear. Also, if they are different, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “the activated state” in claim 23. Note that “the activated state” is also recited in claim 23, line 26 and claim 24, lines 3-4. Clarification is required.
Claim 23 recites “a pressurization at one or more body regions” in line 19, “the defined pressurization-related condition” in line 27, and “a repositioning notification” in line 27, but it is not clear if any of these limitations are the same as, related to, or different from “respective information” in line 8. The respective information is recited to be displayed and so are the subsequent recitations “a pressurization at one or more body regions” in line 19, “the defined pressurization-related condition” in line 27, and “a repositioning notification” in line 27. However, the claim does not link “a pressurization at one or more body regions” in line 19, “the defined pressurization-related condition” in line 27, and “a repositioning notification” in line 27 to “respective information” in line 8 such that it is not clear if there are four displayed items or three displayed items. Clarification is required.
Claims 24-25 and 27 are rejected by virtue of their dependence from claim 23.
Claim 27 recites “an LED array or an LCD display” in line 2, but it is not clear if this recitation is the same as, related to, or different from “display elements” in claim 23, line 6. The elements “an LED array or an LCD display” in line 2 are forms of display element(s), but the claim does not link these concepts together. Clarification is required.
Claim 29 recites “a pressurization at one or more body regions” in lines 19-20 and “the defined pressurization-related condition” in lines 27-28, but it is not clear if any of these limitations are the same as, related to, or different from “respective information” in line 8. The respective information is recited to be displayed and so are the subsequent recitations “a pressurization at one or more body regions” in lines 19-20 and “the defined pressurization-related condition” in lines 27-28. However, the claim does not link “a pressurization at one or more body regions” in lines 19-20 and “the defined pressurization-related condition” in lines 27-28 to “respective information” in line 8 such that it is not clear if there are three displayed items or two displayed items. Clarification is required.
Claims 31-32 are rejected by virtue of their dependence from claim 29.
Claim 31 recites “an LED array or an LCD display” in line 2, but it is not clear if this recitation is the same as, related to, or different from “a plurality of display elements” in claim 29, line 6. The elements “an LED array or an LCD display” in line 2 are forms of display element(s), but the claim does not link these concepts together. Clarification is required.
Claim 34 recites “an activated state” in line 13, but it is not clear if this recitation is the same as, related to, or different from “an active state” in claim 34, line 5. If they are the same, “an activated state” in line 13 should be “the active state”. If they are different, their relationship should be made clear. Note that “the activated state” is also recited in claim 34, line 22 and claim 34, lines 29-30. Clarification is required.
Claim 34 recites “a pressurization at one or more body regions” in line 14, but it is not clear if this limitation is the same as, related to, or different from “respective information” in line 6. The respective information is recited to be displayed and so is the subsequent recitation “a pressurization at one or more body regions” in line 14. However, the claim does not link “a pressurization at one or more body regions” in line 14 to “respective information” in line 8 such that it is not clear if there are two displayed items or just one displayed item. Clarification is required.
Claims 36 and 38 are rejected by virtue of their dependence from claim 34.
Claim 36 recites “an LED display or an LCD display” in line 2, but it is not clear if this recitation is the same as, related to, or different from “a plurality of display elements” in claim 34, line 4. The elements “an LED display or an LCD display” in line 2 are forms of display element(s), but the claim does not link these concepts together. Clarification is required.
Claim 38 recites “a needed repositioning condition” in line 2, but it is not clear if this limitation is the same as, related to, or different from “respective information” in claim 34, line 6. The respective information is recited to be displayed and so is the subsequent recitation “the needed repositioning condition” in line 2. However, the claim does not link “the needed repositioning condition” in line 2 to “respective information” in claim 34, line 6 such that it is not clear if there are three displayed items (i.e., respective information, a pressurization at one or more body regions, and the needed repositioning condition) just two displayed items (i.e., a pressurization at one or more body regions and the needed repositioning condition). Clarification is required.
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.
Claims 23, 25, 27, 29, 31-32, 34, 36, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0263950 (Larson)(previously cited), in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0097983 (Haggman)(previously cited), and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 2005/0190062 (Sullivan 062), and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0052917 (Sullivan 917).
Larson teaches a user-wearable sensor device (paragraphs 0014, 0051-0055, 0057, 0059, 0069, 0181, 0189, and 0226-0227 and FIG. 3 of Larson; paragraph 0054 of Larson teaches that the sensors can be embedded in articles worn by the patient, such as shirts or underwear bracelets, belts, or collars) configured to be directly or indirectly secured to a user or to an article worn by the user, the user wearable sensor device comprising: a sensor device housing (paragraph 0054 of Larson teaches that the sensors can be embedded in articles worn by the patient, such as shirts or underwear bracelets, belts, or collars such that the shirt, underwear bracelet, belt, or collar is considered to be the sensor housing with the sensor housing schematically drawn in FIG. 3 of Larson); at least one accelerometer (the accelerometer of Larson; paragraphs 0014, 0051-0055, 0057, 0059, 0069, 0181, 0189, and 0226-0227 and FIG. 3 of Larson); a display unit including at least one visual indicator (the display of Larson; paragraphs 0047-0048, 0050-0053, 0139, and 279 of Larson); and a battery (the battery of Larson; paragraphs 0052-0054, 0114, 0164, 0171 of Larson).
Paragraph 0052 of Larson teaches that the viewing terminal can be integrated into the patient sensor. Also, Larson teaches that the host system may provide directions and display messages (paragraph 0047 of Larson) and that the host functionality can largely reside in the sensor itself (paragraph 0052 of Larson). Thus, Larson teaches or suggests that the display unit may be integrated into or reside in the sensor device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the display unit integrated into and/or reside in the sensor device since (1) Larson teaches that viewing terminals can be integrated into the patient senor and/or the hosting functionality, including the directions and display messages, may reside on the sensor; (2) it permits the review of the display at the patient itself without a separate monitor; (3) it provides a more compact system; and/or (4) it is a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Larson teaches of various modes of activating the sensing device including by switch (paragraphs 0053, 0115, 0117, and 0135 of Larson). Haggman discloses a method of interaction with an input component on the device in the form of a tapping interface along a plurality of sides of the device using one or more accelerometers as the motion sensors (FIGS. 3-4C and paragraphs 0020-0032 of Haggman). Haggman further teaches that the accelerometers already existing in the device may be used in the tapping interface (paragraph 0020 of Haggman).1 It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the tapping control of Haggman in the system and method of Larson since it provides a simple interface for input and/or it is a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. Further, it would have been obvious to use the already existing accelerometers of Larson as the accelerometers in the tapping control since it reduces the number of accelerometers.
Sullivan 062 teaches a display that is inactive, but becomes active (comes on) when an alarm condition is enabled or on command by the user (paragraph 0012 of Sullivan 062). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to place the display into active mode when there is an alarm condition of Larson or a user command, as suggested by Sullivan 062, between periods of display inactivity when there is no alarm condition or user command since it would conserve battery life while giving the user an opportunity to monitor the device when desired. Sullivan 917 teaches that an alert is automatically deactivated when an alarm condition is resolved (claim 17 of Sullivan 917). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to deactivate the display of Sullivan 062 enabled by an alarm condition of Larson when the alarm condition of Larson is resolved so as to partially automate the process deactivation of the alarm.
With respect to claim 23, the combination teaches or suggests a user-wearable sensor device (paragraphs 0014, 0051-0055, 0057, 0059, 0069, 0181, 0189, and 0226-0227 and FIG. 3 of Larson; paragraph 0054 of Larson teaches that the sensors can be embedded in articles worn by the patient, such as shirts or underwear bracelets, belts, or collars) configured to be directly or indirectly secured to a user or to an article worn by the user, the user-wearable sensor device comprising:
a sensor device housing (paragraph 0054 of Larson teaches that the sensors can be embedded in articles worn by the patient, such as shirts or underwear bracelets, belts, or collars such that the shirt, underwear bracelet, belt, or collar is considered to be the sensor housing with the sensor housing schematically drawn in FIG. 3 of Larson);
at least one accelerometer (the accelerometer of Larson; paragraphs 0014, 0051-0055, 0057, 0059, 0069, 0181, 0189, and 0226-0227 and FIG. 3 of Larson);
a display unit including display elements provided in or on the sensor device housing (the display unit of Larson integrated into and/or reside in the sensor device, which necessarily means that the display unit is provided in or on the sensor device housing), the display unit switchable between (a) an active state in which the display elements are selectively illuminated to visually indicate respective information (the state of enabling the display by the user or alarm condition suggested by Sullivan 062) and (b) an inactive state in which the display unit is turned off such that the display elements are non-illuminated (the state of inactivity of the display suggested by Sullivan 062);
a control system comprising at least one processor (the processor of Larson) configured to:
perform a series of acceleration measurements at a defined measurement frequency using the at least one accelerometer to generate a series of acceleration data (generating the acceleration data from the accelerometer of Larson);
identify a defined user interaction with the user-wearable sensor device based on first acceleration data in the series of acceleration data (the tapping activation suggested by Haggman using the acceleration data from the accelerometer of Larson);
in response to identifying the defined user interaction with the user-wearable sensor device, activate the display unit from the inactive state to the activated state to visually indicate a pressurization at one or more body regions (using the tapping activation suggested by Haggman so as to enable the display by the user as suggested by Sullivan 062);
subsequently return the display unit to the inactive state (instigating the inactivity of the display suggested by Sullivan 062);
automatically monitor an orientation of the user over time based on second acceleration data in the series of acceleration data (the monitoring in FIG. 2B of Larson);
automatically determine a defined pressurization-related condition based on the monitored orientation of the user over time (the step 245 in FIG. 2B of Larson);
in response to the automatic determination of the defined pressurization-related condition, automatically switch the display unit from the inactive state to the activated state to visually indicate the defined pressurization-related condition or a repositioning notification (the step 260 in FIG. 2B of Larson with the display turned on from the inactive state to an active state as suggested by Sullivan 062; paragraphs 0047-0048, 0050-0053, 0115, 0117, 0135, 0139, and 0279 of Larson);
automatically identify a repositioning of the user that remedies the defined pressurization-related condition based on the monitored orientation of the user over time (detecting the removal of the alarm condition as suggested by Sullivan 917); and
automatically switch the display unit to the inactive state in response to the automatic identification of the repositioning of the user that remedies the defined pressurization-related condition, while continuing to perform the series of acceleration measurements and the automatic monitoring of the orientation of the user; such that the display unit is automatically turned off in response to the defined pressurization-related condition being remedied to thereby conserve the battery (detecting the removal of the alarm condition so as to instigate the inactive state of the display as suggested by Sullivan 917).
With respect to claim 25, the combination teaches or suggests that the defined pressurization-related condition comprises a needed repositioning condition (the step 245 in FIG. 2B of Larson).
With respect to claim 27, the combination teaches or suggests that the display unit comprises an LED array or an LCD display (paragraphs 0047-0048, 0050-0053, 0139, and 0279 of Larson; paragraph 0279 of Larson teaches that an LCD display is a suitable form of display such that it would have been obvious to have the display unit of Larson integrated into and/or reside in the sensor device be an LCD display since a type of display is required and Larson teaches one such display and/or it is a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results).
With respect to claim 29, the combination teaches or suggests a user-wearable sensor device (paragraphs 0014, 0051-0055, 0057, 0059, 0069, 0181, 0189, and 0226-0227 and FIG. 3 of Larson; paragraph 0054 of Larson teaches that the sensors can be embedded in articles worn by the patient, such as shirts or underwear bracelets, belts, or collars) configured to be directly or indirectly secured to a user or to an article worn by the user, the user-wearable sensor device comprising:
a sensor device housing (paragraph 0054 of Larson teaches that the sensors can be embedded in articles worn by the patient, such as shirts or underwear bracelets, belts, or collars such that the shirt, underwear bracelet, belt, or collar is considered to be the sensor housing with the sensor housing schematically drawn in FIG. 3 of Larson);
at least one accelerometer (the accelerometer of Larson; paragraphs 0014, 0051-0055, 0057, 0059, 0069, 0181, 0189, and 0226-0227 and FIG. 3 of Larson);
a display unit including a plurality of display elements provided in or on the sensor device housing (the display unit of Larson integrated into and/or reside in the sensor device, which necessarily means that the display unit is provided in or on the sensor device housing; paragraph 0279 of Larson teaches that an LCD display is a suitable form of display such that it would have been obvious to have the display unit of Larson integrated into and/or reside in the sensor device be an LCD display since a type of display is required and Larson teaches one such display and/or it is a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results; the LCD display of Larson has a plurality of display elements with its liquid crystals), the display unit switchable between (a) an active state in which the plurality of display elements are selectively illuminated to visually indicate respective information (the state of enabling the display by the user or alarm condition suggested by Sullivan 062) and (b) an inactive state in which the display unit is turned off such that the plurality of display elements are non-illuminated (the state of inactivity of the display suggested by Sullivan 062);
a battery (the battery of Larson; paragraphs 0052-0054, 0114, 0164, and 0171 of Larson);
a control system comprising at least one processor (the processor of Larson) configured to:
perform a series of acceleration measurements at a defined measurement frequency using the at least one accelerometer to generate a series of acceleration data (generating the acceleration data from the accelerometer of Larson);
identify a defined user interaction with the user-wearable sensor device based on first acceleration data in the series of acceleration data (the tapping activation suggested by Haggman using the acceleration data from the accelerometer of Larson);
in response to identifying the defined user interaction with the user-wearable sensor device, automatically awaken the display unit from an inactive state to visually indicate a pressurization at one or more body regions (using the tapping activation suggested by Haggman so as to enable the display by the user as suggested by Sullivan 062);
subsequently return the display unit to the inactive state (instigating the inactivity of the display suggested by Sullivan 062);
automatically monitor an orientation of the user over time based on second acceleration data in the series of acceleration data (the monitoring in FIG. 2B of Larson);
automatically determine a defined pressurization-related condition based on the monitored orientation of the user over time (the step 245 in FIG. 2B of Larson);
in response to the automatic determination of the defined pressurization-related condition, awaken the display unit from the inactive state to visually indicate the defined pressurization-related condition (the step 260 in FIG. 2B of Larson with the display turned on from the inactive state to an active state as suggested by Sullivan 062; paragraphs 0047-0048, 0050-0053, 0115, 0117, 0135, 0139, and 0279 of Larson); and
automatically identify a repositioning of the user that remedies the defined pressurization-related condition based on the monitored orientation of the user over time (detecting the removal of the alarm condition as suggested by Sullivan 917); and
in response to the automatic identification of the repositioning of the user that remedies the defined pressurization-related condition, automatically switch the display unit to the inactive state, while continuing to perform the series of acceleration measurements and the automatic monitoring of the orientation of the user; such that the display unit is automatically turned off in response to the defined pressurization-related condition being remedied to thereby conserve the battery (detecting the removal of the alarm condition so as to instigate the inactive state of the display as suggested by Sullivan 917).
With respect to claim 31, the combination teaches or suggests that the display unit comprises an LED array or an LCD display (the LCD display of Larson).
With respect to claim 32, the combination teaches or suggests that the defined pressurization-related condition comprises a needed repositioning condition (the step 245 in FIG. 2B of Larson); and the at least one processor configured to automatically awaken the display unit from the inactive state to visually indicate the defined pressurization-related condition comprises the at least one processor configured to selectively control the plurality of display elements to visually indicate the needed repositioning condition (the step 260 in FIG. 2B of Larson with the display turned on from the inactive state to an active state as suggested by Sullivan 062; paragraphs 0053, 0115, 0117, and 0135 of Larson; paragraphs 0047-0048, 0050-0053, 0139, and 0279 of Larson).
With respect to claim 34, the combination teaches or suggests a method of operating a user-wearable sensor device (paragraphs 0014, 0051-0055, 0057, 0059, 0069, 0181, 0189, and 0226-0227 and FIG. 3 of Larson; paragraph 0054 of Larson teaches that the sensors can be embedded in articles worn by the patient, such as shirts or underwear bracelets, belts, or collars) configured to be directly or indirectly secured to a user or to an article worn by the user, the user-wearable sensor device including at least one accelerometer (the accelerometer of Larson; paragraphs 0014, 0051-0055, 0057, 0059, 0069, 0181, 0189, and 0226-0227 and FIG. 3 of Larson), a battery (the battery of Larson; paragraphs 0052-0054, 0114, 0164, 0171 of Larson), and a display unit including a plurality of display elements onboard the user-wearable sensor device (the display unit of Larson integrated into and/or reside in the sensor device, which necessarily means that the display unit is onboard the sensor device; paragraph 0279 of Larson teaches that an LCD display is a suitable form of display such that it would have been obvious to have the display unit of Larson integrated into and/or reside in the sensor device be an LCD display since a type of display is required and Larson teaches one such display and/or it is a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results; the LCD display of Larson has a plurality of display elements with its liquid crystals) and switchable between (a) an active state in which the plurality of display elements are selectively illuminated to visually indicate respective information (the state of enabling the display by the user or alarm condition suggested by Sullivan 062) and (b) an inactive state in which the display unit is turned off with the plurality of display elements non-illuminated (the state of inactivity of the display suggested by Sullivan 062), the method comprising:
performing a series of acceleration measurements at a defined measurement frequency using the at least one accelerometer to generate a series of acceleration data (generating the acceleration data from the accelerometer of Larson);
identifying a defined user interaction with the user-wearable sensor device based on first acceleration data in the series of acceleration data (the tapping activation suggested by Haggman using the acceleration data from the accelerometer of Larson);
in response to identifying the defined user interaction with the user-wearable sensor device, automatically awakening the display unit from an inactive state to an activated state, wherein the display elements are selectively controlled to indicate a pressurization at one or more body regions (using the tapping activation suggested by Haggman so as to enable the display by the user as suggested by Sullivan 062);
subsequently return the display unit to the inactive state (instigating the inactivity of the display suggested by Sullivan 062);
while the display unit is in an inactive state, automatically monitoring an orientation of the user based on second acceleration data in the series of acceleration data (the monitoring in FIG. 2B of Larson); and
automatically determining a defined pressurization-related condition based on the monitored orientation of the user over time (the step 245 in FIG. 2B of Larson);
in response to the automatic determination of the defined pressurization-related condition, automatically switching the display unit from the inactive state to the activated state, wherein the display elements are selectively controlled as a function of the defined pressurization-related condition (the step 260 in FIG. 2B of Larson with the display turned on from the inactive state to an active state as suggested by Sullivan 062; paragraphs 0047-0048, 0050-0053, 0115, 0117, 0135, 0139, and 0279 of Larson); and
automatically identifying a repositioning of the user that remedies the defined pressurization-related condition based on the monitored orientation of the user over time (detecting the removal of the alarm condition as suggested by Sullivan 917); and
in response to the automatic identification of the repositioning of the user that remedies the defined pressurization-related condition, automatically switching the display unit from the activated state to the inactive state, while continuing to perform the series of acceleration measurements and the automatic monitoring of the orientation of the user; such that the display unit is automatically turned off in response to the defined pressurization-related condition being remedied to thereby conserve the battery (detecting the removal of the alarm condition so as to instigate the inactive state of the display as suggested by Sullivan 917).
With respect to claim 36, the combination teaches or suggests that the display unit comprises an LED display or an LCD display (the LCD display of Larson).
With respect to claim 38, the combination teaches or suggests that: the defined pressurization-related condition comprises a needed repositioning condition (the step 245 in FIG. 2B of Larson); and the plurality of display elements are selectively controlled to visually indicate the needed repositioning condition (the step 260 in FIG. 2B of Larson; paragraphs 0047-0048, 0050-0053, 0115, 0117, 0135, 0139, and 0279 of Larson).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0263950 (Larson)(previously cited), in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0097983 (Haggman)(previously cited), and in view of U.S. Patent No. 2005/0190062 (Sullivan 062), and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0052917 (Sullivan 917), and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0194172 (Shyamalan).
Sullivan 062 teaches a display that is inactive, but becomes active (comes on) when an alarm condition is enabled or on command by the user (paragraph 0012 of Sullivan 062). The mechanism to which the inactive state is initiated after a user command is not elaborated upon. Shyamalan teaches a mechanism in which a display timer automatically deactivates (e.g., by shutting off) a display screen after a predetermined period of time has elapsed in which no activity or user input is detected while also using a camera to delay the shutting down of the screen if there is a user looking at the screen (FIG. 3 and paragraphs 0013-0014 and 0047-0051 of Shyamalan). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the shutting-off-the-display procedure of Shyamalan for putting the display in an inactive state after user command since periods of display inactivity are disclosed and Shyamalan discloses a suitable mechanism for instigating such display inactivity.
With respect to claim 24, the combination teaches or suggests that the at least one processor configured to subsequently return the display unit to the inactive state comprises the at least one processor configured to automatically switch the display unit from the activated state to the inactive state upon reaching a defined time-out period (instigating the inactive state of Sullivan 062 using the shutting-off-the-display procedure of Shyamalan).
Response to Arguments
The Applicant’s arguments filed 6/22/2026 have been fully considered.
Claim objections
There are new grounds of claim objections.
35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph
There are new grounds of claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph.
Prior art rejections
The Applicant’s arguments with respect to the prior art rejections of the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground 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. That is, there are new grounds of rejections.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW KREMER whose telephone number is (571)270-3394. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am to 6 pm; every other Friday off.
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, JACQUELINE CHENG can be reached at (571) 272-5596. 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.
/MATTHEW KREMER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
1 Paragraph 0120 of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0316677 (previously cited) also teaches that an accelerometer in a device can have multiple functions including changing an LCD display mode and detecting movement.
Additionally, paragraph 0061 of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0334079 (previously cited) teaches that an accelerometer may have dual functions of sensing movement of an object and activate the electronic display device of the object.
Prosecution Insights