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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 February 2, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 5, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the 35 USC 112b Rejection, the amendments on Claim 10 have overcome the rejection.
Regarding the 35 USC 103 Rejection, the applicant argues Gupta in view of Kesinger does not teach or suggest the following elements recited in independent claims 1, 9, and 17: at least one reference biotransducers, at least one error correction signal, and error correction factor.
At least one reference biotransducer | Applicant’s arguments, see Page 9, filed 01/05/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-6, 8-10, 15-18, and 20 under Gupta in view of Kesinger have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Gupta.
The applicant argues Gupta does not teach the at least one reference biotransducer because the cited reference, paragraph 0074, teaches a working electrode. Additionally, the applicant argues the at least one reference biotransducer is “non-ion selective and rather measures a potential to determine baseline measurements” (Page 9 of 11).
The claims state “at least one reference biotransducer to provide a plurality of baseline signals of the target environment, the at least one reference biotransducer unaffected by a concentration of the analyte in the target environment.” Furthermore, the specification defines the collection of the baseline signal from the at least one reference biotransducer as “the baseline signal provided by the reference biotransducer 110 is unaffected by the presence of the analyte in the target environment 10. Instead, the baseline signal may be representative of noise and other conditions of the target environment 10 that may impact signals provided by any of the plurality of biotransducers 106” (Specification, Page 9).
As clarified by the specification, the baseline signal collected by the at least one biotransducer measures the following raw data: noise, analyte measurements, and other conditions of the target environment.
The examiner agrees with the applicant, but Gupta does teach this limitation. Gupta teaches this limitation, in paragraphs 0114 of Gupta, it teaches the internal sensor, element 2032, to measure and collect signals from the target environment. Those signals include noise, analyte measurements, and other conditions of the target environment. Therefore, the applicant’s arguments are persuasive, but the new rejection does not show novelty of the specific claim limitation.
At least one error correction signal | The applicant argues that Gupta does not teach at least one error correction signal because “Gupta teaches a method of aligning multiple sensor signals which may have differing amounts of delay or lag to ensure the signals correlate correctly to one another” and “it is not the same as the error correction signal recited in independent claim 1” (Page 10 of 11).
The claims state “at least one working as reference biotransducer to provide at least one error correction signal of the target environment.”
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant because the teachings of Gupta does teach this limitation. The independent claims nor the specification does not provide a clear definition for the error correction signal, rather it only states that “at least one working as reference biotransducers to provide at least one error correction signal of the target environment.”
In Paragraph 0097 of Gupta, it teaches the signals collected by the multiple background species electrodes are used to correct for noise, lag, and delay that may affect reference biotransducers, the analyte-modulated electrode. Therefore, the applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
Error Correction Factor | Applicant’s arguments, see Page 10, filed 01/05/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-6, 8-10, 15-18, and 20 under Gupta in view of Kesinger have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Gupta.
The applicant argues that Gupta in view of Kesinger does not teach at does not teach the error correction factor because it is based on the baseline signal and the at least one error correction signal, when it should be a compound baseline signal not a baseline signal. Therefore, the applicant’s argument is persuasive and overcomes the rejection.
However, Gupta teaches all elements of the error correction factor. The compound baseline signals are collected from the internal sensors (2032) and the at least one error correction signal is measured by the multiple background species sensing elements (808) and analyte-modulated sensing element (810). In paragraph 0097, Gupta discusses the error correction factor as the temporal correlation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6, 8-12, 14, 15, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gupta et al. (US 20200000386 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Gupta discloses an analyte sensor apparatus for detecting an analyte in a target environment comprising (implantable sensor apparatus – element 2000):
a plurality of biotransducers configured to provide a plurality of signals for detecting the analyte in the target environment, the plurality of biotransducers comprising [Examiner’s note, made up of the elements it comprises.]:
at least one reference biotransducer to provide a plurality of baseline signals of the target environment, the at least one reference biotransducer unaffected by a concentration of the analyte in the target environment (internal sensors – element 2032; Paragraph 0114);
one or more working biotransducers to provide one or more analyte signals(sensing element group – element 806a-806n, Paragraph 0072); and
at least one working as reference biotransducer to provide at least one error correction signal of the target environment (multiple background species sensing elements (808) and analyte-modulated sensing element (810); Paragraphs 0054, 0072, 0097); and
a controller (processor – element 2010) operatively coupled to the plurality of biotransducers (Figure 12) and configured to:
receive the plurality of baseline signals (internal sensors – element 2032; Paragraph 0026; [Examiner’s note, the plurality of baseline signals are measured by the internal sensors, which is received by the controller.]), the one or more analyte signals (sensing element group – element 806a-806n), and the at least one error correction signal (multiple background species sensing elements (808) and analyte-modulated sensing element (810); Figure 12; Paragraphs 0072, 0097, 0114-0116; [Examiner’s note, the processor (2010), received the plurality of baseline signals through the internal sensors (2032), one or more analyte signals through the sensing element group – element 806a-806n, and the at least one error correction signal through multiple background species sensing elements (808) and analyte-modulated sensing element (810) which is found within electrode 806a);
determine an average of the plurality of baseline signals to provide a compound baseline signal (Paragraph 0026);
provide one or more analyte levels based on the compound baseline signal (internal sensors – element 2032) and the one or more analyte signals (sensing element group – element 806a-806n; Figures 10-11; Paragraphs 0095-0097);
provide an error correction factor based on the compound baseline signal (internal sensors – element 2032; Paragraph 0026) and the at least one error correction signal (multiple background species sensing elements (808) and analyte-modulated sensing element (810); Paragraph 0097); and
output one or more adjusted analyte levels (Figure 10 – step 1012) based on the one or more analyte levels (sensing element group – element 806a-806n) and the at least one error correction factor (Paragraph 0097).
Regarding Claim 2, Gupta discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one working as reference biotransducer comprises a plurality of working as reference biotransducers each configured to provide an error correction signal of the one or more error correction signals of the target environment (multiple background species sensing – elements 808; Paragraph 0054, 0072, 0097).
Regarding Claim 3, Gupta discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one working as reference biotransducer comprises a blank biotransducer and the at least one error correction signal is based on at least background noise sensed by the blank biotransducer (multiple background species sensing – elements 808; Paragraph 0054, 0072, 0097).
Regarding Claim 4, Gupta discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one working as reference biotransducer comprises a reference-like biotransducer and the at least one error correction signal is based on a signal provided by the reference-like biotransducer (multiple background species sensing – elements 808; Paragraph 0054, 0072, 0097).
Regarding Claim 5, Gupta discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one working as reference biotransducer comprises:
a reference-like biotransducer configured to provide a first error signal based on the target environment (multiple background species sensing – elements 808; Paragraph 0054, 0072, 0097);
a blank biotransducer to provide a second error signal based on background noise of the target environment (multiple background species sensing – elements 808; Paragraph 0054, 0072, 0097); and
wherein the controller (processor – element 2010) is configured to provide the error correction factor based on the compound baseline signal (Paragraph 0026), the first error signal, and the second error signal (multiple background species sensing – elements 808; Paragraph 0054, 0072, 0097).
Regarding Claim 6, Gupta discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the analyte sensor apparatus comprises a communication interface (wireless interface – element 2028) configured to transmit the one or more adjusted analyte levels to an external device (Paragraphs 0032, 0113).
Regarding Claim 8, Gupta discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the analyte sensor apparatus comprises an implantable medical device (implantable sensor apparatus – element 2000).
Regarding Claim 9, Gupta discloses an analyte sensing system (Paragraph 0008) comprising:
an analyte sensor apparatus for detecting an analyte in a target environment (sensor face – element 804; Figure 12) comprising:
a plurality of biotransducers configured to provide a plurality of signals for detecting the analyte in the target environment, the plurality of biotransducers comprising [Examiner’s note, made up of the elements it comprises.]:
at least one reference biotransducer to provide a plurality of baseline signals of the target environment, the at least one reference biotransducer unaffected by a concentration of the analyte in the target environment (internal sensors – element 2032; Paragraph 0114);
one or more working biotransducers to provide one or more analyte signals based on a presence of the analyte in the target environment (sensing element group – element 806a-806n, Paragraph 0072); and
at least one working as reference biotransducer to provide at least one error correction signal of the target environment (multiple background species sensing elements (808) and analyte-modulated sensing element (810); Paragraphs 0054, 0072, 0097); and
a computing apparatus (implantable sensor apparatus – element 2000) comprising one or more processors (processor – element 2010) and operatively coupled to the analyte sensor apparatus (Figure 12), the computing apparatus configured to:
receive the plurality of baseline signals (internal sensors – element 2032; Paragraph 0026; [Examiner’s note, the plurality of baseline signals are measured by the internal sensors, which is received by the controller.]), the one or more analyte signals (sensing element group – element 806a-806n), and the at least one error correction signal (multiple background species sensing elements (808) and analyte-modulated sensing element (810); Figure 12; Paragraphs 0072, 0097, 0114-0116; [Examiner’s note, the processor (2010), received the plurality of baseline signals through the internal sensors (2032), one or more analyte signals through the sensing element group – element 806a-806n, and the at least one error correction signal through multiple background species sensing elements (808) and analyte-modulated sensing element (810) which is found within electrode 806a);
determine an average of the plurality of baseline signals to provide a compound baseline signal (Paragraph 0026);
determine one or more analyte levels based on the compound baseline signal (internal sensors – element 2032) and the one or more analyte signals (sensing element group – element 806a-806n; Figures 10-11; Paragraphs 0095-0097);
determine an error correction factor based on the compound baseline signal (internal sensors – element 2032; Paragraph 0026) and the at least one error correction signal (multiple background species sensing elements (808) and analyte-modulated sensing element (810); Paragraph 0097); and
determine one or more adjusted analyte levels (Figure 10 – step 1012) based on the one or more analyte levels (sensing element group – element 806a-806n) and the at least one error correction factor (Paragraph 0097).
Regarding Claim 10, Gupta discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the at least one working as reference biotransducer comprises a plurality of working as reference biotransducers each configured to provide an error correction signal of the one or more error correction signals of the target environment and wherein the computing apparatus is further configured to determine the error correction factor based on the compound baseline signal and an average of the plurality of one or more error correction signals (multiple background species sensing – elements 808; Paragraph 0054, 0072, 0093, 0097).
Regarding Claim 11, Gupta discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the at least one working as reference biotransducer comprises a blank biotransducer (multiple background species sensing – elements 808; Paragraph 0054, 0072, 0097) and, to determine the error correction factor (Paragraph 0097), the computing apparatus (implantable sensor apparatus – element 2000) is configured to determine a background noise of the target environment based on the compound baseline signal (Paragraph 0026) and the at least one error correction signal (Figure 10 – step 1010; Paragraphs 0107-0108; [Examiner’s note, both the at least one error correction signal and the compound baseline signal collect data of the target environment. The data from both contains background noise.]).
Regarding claim 12, Gupta discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the at least one working as reference biotransducer comprises a reference-like biotransducer (multiple background species sensing – elements 808; Paragraph 0054, 0072, 0097) and, to determine the error correction factor (Paragraph 0097), the computing apparatus (implantable sensor apparatus – element 2000) is configured to determine the compound baseline signal (internal sensors – element 2032; Paragraph 0026) and the at least one error correction signal (Figure 10 – step 1010; Paragraphs 0107-0108).
Regarding Claim 14, Gupta discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the analyte sensor apparatus (implantable sensor apparatus – element 2000) comprises a wearable device (Paragraph 0008; [Examiner’s note, the implantable sensor apparatus is implanted on the body of the user. Therefore, making the apparatus a wearable device]).
Regarding Claim 15, Gupta discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the analyte sensor apparatus further comprises a communication interface configured to wirelessly transmit the plurality of baseline signals, the one or more analyte signals, and the at least one error correction signal to the computing apparatus (Figure 10 – Step 1012; Paragraph 0112).
Regarding Claim 17, Gupta discloses a method for detecting an analyte in a target environment comprising:
receiving a plurality of baseline signals of the target environment (internal sensors – element 2032; Paragraph 0026; [Examiner’s note, the plurality of baseline signals are measured by the internal sensors, which is received by the controller.]), one or more analyte signals of the target environment (sensing element group – element 806a-806n), and at least one error correction signals from the target environment (multiple background species sensing elements (808) and analyte-modulated sensing element (810); Figure 12; Paragraphs 0072, 0097, 0114-0116; [Examiner’s note, the processor (2010), received the plurality of baseline signals through the internal sensors (2032), one or more analyte signals through the sensing element group – element 806a-806n, and the at least one error correction signal through multiple background species sensing elements (808) and analyte-modulated sensing element (810) which is found within electrode 806a), the at least one reference biotransducer unaffected by a concentration of the analyte in the target environment (internal sensors – element 2032; Paragraph 0114);
determining an average of the plurality of baseline signals to provide a compound baseline signal (Paragraph 0026);
determining one or more analyte levels based on the compound baseline signal (internal sensors – element 2032) and the one or more analyte signals (sensing element group – element 806a-806n; Figures 10-11; Paragraphs 0095-0097);
determining an error correction factor based on the compound baseline signal (internal sensors – element 2032; Paragraph 0026) and the at least one error correction signal (multiple background species sensing elements (808) and analyte-modulated sensing element (810); Paragraph 0097); and
determine one or more adjusted analyte levels (Figure 10 – step 1012) based on the one or more analyte levels (sensing element group – element 806a-806n) and the at least one error correction factor (Paragraph 0097).
Regarding Claim 18, Gupta discloses the method of claim 17, wherein determining the error correction factor comprises averaging a plurality of error correction signals provided by a plurality of working as reference biotransducers (Paragraph 0026, 0093, 0097).
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:
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.
Claims 7, 13, 16, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al. (US 20200000386 A1) in view of Hall et al. (US 20200196921 A1).
Regarding Claim 7, Gupta discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the analyte sensor apparatus comprises each of the plurality of biotransducers is an electrode (Gupta | Figure 12). Gupta does not explicitly disclose a potentiometric sensor;
Hall teaches a potentiometric sensor (Hall | 110; potentiostat – element 140; Paragraph 0069, the potentiostat 140 may support potentiometric measurements of pH levels in the body fluid). One having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have found it obvious to modify the implantable sensing apparatus of Gupta to incorporate the teachings of a potentiometric sensor from Hall because the potentiometric sensor measures the electrical potential or charge that accumulates within the patient’s biological environment, which is ideal for detecting and quantifying specific charged analytes, such as hydrogen ions (for measuring pH) in a patient's blood (Hall | Paragraphs 0003, 0008).
Regarding Claim 13, Gupta discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the at least one working as reference biotransducer comprises:
a reference-like biotransducer configured to provide a first correction error signal based on the target environment (Gupta | multiple background species sensing – elements 808; Paragraph 0054, 0072, 0093, 0097); and
a blank biotransducer to provide a second error correction signal based on background noise of the target environment (Gupta | multiple background species sensing – elements 808; Paragraph 0054, 0072, 0093, 0097); and compound baseline signal (Gupta | Paragraph 0026);
wherein the computing apparatus (implantable sensor apparatus – element 2000) is configured to:
determine the error correction factor (Paragraph 0097).
Gupta does not explicitly disclose filter the background noise of the baseline signal based on the second error correction signal to provide a filtered baseline; and determine the error correction factor based on the filtered baseline signal and the first error correction signal;
Hall teaches filter the background noise of the baseline signal based on the second error correction signal to provide a filtered baseline signal (Hall | Paragraph 0067, the multi-electrode electrochemical cell 130 may perform additional electrochemical measurements, for example, of background interference and/or pH levels in the body fluid in order to correct for errors introduced by the environmental perturbations; [Examiner’s note, one can determine an electrode within the multi-electrode electrochemical cell can perform the same function as the blank biotransducer because it responds to background noise of the target environment but does not react to the target environment. More specifically, the second working electrode measures the background interference (baseline signal) present in the target environment and functions the same as the blank biotransducer. It would be obvious to interpret the signal from this electrode, which functions as the blank biotransducer, is the second error signal that provides a corrected baseline signal which filters background noise; this correction signal provides a filtered baseline signal]); and determine the error correction factor based on the filtered baseline signal and the first error correction signal (Hall | Paragraph 0067, the multi-electrode electrochemical cell 130 may perform additional electrochemical measurements, for example, of background interference and/or pH levels in the body fluid in order to correct for errors introduced by the environmental perturbations; [Examiner’s note, the filtered baseline signal is provided by one of the working electrodes from the multi-electrode electrochemical cell (blank electrode) and the first error correction signal is provided by one of the working electrodes from the multi-electrode electrochemical cell (reference-like electrode). The multi-electrode electrochemical cell is one component in the biosensor system; the biosensor system is coupled to the computing system. It would be obvious for the computing system to determine an error correction factor from the measured signals collected from the biosensor system based on the filtered baseline signal and the first error correction signal]).
One having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have found it obvious to modify the implantable sensing apparatus of Gupta to incorporate the teachings of a filtering background noise, drift and determining an error correction factor from Hall because it allows for the device to efficiently filter out background noise, drift, and error signals, which ensures the analyte data is reliable and accurate. This enables physicians to more effectively diagnose and monitor the patient's diabetes, thus leading to better-informed treatment decisions (Hall | Paragraph 0003).
Regarding Claim 16, Gupta discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the computing apparatus is further configured to show the one or more adjusted analyte levels (Paragraphs 0032, 0112-0113).
Though Gupta discusses of a portable electronic apparatus with a wireless interface, but does not explicitly disclose of a display;
Hall teaches a display (Hall | Input/Output Device – element 1240; Paragraph 0093). One having an ordinary skill in the art the time the invention was filed would have found it obvious to modify the implantable sensing apparatus of Gupta to incorporate the teachings of a display from Hall because the display allows the user to monitor the patient’s real-time health status and receive any further treatment based on their results (Hall | Paragraph 0051).
Regarding Claim 19, Gupta discloses the method of claim 17, wherein the compound baseline signal (Gupta | Paragraph 0026) based on an error correction signal provided by a blank biotransducer (Gupta | multiple background species sensing – elements 808; Paragraph 0054, 0072, 0097). Gupta does not explicitly disclose determining the error correction factor comprises filtering background noise;
Hall teaches determining the error correction factor comprises filtering background noise from baseline signal based on an error correction signal provided by a blank biotransducer (Hall | Paragraph 0067, the multi-electrode electrochemical cell 130 may perform additional electrochemical measurements, for example, of background interference and/or pH levels in the body fluid in order to correct for errors introduced by the environmental perturbations; [Examiner’s note, one can determine an electrode within the multi-electrode electrochemical cell can perform the same function as the blank biotransducer because it responds to background noise of the target environment but does not react to the target environment. More specifically, the second working electrode measures the background interference (baseline signal) present in the target environment and functions the same as the blank biotransducer. It would be obvious to interpret the signal from this electrode, which functions as the blank biotransducer, is the second error signal that provides a corrected baseline signal which filters background noise; this correction signal provides a filtered baseline signal]).
One having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have found it obvious to modify the implantable sensing apparatus of Gupta to incorporate the teachings of a filtering background noise, drift and determining an error correction factor from Hall because it allows for the device to efficiently filter out background noise, drift, and error signals, which ensures the analyte data is reliable and accurate. This enables physicians to more effectively diagnose and monitor the patient's diabetes, thus leading to better-informed treatment decisions (Hall | Paragraph 0003).
Regarding Claim 20, Gupta discloses the method of claim 17, wherein receiving the at least one error correction signal comprises:
receiving a first error correction signal provided by a reference-like biotransducer (Gupta | multiple background species sensing – elements 808; Paragraph 0054, 0072, 0093, 0097); and
receiving a second error correction signal provided by a blank biotransducer (Gupta | multiple background species sensing – elements 808; Paragraph 0054, 0072, 0097); and wherein determining the error correction factor comprises.
Gupta does not explicitly teach filtering background noise of the compound baseline signal based on the second error correction signal to provide a filtered baseline signal; and determining the error correction factor based on the filtered baseline signal and the first error correction signal;
Hall teaches filtering background noise of the compound baseline signal based on the second error correction signal to provide a filtered baseline signal (Hall | Paragraph 0067, the multi-electrode electrochemical cell 130 may perform additional electrochemical measurements, for example, of background interference and/or pH levels in the body fluid in order to correct for errors introduced by the environmental perturbations; [Examiner’s note, one can determine an electrode within the multi-electrode electrochemical cell can perform the same function as the blank biotransducer because it responds to background noise of the target environment but does not react to the target environment. More specifically, the second working electrode measures the background interference (baseline signal) present in the target environment and functions the same as the blank biotransducer. It would be obvious to interpret the signal from this electrode, which functions as the blank biotransducer, is the second error signal that provides a corrected baseline signal which filters background noise; this correction signal provides a filtered baseline signal]); and determining the error correction factor based on the filtered baseline signal and the first error correction signal (Hall | Paragraph 0067, the multi-electrode electrochemical cell 130 may perform additional electrochemical measurements, for example, of background interference and/or pH levels in the body fluid in order to correct for errors introduced by the environmental perturbations; [Examiner’s note, the filtered baseline signal is provided by one of the working electrodes from the multi-electrode electrochemical cell (blank electrode) and the first error correction signal is provided by one of the working electrodes from the multi-electrode electrochemical cell (reference-like electrode). The multi-electrode electrochemical cell is one component in the biosensor system; the biosensor system is coupled to the computing system. It would be obvious for the computing system to determine an error correction factor from the measured signals collected from the biosensor system based on the filtered baseline signal and the first error correction signal]).
One having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have found it obvious to modify the implantable sensing apparatus of Gupta to incorporate the teachings of a filtering background noise, drift and determining an error correction factor from Hall because it allows for the device to efficiently filter out background noise, drift, and error signals, which ensures the analyte data is reliable and accurate. This enables physicians to more effectively diagnose and monitor the patient's diabetes, thus leading to better-informed treatment decisions (Hall | Paragraph 0003).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SRISTI DIVINA GOMES whose telephone number is (571)272-1356. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday: 7:30-4:30 & Friday 7:30-3:30.
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, Robert Chen can be reached at 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.
/SRISTI DIVINA GOMES/Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/DANIEL L CERIONI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights