DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments, filed 03/04/2026, are accepted.
Claims 2-20 are pending.
Claims 1-6, 9-15, and 19-20 are amended.
Specification [0001] is amended.
Applicant's arguments filed 03/04/2026 have been reviewed and fully considered.
Objection to Specification
Examiner withdraws objection to specification based on amendments made to paragraph [0001].
With regard to rejection of Claims 1-20 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), over obvious combination of prior art by KUMAR (US 6416471 B1), TOROK (US 6245025 B1), PIRET (US 20090271681 A1), COFFMAN (US 20010044731 A1), BELLO (US 20050055242 A1), DREW (US 20060094971 A1) and/or MERZ (US 20100010327), based on further consideration and search as necessitated by amendments, Examiner finds arguments are not persuasive.
Specifically, Applicant argues regarding rejection of Claim 1, (Remarks, Pg10, Paragraph 1 – Pg 11) that TOROK fails to teach or suggest use of these time values, or transmission of time values, that Kumar fails to teach or suggest storing data, namely time values or rates related to observed data peaks and that neither KUMAR or TOROK teach away from a data packet structure based on KUMAR’s teaching of timed data streams, and combining the art of TOROK with KUMAR would render KUMARs invention unsuitable for its intended purpose. Examiner has considered these arguments focused on Claim 1, and likewise similarly for Claims 11 and 20, but in view of amended claim language necessitating further search and evaluation, finds the arguments unpersuasive.
Detailed response with further consideration of Applicant arguments, and attention to reasoning and rationale as applied to establish a prima facie case of obviousness in determination that the claimed invention, with claim limitations as currently amended, does not distinguish over prior art is presented below with new grounds of rejection as necessitated by amendment.
Claim Rejections 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6-7, 11, 13-14, 16-17, and 20 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over KUMAR (US 6416471 B1) in view of TOROK (US 6245025 B1), and further in view of PIRET (US 20090271681 A1).
With respect to Claims 1, 11, and 20 KUMAR teaches:
A method of storing and forwarding vital-sign data, performed by a computing device, (KUMAR is in same technical field, Abstract: “system and method for monitoring vital signs and capturing data from a patient remotely using radiotelemetry techniques”; and FIG. 6 with COL16,L33: “conventional personal computer 86”)
a bridge device configured to perform operations (Examiner interprets “bridge device” generally, as an electronic device functioning to facilitate communication, including data transmission, between two or more different, otherwise unconnected networks, circuits, or devices, which may allow for communication between the two or more networks or circuits. Using this interpretation, examiner asserts as in previous office action, as in FIG.1, “base station unit 30” and FIG. 6, “band sensor 10 and signal transfer unit 20 …monitor station 50”, serving function of bridge device)
wirelessly receiving, at a computing device, a record of vital-sign data from a vital-sign sensor configured to monitor a vital-sign of a user, (Abstract, and COL5,L28-29: “wireless communications link”; FIG. 1, element 10, element 20, with COL8,L8-14: “transmitting the measured vital signs data, a signal transfer unit 20 in proximity to the sensor band 10 for storing and retransmitting the measured vital signs data”; and Col27,L26-27: “data record type field within the command specifies the format”)
vital-sign data comprises a sequence number and a series of recorded values stored in a defined data structure, (FIG. 9, with COL20,L21: “the 160 bits in each packet, 128 form the data payload…header including a field to indicate the format of the data and a sequence number that increments with each packet”; and Col27,L26-27: “data record type field within the command specifies the format (i.e., “data structure”)”)
storing the record of the vital-sign data in a memory in association with the sequence number when the sequence number indicates that record of the vital-sign data is not duplicative (COL12L46-47: “base station unit 30 will collect and store all data received from the sensor band 10…has a hard disk memory, enabling storage of data until it is ready to be sent to the remote monitoring station 50”; COL12 L63-65: “data is retained in the base station memory until either it is directed to be discarded by an instruction sent from the remote monitoring station 50”; and, COL19L7-8: “procedure is then repeated until no further suitable duplicated sequences are found” )
listening for an upload command from a server device; (FIG. 6, with COL26, L62: “both ends of the communications link 85 will listen for commands.” And “Surveillance server 60”; and, COL 26 L41-56, “upload command”; “
when the upload command is received from the server device, by the computing device: retrieving at least a portion of the record of the vital-sign data from the memory according to the sequence number; (FIG.6, “base station 30” and “remote monitor station 50” , “communications link 85”; As above, COL20,L L21: “sequence number that increments with each packet”; and COL27L1-COL28L17: “protocol for communications between the base station unit 30 and the remote monitoring station 50…command set”, including COL27L15: “SetConfig command from the remote monitoring station 50 sends any required configuration data to the base station unit 30” followed by “DataRequest command”.)
transmitting the retrieved portion record of the vital-sign data to the server device.
(COL 27,L23-26: “DataRequest command from the remote monitoring station 50 requests that the base station unit 30 sends a specified time range of raw or real-time data to the remote monitoring station 50.”)
KUMAR does not teach:
vital signs data comprises a series of recorded values including (i) a time value of a first peak value of a first vital-sign measurement and (ii) a time value of a second peak value of a second vital-sign measurement together with (iii) a rate corresponding to a time interval between the first and second peaks;
storing the record of the vital-sign data in a memory in association with the sequence number when the sequence number indicates that record of the vital-sign data is not duplicative of a previous successfully-received record of the vital-sign data
TOROK teaches:
vital signs data (TOROK is in same technical field, Abstract: “Method and apparatus for long-term, non-invasive measuring of fetal heart rate (i.e., “vital signs data”)” and “method utilizes the characteristic curves of first and second heart sound received”) comprises a series of recorded values (Abstract: “apparatus is capable to registrate, store and transfer data of fetal heart rate”)
including (i) a time value of a first peak value of a first vital-sign measurement and (ii) a time value of a second peak value of a second vital-sign measurement (Figure4: “storing peak value and timing”, “first sound”, “second sound” with COL2,L25:“method comprises the following steps:...detecting and storing local peak values Pa1 (i.e., “first peak value of a first vital-sign measurement”) and Pa2 (i.e., second peak value of a second vital-sign measurement”); as well as…relevant times ta1 (i.e., a time value of a first peak value) and ta2 (i.e., a time value of a second peak value)
together with (iii) a rate corresponding to a time interval between the first and second peaks; (Figure3(a-d) with COL2,L41-56: “determining time differences dt = ta1 – tb1” (i.e., “time interval between first and second peaks”); and COL2,L55: “calculating fetal heart rate (i.e., “a rate”) from a time difference (i.e., “time interval”) between two consecutively identified heartbeats.”; and COL18,Claim10: “identifying first and second heart sounds based upon the time and the sequence of said local peaks and for computing fetal heart rate”; Examiner asserts TOROK does teach the limitation as amended.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vital signs data method and system of KUMAR to include, for improvement of a method of storing and forwarding vital-sign data, vital sign data including a time of a first peak value of a first vital-sign measurement and a time of a second peak value of a second vital-sign measurement together with a rate corresponding to a time interval between the first and second peaks, such as that of TOROK because this would provide an efficient and effective modification to data acquisition method and system of KUMAR to allow for accurate data acquisition and reliable interpretation to determine a rate based on a time interval. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that consideration of timed data values associated with identified peak values would improve the ability to verify and validate data for determination of a vital sign rate.
KUMAR, as modified by TOROK and taught above, does not explicitly teach
storing the record of the vital-sign data in a memory in association with the sequence number when the sequence number indicates that record of the vital-sign data is not duplicative of a previous successfully-received record of the vital-sign data
PIRET teaches:
storing the record of the vital-sign data in a memory in association with the sequence number when the sequence number indicates that record of the vital-sign data is not duplicative of a previous successfully-received record of the vital-sign data
(Examiner notes PIRET is considered to be “reasonably pertinent” to the instant application, as discussed in detail in previous office action, in a related technical field, Abstract: “invention is especially applicable for transmitting data packets in such communication systems”; [0005]: “sequence numbering and timers are used to ensure correct delivery of data packets at the receiver”; and [0006]: “sequence numbers are used to correctly order packets that may be received out of order and to eliminate duplicates; and [0071]: “receiving method…allows the recovery of missing data packets from a list L of data packets transmitted by the sending device, when sufficient number of parity packets have been received, by avoiding the reception of duplicated data packets.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify KUMAR, as modified by TOROK as taught above, to use record storage with associated with the sequence number when the sequence number indicates that vital-sign data is not duplicative of a previous successfully-received vital-sign data, such as that of PIRET because this data management technique improves the ability to verify data used for evaluation. Examiner notes KUMAR teaches recognition of duplicity issues, but is not explicit about how storage is managed to avoid duplication. One of ordinary skill would see the advantage and find it obvious and logical to incorporate the data management technique of PIRET to ascertain any duplicate data and avoid using repeated data for analysis resulting in improved accuracy and efficiency which would be considered essential for improving a vital signs monitoring application.
With regard to Claims 3 and 13, KUMAR, in view of TOROK and further in view of PIRET as taught above, teaches the method and system of Claims 1 and 11.
KUMAR further teaches:
wirelessly receiving the record of the vital-sign data comprises wirelessly receiving physiological measurements related to at least one of a body temperature, cardiac pulse rate, oxygen saturation, respiration rate, and blood pressure of the user.
(FIG. 1 and COL5L42-44: “sensor band preferably comprises a transmitter having a first antenna which transmits the data signal over the first wireless communications link to a transceiver”; and COL5L52-54: “sensor band measures full waveform single or multiple lead ECG, full waveform respiration, skin temperature, and motion”)
With regard Claims 4 and 14, KUMAR, in view of TOROK and further in view of PIRET as taught above, teaches the method and system of Claims 1 and 11.
KUMAR further teaches:
wherein the vital-sign sensor is configured for placement on a human body, (FIG. 1 with COL4 L47-48 : “sensor band…is positioned on the patient”; and Abstract: “system and method for monitoring vital signs and capturing data from a patient remotely using radiotelemetry techniques”)
taking vital-sign measurements of a vital-sign of the user; (As above, FIG. 1; with COL4 L47-48 and Abstract)
wirelessly transmitting the vital-sign measurements to the computing device in the vital- sign data. (As above, Abstract: “small signal transfer unit…receives data…then forwards by e.g., radio transmission to a base station”; or COL5L43: “transmitter having a first antenna which transmits the data signal over the first wireless communications link to a transceiver”)
With regard to Claim 6, KUMAR, in view of TOROK and further in view of PIRET as taught above, teaches the method of Claim 1.
KUMAR further teaches:
before wirelessly receiving the record of the vital-sign data, wirelessly transmitting a signal to the vital sign sensor that will cause the vital-sign sensor to transmit the vital-sign data. (As above, Abstract; and FIG. 1 with COL25L2-6: “dialog request packet initiates a dialog between the signal transfer unit 20 and the base station unit 30 and can only be sent by the signal transfer unit 20. Three types of dialog exist to implement registration, idle mode and data transfer initiation.”; Examiner interprets “signal…that will cause the vital-sign sensor to transmit the vital sign data” as analogous to reference term “dialog request packet” to mean a signal initiating data transfer.)
With regard to Claims 7 and 17, KUMAR, in view of TOROK and further in view of PIRET as taught above, teaches the method and system of Claims 1 and 11.
KUMAR further teaches:
wherein the vital-sign data is received as successive vital-sign measurements,
(COL20L16-17: “data from the sensor band 10 consists of a continuous sequence (i.e., “successive”) of 160-bit packets”; and COL22L50-53: “provision for subsequent timing alignment is provided by synchronization sequences preceding all data packets.”; also COL25L54-55: “between successive data packets”)
further comprising: storing the successive vital-sign measurements in the memory as successive data records. (COL28L38-54: “Database manager 112 runs as a continuous background process to ensure that data can always be stored on arrival.”)
With regard to Claim 16, KUMAR, in view of TOROK and further in view of PIRET as taught above, teaches the system of Claim 11.
KUMAR further teaches:
wherein the bridge device is configured to wirelessly communicate with the vital-sign sensor via a network. (Examiner interprets “bridge device” as discussed above; and Abstract; and COL5L43)
Claims 2, 9, 12 and 19 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over KUMAR in view of TOROK and PIRET as applied to Claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of COFFMAN (US 20010044731 A1).
With regard to Claims 2 and 12, KUMAR, in view of TOROK and further in view of PIRET as taught above, teaches the method and system of Claims 1 and 11.
KUMAR further teaches:
retaining the record of vital-sign data until a signal is received from the server device confirming that the vital-sign data was successfully received by the server device; (COL12 Ln63-67: “data is retained in the base station memory until either it is directed to be discarded by an instruction sent from the remote monitoring station 50”; and COL22Ln61: “purpose of the registration mechanism is to provide a means by which the signal transfer unit 20 and the base station unit 30 acknowledge their mutual presence and confirm the performance of the radio link”; and FIG.10A with COL23L4-8: “base station unit 30 responds to the registration request with an acknowledgment (ACK) packet to confirm its correct receipt or a data packet containing control information which implicitly provides the acknowledgment.”)
KUMAR, as modified by TOROK and PIRET as taught above, does not teach:
erasing the record of the vital-sign data from the memory responsive to receiving the signal.
COFFMAN teaches:
erasing the record of the vital-sign data from the memory responsive to receiving the signal. (COFFMAN is considered pertinent to instant application, Abstract: “method for communicating and validating patient information including medication delivery information in a care-giving facility”; FIGURE 1 and FIGURE 2 with [0075]: “Once the information contained within the MTC 110 has been transferred to the control system 40 in step 345, the currently cleared and transferred medical transaction information stored in the MTC 100 may be erased, as indicated in box 350”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the method and system disclosed by KUMAR, as modified by TOROK and PIRET as taught above, to include erasing the vital-sign data from the memory responsive to receiving the signal, such as that of COFFMAN because doing so would avoid the necessity of data storage components with large memory, since it would allow for clearing a smaller storage device of unnecessary data, freeing up space for additional new data storage, and allow for the original data collection/data transfer device and data transfer process to function more efficiently. One of ordinary skill would see this technique taught by COFFMAN as an obvious and advantageous improvement in combination with the method of KUMAR, as modified and taught above.
With regard to Claims 9 and 19, KUMAR, in view of TOROK and further in view of PIRET, as taught above, teaches the method and system of Claims 1 and 11.
KUMAR further teaches:
Receiving a record of the vital-sign data in a form of a data packet comprising a data packet identification value and a data integrity value; (FIG. 9 with COL6L62-65: “illustrates the format of the data packets transmitted”; COL25L15: “a registration identification codeword that identifies the transmitted data packet as a registration data packet”; and COL20,L38-40: “three-bit sequence number increments modulo 8 with each packet and can be used to check the integrity of the data stream.” )
verify the integrity of the data packet based on the data integrity value.
(As above, COL20L38-40; and COL22L1-3, L20-24: “communications protocol between the signal transfer unit 20 and the base station unit 30 has been designed to address the following requirements… 5) A high degree of data integrity is required…the system must `fail safe` with the preference being to supply no data rather than erroneous data.”)
KUMAR, as modified by TOROK and further modified PIRET as taught above, does not teach:
verifying, based on the data packet identification value, that the data packet is not a duplicate of a previously received packet
Nevertheless, COFFMAN teaches:
verifying, based on the data packet identification value, that the data packet is not a duplicate of a previously received packet ([0037]: “validation of previous and/or duplicate transactions”; and [0109] “system concept is further effected by extending and combining the data validation concept with that used in packet-based data transfer, whereby specific data packets may be lost or duplicated, but the validation is still auditably correct.”; Examiner notes that while both KUMAR and PIRET teach techniques for avoiding duplicity, COFFMAN teaches this idea more explicitly. )
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the method and system disclosed by KUMAR, as modified by TOROK and further modified PIRET as taught above, to include the step of verifying, based on the data packet identification value, that the data packet is not a duplicate of a previously received packet, such as that of COFFMAN because when using data packet transfer structure that includes a packet identification and data integrity value, the evaluation of duplicative data would be a logical and convenient step that would improve accuracy of data transfer and increase efficiency by not storing unnecessary data packets for vital sign monitoring. One of ordinary skill would understand the advantage of using existing data in a way that would improve efficiency and avoid unnecessary data storage.
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over KUMAR, in view of TOROK and PIRET as applied to Claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of COFFMAN and BELLO (US 20050055242 A1).
With regard to Claims 5 and 15, KUMAR, in view of TOROK and further in view of PIRET, as taught above, teaches the method and system of Claims 1 and 11.
KUMAR further teaches:
the record of the vital-sign data received from the vital-sign sensor is in a form of a data packet that comprises a data packet identification value and a data integrity value, (As above, FIG. 9 with COL6L62-65: “format of the data packets transmitted in the communications link between the sensor band and the signal transfer unit.”; and COL24,L58; and COL25L10-16: “a registration identification codeword that identifies the transmitted data packet as a registration data packet”; and COL20,L38-40: “three-bit sequence number increments modulo 8 with each packet and can be used to check the integrity of the data stream.”)
using the data integrity value to verify the integrity of the data packet; (As above, FIG. 9, with COL6L62-65, COL24L58, COL25L10-16, and COL20L33-41; and COL22L1 -24: “communications protocol between the signal transfer unit 20 and the base station unit 30 has been designed to address the following requirements:…5) A high degree of data integrity is required…the system must `fail safe` with the preference being to supply no data rather than erroneous data.”)
transmitting a request to the vital-sign sensor to retransmit the data packet if the integrity of the received data packet has been corrupted. (COL22 L33-35: “data packet scheme has been adopted with CRC to provide error detection and an ARQ scheme to retransmit erroneous data packets”)
KUMAR, as modified by TOROK and PIRET as taught above, does not teach
using the data packet identification value to determine if the data packet is a duplicate of a previously received packet;
discarding the data packet if it is a duplicate data packet;
COFFMAN teaches:
wherein the method further comprises: using the data packet identification value to determine if the data packet is a duplicate of a previously received packet; (As above, [0021]: “MTC may take the form of an electronic data stream, or message, formatted to include a unique identifier”; and [0037]: “MTC 110 may also store data or information concerning primary or secondary validation of previous and/or duplicate transactions”, with [0109]: “system concept is further effected by extending and combining the data validation concept with that used in packet-based data transfer, whereby specific data packets may be lost or duplicated, but the validation is still auditably correct.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the method as disclosed by KUMAR, as modified by TOROK and PIRET as taught above, to include in the method using the data packet identification value to determine if the data packet is a duplicate of a previously received packet, such as that of COFFMAN because doing so would add additional validation for data packet storage process and allow for the assumption of subsequent data packets as received and stored. One of ordinary skill would understand the advantageous of not only a more robust data validation step, but also the efficiency of not storing duplicated data.
KUMAR, as modified by TOROK and PIRET, and further modified by COFFMAN, as taught above, does not teach
discarding the data packet if it is a duplicate data packet;
BELLO teaches:
discarding the data packet if it is a duplicate data packet; (BELLO is pertinent to instant application, in related technical area, see [0003]: “invention relates generally to healthcare/medication delivery systems and medical information technology systems.”; and FIG.3 and [0488]: “if the hub 107 recognizes that the alarm, alert or other notification is a duplicate, it may discard the duplicate notification.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the method as disclosed by KUMAR, as modified by TOROK and PIRET and further modified by COFFMAN, as taught above, to include the step of discarding the data packet if it is a duplicate data packet, such as that of BELLO because doing so would ensure the validity of stored data and prevent the data stream of becoming corrupt or unnecessarily large with repetitive information, and avoid unnecessary use of storage space in the device.
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable over KUMAR in view of TOROK and PIRET, as applied to Claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of DREW (US 20060094971 A1).
With regard to Claims 8 and 18, KUMAR, in view of TOROK and further in view of PIRET, as taught above, teaches the method and system of Claims 7 and 17 above.
KUMAR further teaches:
further comprising: storing the successive data records within the memory; (As above (Claim 7), COL25L54-55: “between successive data packets”; and see COL28L38-54: “Database manager 112 runs as a continuous background process to ensure that data can always be stored on arrival.”)
overwriting the oldest data record with the new data record (COL10L48-50: “if the memory buffer should become full at any point, the earliest data in the memory will be replaced with the latest data.”)
KUMAR, as modified by TOROK and PIRET as taught above, does not teach:
storing the successive data records in a circular buffer within the memory;
when the circular buffer becomes full of data records and a new data record is received: creating a lost data record that comprises information associated with an oldest data record, storing the lost data record outside of the circular buffer
DREW teaches:
storing data records in a circular buffer within the memory (DREW is in related technical field, [0002]: “invention relates to techniques for selecting, storing and reporting data associated with physiologic signals”; [0012]: “device obtains acquired data and stores a data record associated with the data in a selected data entry of the first data structure (e.g., an age buffer such as circular buffer)”; and FIG. 16 with [0097]: “the circular buffer stores chronologically sequenced data records in sequential memory locations.”)
when the circular buffer becomes full of data records and a new data record is received: creating a lost-data record that comprises information associated with an oldest data record, ([0012]: “Before an older data record in the first data structure is replaced (completely or partially) with a new data record, the older data record may be stored in the second data”; and [0099]: “If the first data structure becomes full, a new data record replaces either the oldest data record…the data record being replaced may be stored in a priority buffer instead of being permanently removed.”; Examiner notes reference term “first data structure” refers to circular buffer structure ([0100]); Examiner interprets “creating a lost-data record” as analogous to the process taught in reference as “stored in a priority buffer”.)
storing the lost data record outside of the circular buffer. (Abstract: “Before an oldest data record is lost, the oldest data record may be stored in a second data structure that is priority index-based.”; Examiner interprets “outside of the circular buffer” to be analogous reference disclosure of storage of data “in a second data structure”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the method as disclosed by KUMAR, as modified by TOROK and PIRET as taught above, to include the processes of storing data records in a circular buffer, and when the buffer becomes full of data records and a new data record is received to create a lost-data record that comprises information associated with an oldest data record, and to store the lost data record outside of the circular buffer, such as that of DREW because it would be understood as an improved way to facilitate more efficient data management techniques making use of a generally known circular data storage structure. It would have been known in the art at the time of filing the invention that the circular data buffer, or “cyclic” buffer, with its fixed-array size allows data to be continuously read and written, making it advantageous for situations where there is a need to measure and record continuous data streams, and avoids unnecessary data storage with prioritization evaluation of incoming and previously stored data.
Claim 10 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable over KUMAR in view of TOROK and PIRET, as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of MERZ (US 20100010327).
With regard to Claim 10, KUMAR, in view of TOROK and further in view of PIRET, as taught above, teaches the method Claim 1.
KUMAR further teaches:
determining, by the computing device, time intervals for the computing device to receive the vital-sign data from the vital-sign sensor; (COL8L10-14 and COL39L14-16; and COL13L46: “Programming involves…setting data collection times (e.g., 5 minutes every hour), and setting times for recording data from auxiliary sensors”)
and instructing, by the computing device, the vital-sign sensor to transmit the vital-sign data to the computing device at time intervals determined by the computing device, for monitoring the vital-sign of the user. (As above, COL 27L23-26: “DataRequest command from the remote monitoring station 50 requests that the base station unit 30 sends a specified time range of raw or real-time data to the remote monitoring station 50.”)
the time intervals not being synchronized with measurement intervals for monitoring the vital-sign of the user. (COL8L51-COL9L15, “ECG data is collected at a 250 Hz sampling frequency” and “waveform respiration data is also collected at a 25 Hz sampling frequency” or “Skin temperature data is collected at 25 Hz”; Examiner interprets “time intervals” to mean data collection time spans, taught by reference as variations in “sampling frequency” ; and see COL13L55: “remote monitoring station 50 has the ability to automatically dial in to the base station unit 30 to download data at specified times or to view real-time live data.”; see also COL16L28-32: “vital signs data may be uploaded once per day in the early morning hours to minimize interference with normal telephone usage, uploaded several times per day, or once per week.”; Examiner interprets “not being synchronized” to generally mean that two actions do not occur at the same time and/or time-interval, or, in other words “not simultaneously”. Examiner asserts reference teaches the technique of non-simultaneous actions of acquiring data (measurement, with measurement time intervals dependent upon specific vital sign being acquired) and retrieving data (transmitting data to external storage))
KUMAR, as modified by TOROK and PIRET as taught above, does not teach:
determining irregular time intervals for the computing device to receive data from sensor;
transmit the data to the computing device at the irregular time intervals determined by the computing device, the irregular time intervals not being synchronized with measurement intervals for monitoring the [signal] of the user.
MERZ teaches:
determining irregular time intervals for the computing device to receive data from sensor; (MERZ is in same technical field, FIG. 1 and see ABSTRACT: “sensor module (130) for a catheter (110), the sensor module (130) comprising a biofilm detection unit (131)…providing an output signal”; [0016]: a base station is provided comprising a communication unit adapted for communicating with a sensor module”; and [0046]: “Data may be sent to the base station at regular or irregular intervals upon request from the base station.”)
transmit the data to the computing device at the irregular time intervals determined by the computing device, the irregular time intervals not being synchronized with measurement intervals for monitoring the user. ( [0042]: “sensor module may comprise a communication unit adapted for transmitting the electronic output signal to a base station”; and [0046]: “Data may be sent to the base station at regular or irregular intervals upon request from the base station”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the method as disclosed by KUMAR, as modified by TOROK and further modified PIRET, as taught above, to include the technique of determining irregular time intervals for the vital-sign data from the vital-sign sensor and to transmit the vital-sign data to the computing device at the irregular time intervals determined by the computing device, the irregular time intervals not being synchronized with measurement intervals for monitoring the vital-sign of the user, such as that of MERZ, because this technique would be understood to reduce the number of operations required for a specific sensor module. The use of irregular time intervals for sending data transfer requests would reduce unnecessary data transfer, since the system or user would determine an optimized value for time between data transfer from the sensor module and a best value of data collection time intervals based on the function of a specific sensor. This level of specification would be seen as a logical way to best use the method of KUMAR as modified by TOROK and PIRET. Moreover, including an irregular time interval calculation for requesting data transfer from the sensor module would reduce power consumption by the sensor module and improve overall efficiency of the vital signs monitoring system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure has been included in previous office actions.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONI D SAUNCY whose telephone number is (703)756-4589. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. ET.
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, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at 571-270-0349. 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.
/TONI D SAUNCY/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/Catherine T. Rastovski/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights