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 .
Status of the Claims
The Amendment filed October 7th, 2025 has been entered. Claims 3-4 and 12 have been amended. Claims 1-5 and 7-17 are currently examined herein.
Status of the Rejection
All Claim objections and 112b rejections from the previous office action are withdrawn in view of the amendments.
All 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections from the previous office action are essentially maintained and modified only into response to amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 7-8, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheppard (US 2011/0089957 A1) in view of Solartron (HF Frequency Response Analyzer, Solartron Analytical, 2019) and Brown (US 2015/0022184 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Sheppard teaches a circuitry (a potentiostat circuit in Fig. 4A [para. 0041]); the limitation “for analyzing one or more biomarkers in a sample of a user” is an intended use limitation [see MPEP 2111.02]. Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does [MPEP 2114(II)]. A functional recitation of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. See MPEP 2114. In the instant case, Sheppard teaches the potentiostat circuit and related circuitry are used for controlling the operation of an array of biosensors [para. 0002] to detect biomarkers, such as glucose [para. 0041], and the potentiostat of Figure 4A is specifically configured to perform the intended use [para. 0041], the circuitry comprising:
A coupling counter electrode (CE) (a common counter electrode 412 in Fig. 4A [para. 0041]), a coupling reference electrode (RE) (at least a first reference electrode 416 in Fig. 4A [para. 0041]), and one or more coupling working electrodes (WEs) (a plurality of working electrodes, including at least a first working electrode 414, a second working electrode 418, and a third working electrode 422 in Fig. 4A [para. 0041]);
an excitation-signal circuit (a non-inverting input connected to the inverting input of the first control amplifier 404 in Fig. 4A [para. 0044]) for generating an excitation signal (excitation signal can be, for example, 0.5 V [para. 0044]) and applying the excitation signal to the coupling CE and the coupling RE (counter electrode 412 is electrically connected to the output of the first control amplifier 402, and the first reference electrode 416 is electrically connected to the inverting input of the first control amplifier 402 [para. 0044]);
one or more signal analyzers (a first current measurement circuitry, which includes a first transimpedance amplifier 406 and a first sensing resistor R1 [para. 0045]) each electrically connected to a respective one of the one or more coupling WEs (for example, first current measurement circuitry is electrically connected to first working electrode 414 [para. 0045]) for receiving a return signal from the respective coupling WE in response to the excitation signal for analyzing the one or more biomarkers (output voltage of the differential amplifier 426 is measured by a microcontroller to determine information on the sensor current detected by the first working electrode 414 [para. 0045]).
Sheppard is silent on at least one calibration resistor; and
a set of switches each switchable between an OPEN state and a CLOSED state;
wherein the set of switches are configured for, when in the CLOSED states, electrically connecting the coupling CE and the coupling RE and electrically connecting the one or more signal analyzers to the connected coupling CE and coupling RE via the at least one calibration resistor for directing a calibration signal to the at least one frequency analyzer component for calibration; and
wherein the set of switches are configured for, when in the OPEN states, electrically disconnecting the coupling CE for the coupling RE and electrically disconnecting the one or more signal analyzers from the coupling RE for analyzing the one or more biomarkers.
Solartron teaches a frequency response analyzer (title), and teaches at least one frequency analyzer component for calibration (a frequency response analyzer used for frequency generation can be used for electronic testing of circuits [entire Section of Electronic Testing on page 1]).
Sheppard and Solartron are considered analogous art to the claimed inventions because they are in the same field of circuitry for sensors. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the circuitry of Sheppard to include a frequency response analyzer, as taught by Solartron, frequency response analyzer allows for electronic testing of circuit components (Solartron, [entire Section of Electronic Testing, page 1]).
Modified Sheppard is silent on at least one calibration resistor; and
a set of switches each switchable between an OPEN state and a CLOSED state;
wherein the set of switches are configured for, when in the CLOSED states, electrically connecting the coupling CE and the coupling RE and electrically connecting the one or more signal analyzers to the connected coupling CE and coupling RE via the at least one calibration resistor for directing a calibration signal to the at least one frequency analyzer component for calibration; and
wherein the set of switches are configured for, when in the OPEN states, electrically disconnecting the coupling CE for the coupling RE and electrically disconnecting the one or more signal analyzers from the coupling RE for analyzing the one or more biomarkers.
Brown teaches a switching device controlled by a microprocessor to selectively configure a circuit between a circuit measurement mode and a calibration mode (abstract), and teaches at least one calibration resistor (a small value resistor used in calibration mode [para. 0009], such as Rcal in Fig. 5 [para. 0028]), a switch (a switch S1 in Fig. 5 [para. 0033]) switchable between an OPEN state and a CLOSED state (switch S1 can be set to either OPEN or CLOSED [para. 0033], and although Brown does not explicitly teach wherein the switch is configured for, when in the CLOSED state, electrically connecting the coupling CE and the coupling RE and electrically connecting the one or more signal analyzers to the connected coupling CE and coupling RE via the at least one calibration resistor for directing a calibration signal to the at least one frequency analyzer component for calibration; and wherein the switch is configured for, when in the OPEN state, electrically disconnecting the coupling CE from the coupling RE and electrically disconnecting the one or more signal analyzers from the coupling CE and the coupling RE for analyzing the one or more biomarkers, Brown does teach that when the switch is set to the “on” position, the circuit acts like a normal prior art circuit for measurement [para. 0009], and when the switch is set to the “off” position, the calibration resistor connects the inputs of the measuring circuit so that the circuit can generate an output voltage corresponding to the zero load current [para. 0009].
Sheppard and Brown are considered analogous art to the claimed inventions because they are in the same field of circuitry. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the potentiostat circuit of Sheppard to include at least one calibration resistor; and a switch switchable between an OPEN state and a CLOSED state; wherein the switch is configured for, when in the CLOSED state, electrically connecting the coupling CE and the coupling RE and electrically connecting the one or more signal analyzers to the connected coupling CE and coupling RE via the at least one calibration resistor for directing a calibration signal to the at least one frequency analyzer component for calibration; and wherein the switch is configured for, when in the OPEN state, electrically disconnecting the coupling CE for the coupling RE and electrically disconnecting the one or more signal analyzers from the coupling RE for analyzing the one or more biomarkers, as taught by Brown, as adding a calibration resistor and a switch to change the mode of the potentiostat from measurement mode to calibration mode allows for accurate determination of the current (Brown, [para. 0002]). In addition, although Brown teaches the use of only one switch, the switch could be duplicated so that a set of switches could be used depending on the sensor. The court noted that the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) and MPEP 2144.04 VI(B).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Sheppard teaches the circuitry of claim 1.
Sheppard is silent on wherein the set of switches are synchronously switchable between the OPEN state and the CLOSED state. However, given that the circuitry of claim 1 functions in a measurement mode only when the switches are in the OPEN state, and functions in a calibration mode when the switches in the CLOSED state (Brown, [para. 0009]), there are two options for switching the switches: the switches can be synchronously switchable, or the switches can be asynchronously switchable. Thus, there are two identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try by choosing from the above two identified solutions, which would lead to choosing the switches can be synchronously switchable. Choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation for success, is likely to be obvious to a person if ordinary skill in the art. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143 (I)(E)).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Sheppard teaches the circuitry of claim 1, wherein the set of switches comprise a plurality of switches (as outlined in the claim 1 rejection above, a plurality of switches can be used) and the at least one calibration resistor is a single calibration resistor (modified Sheppard teaches a single calibration resistor is used as outlined in the claim 1 rejection above).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Sheppard teaches the circuitry of claim 1, Sheppard teaches wherein the set of switches comprise a plurality of switches and the one or more signal analyzers are electrically connected to the one or more coupling WEs via one or more first amplifiers (a first sensing resistor R1 is connected to a first transimpedance amplifier 406 for the first working electrode 414 in Fig 4A [para. 0045]; the second working electrode 418 and the third working electrode are similarly connected [paras. 0046-0047]) with each signal analyzer electrically connected to the respective WE via a respective one of the one or more first amplifiers (as illustrated in paras. 0045-0047, each of the working electrodes [first working electrode 414, second working electrode 418, and third working electrode 422] are electrically connected to their respective WE via a respective amplifier; for example, the first working electrode 414 is connected to a first transimpedance amplifier 406 [para. 0045]).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Sheppard teaches the circuitry of claim 7.
Sheppard is silent on wherein the set of switches are configured for, when in the CLOSED state, electrically connecting the coupling CE and the coupling RE and electrically connecting the one or more first amplifiers to the connected coupling CE and the coupling RE via the at least one calibration resistor.
Brown teaches wherein the set of switches are configured for, when in the CLOSED state, electrically connecting the coupling CE and the coupling RE and electrically connecting the one or more first amplifiers to the connected coupling CE and the coupling RE via the at least one calibration resistor (when in the CLOSED or “off” state, the calibration resistor connects the inputs of the measuring circuit so that the circuit can generate an output corresponding to a zero load current [para. 0009]).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the set of switches of modified Sheppard so that the set of switches are configured for, when in the CLOSED state, electrically connecting the coupling CE and the coupling RE and electrically connecting the one or more first amplifiers to the connected coupling CE and the coupling RE via the at least one calibration resistor, as taught by Brown, as a circuit with this calibration setup allows for more accurate determination of the circuit current (Brown, [para. 0002]).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Sheppard teaches an electrochemical-sensing apparatus (implantable device 702 in Fig. 7 [para. 0065] in Sheppard); the limitation “for analyzing one or more biomarkers in a sample of a user” is an intended use limitation [see MPEP 2111.02]. Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does [MPEP 2114(II)]. A functional recitation of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. See MPEP 2114. In the instant case, Sheppard teaches the potentiostat circuits and related circuitry are used for controlling the operation of an array of biosensors [para. 0002] to detect biomarkers such as glucose [para. 0041], and the potentiostat of Figure 4A is specifically configured to perform the intended use [para. 0041], the apparatus comprising:
an analysis circuitry of claim 1 (modified Sheppard teaches the analysis circuitry as outlined in the claim 1 rejection above); and
an output (differential amplifier 426 gives an output [para. 0045]) for outputting an analytical result of said analysis of the one or more biomarkers in a sample (output of differential amplifier 426 can be filtered and measured by a microcontroller to give information regarding the first working electrode 414 sensor current [para. 0045]).
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheppard, Solartron, and Brown, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Lopez (Fast Calibration Methods for Resistive Sensor Readout Based on Direct Interface Circuits. Sensors, 2019; 19, 1-19).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Sheppard teaches the circuitry of claim 1, and the set of switches comprise a plurality of switches (as outlined in the claim 1 rejection above, a plurality of switches can be used).
Sheppard is silent on wherein the at least one calibration resistor comprises a plurality of calibration resistors.
Lopez teaches a method to measure the resistance of a sensor (abstract), and teaches wherein the at least one calibration resistor comprises a plurality of calibration resistors (a two-point calibration method [TPCM] uses two calibration resistors [second para., page 3).
Modified Sheppard and Lopez are considered analogous art to the claimed inventions because they are in the same field of circuitry for sensors. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the at least one calibration resistor of modified Sheppard to comprise a plurality of calibration resistors, as taught by Lopez, as multiple calibration resistors can be used as an alternative method of calibration, such as for a two-point calibration method (Lopez, [second para. page 3]).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Sheppard teaches the circuitry of claim 4.
Sheppard is silent on wherein the plurality of calibration resistors have a same resistance, or at least a first subset and a second subset of the plurality of calibration resistors have different resistances.
Lopez teaches at least a first subset and a second subset of the plurality of calibration resistors have different resistances (using a two-point calibration method, a calibration resistor Rc1 can have a resistance in 15% of the range between the minimum and maximum resistance, while a second calibration resistor Rc2 can have a resistance in 85% of the range [fourth para., page 4]).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the calibration resistors of modified Sheppard so that at least a first subset and a second subset of the plurality of calibration resistors have different resistances, as taught by Lopez, as two calibration resistors with different resistances are used in an alternative method to calibrating a sensor using the two-point calibration method (Lopez, [second para. page 3]).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheppard, Solartron, and Brown, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Yang (US 2013/0332085 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Sheppard teaches the circuitry of claim 1.
Sheppard is silent on at least one frequency generator for providing one or more control signals to the one or more signal analyzers.
Yang teaches a circuit for one or more sensing electrodes (abstract), and teaches at least one frequency generator for providing one or more control signals to the one or more signal analyzers (AC voltages plus a DC bias are applied between the working electrode and the counter electrode selected from frequencies ranging from 0.1 Hz to 1000 MHz [para. 0182]). In addition, the frequency generator of Yang is capable of applying a sinusoidal working potential to the glucose sensor [para. 0184].
Modified Sheppard and Yang are considered analogous art to the claimed inventions because they are in the same field of circuitry for sensors. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a frequency generator to modified Sheppard for providing one or more control signals to the one or more signal analyzers, as using a frequency generator with a sweeping range allows for tuning of the sensor based on the variables, such as the sensor structure and surface area of the electrodes (Yang, [para. 0187]).
Regarding Claim 10, modified Sheppard teaches the circuitry of claim 9, and modified Sheppard teaches wherein the at least one first frequency generator is configured for generating the one or more control signals of various frequencies within a predefined sweeping frequency-band (as outlined in the claim 9 rejection above, frequency applied can be sinusoidal).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheppard, Solartron, and Brown, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Qu (US 2020/0033398 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Sheppard teaches the circuitry of claim 1.
Sheppard is silent on wherein the excitation-signal circuit comprises a second frequency generator for generating the excitation signal.
Qu teaches an apparatus comprising a measurement circuit and an excitation circuit configured to apply a predetermined voltage (abstract), and teach the excitation-signal circuit comprises a second frequency generator (a waveform generator [para. 0045]) for generating the excitation signal (excitation circuit 414 applies an excitation signal to the sensor circuit, and the magnitude and frequency of the excitation signal can be modified via a DAC circuit 412 to allow different excitation signals of different frequencies and magnitude to be generated [para. 0045]).
Modified Sheppard and Qu are considered analogous art to the claimed inventions because they are in the same field of circuitry for sensors. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the excitation circuit of modified Sheppard to comprises a second frequency generator for generating the excitation signal, as taught by Qu, as varying the excitation signal frequency allows for a test of the circuit to measure the internal impedance (Qu, [para. 0046]).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Sheppard teaches the circuitry of claim 11.
Sheppard is silent on wherein the second frequency generator comprises a frequency-response analyzer.
Solartron teaches a frequency response analyzer (title), and teaches wherein the second frequency generator comprises a frequency-response analyzer (a frequency response analyzer used for frequency generation can be used for electronic testing of circuits [entire Section of Electronic Testing on page 1]).
Modified Sheppard and Solartron are considered analogous art to the claimed inventions because they are in the same field of circuitry for sensors. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the second frequency generator of modified Sheppard to further comprises a frequency-response analyzer, as taught by Solartron, frequency response analyzer allows for application of a high accuracy, wide frequency range (Solartron, [bullet points of col. 1, page 1]).
Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheppard, Solartron, Brown, and Qu, as applied to claim 11 above, and in further view of Wissenwasser (Signal Generator for Wireless Impedance Monitoring of Microbiological. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement. 2011; 60(6), 2039-2046).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Sheppard teaches the circuitry of claim 11.
Sheppard is silent on wherein the excitation-signal circuit further comprises a frequency filter for filtering an output of the second frequency generator for generating the excitation signal.
Wissenwasser teaches a small microcontroller-based sine wave generator for wireless applications in biosensing (abstract), and although Wissenwasser does not explicitly teach wherein the excitation-signal circuit further comprises a frequency filter for filtering an output of the second frequency generator for generating the excitation signal, Wissenwasser does teach a frequency filter (a low-pass filter within signal processing [second para. col. 1, page 2040]) for filtering an output of a frequency generator (low-pass filter partially suppresses some of the harmonics from the signal generator [second para. col. 1, page 2040]).
Wissenwasser and modified Sheppard are considered analogous art to the claimed inventions because they are in the same field of circuitry for sensors. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the excitation-signal circuit of modified Sheppard to further comprises a frequency filter for filtering an output of the second frequency generator for generating the excitation signal, as taught by Wissenwasser, as adding a frequency filter, such as a low-pass filter, to an electronic signal allows for suppression of some of the harmonics from the frequency generator (Wissenwasser, [second para. col. 1, page 2040]).
Regarding Claim 14, modified Sheppard teaches the circuitry of claim 13.
Sheppard is silent on wherein the excitation-signal circuit further comprises a microcontroller for controlling the frequency filter and the second frequency generator.
Wissenwasser teaches a microcontroller (a microcontroller [first para. of Section A. Circuitry, page 2040]) for controlling the frequency filter and the second frequency generator (microcontroller selects the bit pattern that the signal generator uses, which is then fed into a second order low-pass filter [first para. of section A. circuitry on page 2040]).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a microcontroller to the excitation-signal circuit of modified Sheppard for controlling the frequency filter and the second frequency generator, as taught by Wissenwasser, as the microcontroller controls the exact voltage delivered to the circuit (Wissenwasser, [first para. of section A. circuitry, page 2040]).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Sheppard teaches the circuitry of claim 13.
Sheppard is silent on wherein the excitation-signal circuit further comprises a second amplifier for amplifying an output of the frequency filter for generating the excitation signal.
Wissenwasser teaches a second amplifier for amplifying an output of the frequency filter (depending on the application, an additional amplifier may be needed for the output of the frequency filter [last para. col. 1, page 2040]).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a second amplifier to the excitation-signal circuit of modified Sheppard for amplifying an output of the frequency filter for generating the excitation signal, as taught by Wissenwasser, as amplifying the signal of the excitation-circuit may be required for certain applications (Wissenwasser, [last para. col. 1, page 2040]).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheppard, Solartron, and Brown, as applied to claim 16 above, and in further view of Yao (US 2017/0030889 A1).
Regarding Claim 17, modified Sheppard teaches the electrochemical-sensing apparatus of claim 16.
Sheppard teaches a housing (a monitor or device includes packaging for housing the potentiostat circuit [para. 0026]), the electrochemical-sensing structure comprising a first set of electrodes for contacting the sample (one or more sensors 709, which may include one or more electrodes [para. 0065]), the first set of electrodes comprising a CE for coupling with the coupling CE (a CE sensor may be provided for coupling with the coupling CE [para. 0065]), a RE for coupling with the coupling RE (a RE may be provided for coupling with the coupling RE [para. 0065]), and one or more WEs for coupling with the one or more coupling WEs (a WE may be provided for coupling with the coupling WE [para. 0065]).
Sheppard is silent on the housing comprising at least one first port for receiving an electrochemical-sensing structure.
Yao teaches a wireless transmitter adapter for a biosensor meter (abstract), and teaches at least one first port for receiving an electrochemical-sensing structure (biosensor includes circuitry that includes a microcontroller 107; a communications port 112 can be electrically coupled to microcontroller 112 [para. 0022]).
Modified Sheppard and Yao are considered analogous art to the claimed inventions because they are in the same field of circuitry for biosensors. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the housing of modified Sheppard to include at least one first port for receiving an electrochemical-sensing structure, as taught by Yao, as adding a port allows for electrical connection of the biosensor to other circuitry/displays (Yao, [abstract, para. 0022]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see Remarks pgs. 7-10, filed 10/07/2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C 103 rejections and amended claims have been fully considered.
Applicant’s Argument #1:
Applicant traverses the 35 U.S.C 103 prior art rejection of independent claim 1 that one of ordinary skill in the art would not find any teaching or suggestion from Brown that, when the switches are CLOSED, the coupling CE and the coupling RE are electrically connected, and the coupling CE and the coupling RE are connected to the one or more signal analyzers, and when the switches are OPEN, the coupling CE and the coupling RE shall be electrically disconnected, as Brown does not disclose how the normal prior art circuit for measurement is formed, or where to put the calibration resistor or switch.
Examiner’s Response #1:
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered, but are not persuasive. As Brown teaches that the switch and calibration resistor selectively break the connection between its side of the resistor and the respective input of the amplifier (Brown, [Claim 1]). As a biosensor comprising a counter electrode, working electrode, and reference electrodes uses an input of a control amplifiers (see Figure 1 of Sheppard), it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to place the calibration resistor and switch, so that when the switches are CLOSED, the coupling CE and the coupling RE are electrically connected, and the coupling CE and the coupling RE are connected to the one or more signal analyzers, and when the switches are OPEN, the coupling CE and the coupling RE shall be electrically disconnected, as breaking the connection of the control amplifier also breaks the electrical connection of the RE and CE.
Applicant’s Argument #2:
Applicant argues on page 10 that for dependent claim 2 that there may exist more than two options for opening and closing the switches to determine a measurement mode and a calibration mode, not only the two options of all switches are synchronously switchable, or all switches are asynchronously switchable.
Examiner’s Response #2:
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered, but are not persuasive as even if other combinations of switches are considered (i.e., some switches on and other switches off), there remain a finite number of combinations. Thus, there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success. Choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation for success, is likely to be obvious to a person if ordinary skill in the art. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143 (I)(E)).
Applicant’s Argument #3:
Applicant argues on pages 10-11 that since dependent claim 3 has been further amended to recite “wherein the set of switches comprise a plurality of switches and the at least one calibration resistor is a single calibration resistor.” and dependent claim 8 recites “the one or more first amplifiers” connecting coupling CE and coupling RE via the at least one calibration resistor in the closed state, claims 3 and 8 are not obvious over the prior art.
Examiner’s Response #3:
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered, but are not persuasive as for claim 3 the switch can be duplicated so that a set of switches could be used depending on the sensor. The court noted that the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) and MPEP 2144.04 VI(B). For claim 8, Sheppard teaches the one or more first amplifiers (see Claim 7 rejection above) and, as outlined in claim 1 rejection above and Examiner’s Response #1, Brown teaches that the switch and calibration resistor selectively break the connection between its side of the resistor and the respective input of the amplifier (Brown, [Claim 1]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 RANDALL LEE GAMBLE JR whose telephone number is (703)756-5492. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 10:00-6:00 EST.
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, Luan Van can be reached at (571) 272-8521. 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.
/R.L.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1795
/LUAN V VAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1795