Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/944,592

DEVICE AND SYSTEM FOR PASSIVE CLINICAL ASSESSMENT

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 14, 2022
Examiner
BARFIELD, ANTHONY DERRELL
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Christiana Care Health System Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
975 granted / 1218 resolved
+28.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
1241
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
38.3%
-1.7% vs TC avg
§102
45.2%
+5.2% vs TC avg
§112
13.1%
-26.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1218 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . 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. Claim(s) 1-6, 8, 13-16, 18-19, 21-23, 28-30,32, 36-38 and 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lin (CN 204581872A). Lin shows the use of a passive clinical assessment device (Fig. 1) comprising: a freestanding patient-engaging structure (2,6) having a seat (6) and backrest (2) configured to register with a person's anatomical structure in a predictable fashion (when the person is seated thereon); a plurality of sensors (1,3) supported on the patient-engaging structure in positions for registering with selected anatomical portions of a person engaged with the patient-engaging structure; and a caregiver display device (5) for displaying information as a function of data collected by via the plurality sensors, that is supported on the freestanding patient-engaging structure within a field of view of a person seated on the patient-engaging structure but in a position to display information in a direction of a vantage point of the person seated on the patient-engaging structure so that the displayed information is viewable from a vantage point opposing that of the person seated on the patient-engaging structure. Regarding claim 2, a patient-engagement structure as a countertop (the seat surface portion of the seat). Regarding claim 3, the caregiver display is supported on the patient-engaging structure in a position so as not be viewable by the person engaged with the patient engaging structure (see Figs.1). Regarding claims 4-6,8, 28, 32 and 40-42, the patient-engaging structure is configured as a patient-supporting structure having an armrests (the portion along the backrest and rail (4)) and a base (the legs) wherein a microphone (via the sensors (3) to be recorded by the recording device (13)) is supported on the backrest that is tiltable relative to a seat of the chair (see last para of page 2 on of the translation]). Regarding claims 13-16, and 28-30, the passive clinical-assessment device has an electronic data management component (11,13). The electronic data management component is operatively connected to one of the plurality of sensors (Fig. 1). Regarding claims 21-23 and 36-38, Lin shows the use of a display pod (4) that supports the caregiver display device and a touchless sensor (13) to obtain biometric data (from ECG sensors (3)). 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. Claim(s) 7, 9-12, 20, 34-35 and 41-47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Waterson et al. (2012/0179479). Lin shows all of the teachings of the claimed invention except the use of a pair of armrests having a respective set or electrically-conductive contacts or an inflatable cuff for automatically obtaining blood pressure measurement of a person seated on the seat. Waterson et al. teaches the use of a passive clinical assessment device (Fig.1) comprising a patient-engaging structure having a tiltable backrest (316) and a pair of armrests (306) that have electrically-conductive contacts and a base that supports a third set of electronically-conductive contacts (Figs. 1-2, (222) see para[0023], [0161-0162]) in regards to claims 7 and 9. Regarding claims 10-11, 34-35, 41 and 43-44 the armrest has an inflatable cuff (152) and a pulse oximeter clip (158) indirectly supported thereon. Waterson further teaches the use of a scale (112), in regards to claim 12. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the patient- engaging structure of Lin, with the teachings of Waterson et al. in order to allow more data to be collected in order to better monitor a patient’s vitals. Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Macoviak et al. (2020/0098461). Lin fails to disclose an electronic data management component is configured to perform data processing on digital data to produce a 6-lead electrocardiogram (EKG). Macoviak et al. teaches the use of electronic data management component is configured to perform data processing on digital data to produce a 6-lead electrocardiogram (EKG) (see para[0131],[0320],[0324],[0357]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the device of Lin to include an electronic data management component that is configured to perform data processing on digital data to produce a 6-lead electrocardiogram (EKG), as taught by Macoviak et al. in order to provide the detection of additional abnormality categories. Claim(s) 24-25, 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Cashman et al (2018/0158555). Lin shows all of the teachings of the claimed invention but fails to disclose the use of an infrared temperature sensor, a video camera to capture images of a patient and self-cleaning system. Cashman et al. teaches the use of a display pod having at least one touchless sensor comprising an infrared (IR) temperature sensor (Figs 2,5, 7, 8, 10 see para [0247], [0256], [0330]). The pod further has a video camera in regards to claim 25. Regarding claim 27, Cashman et al. teaches a compressed gas source configured to hold compressed gas (see para [0031], [0033], [0164], [0316)); a dispenser structure in fluid communication with the reservoir and the compressed gas source that is configured to dispense a mist of cleaning solution propelled by gas from the compressed gas source (para [0031],{0033},[0164],[0316]) having a controller operable to selectively open and close the valve (see para [0031], [0033], [0164], (0316]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the passive clinical assessment device of Lin with the teachings of Cashman et al., in order to provide additional medical attendant assistance and insure that the examination environment was sterile. Claim(s) 26 and 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Drucker (2007/0208241). Lin shows all of the teachings of the claimed invention, but fails to disclose the use of a tube, wherein a passive clinical assessment device comprises at least one of a hardware and software for performing an automated breath analysis on a breath sample received via the tube. Drucker teaches a tube (955), wherein a passive clinical assessment device comprises at least one of a hardware and software for performing an automated breath analysis on a breath sample received via the tube (see para[0027], [0072]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the device of Lin to include a tube along with a passive clinical assessment device comprising at least one of hardware and software for performing an automated breath analysis on a breath sample received via the tube, as taught by Drucker, in order to provide additional physiological assessments. Claim(s) 48 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Waterson et al. as applied to claims 41-47 above, and further in view of Drucker (2007/0208241). Lin in view of Waterson et al. shows all of the teachings of the claimed invention, but fails to disclose the use of a tube, wherein a passive clinical assessment device comprises at least one of a hardware and software for performing an automated breath analysis on a breath sample received via the tube. Drucker teaches a tube (955), wherein a passive clinical assessment device comprises at least one of a hardware and software for performing an automated breath analysis on a breath sample received via the tube (see para[0027], [0072]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the device of Lin in view of Waterson et al. to include a tube along with a passive clinical assessment device comprising at least one of hardware and software for performing an automated breath analysis on a breath sample received via the tube, as taught by Drucker, in order to provide additional physiological assessments. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 28 and 40 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any of the references solely and/or in combination as applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY D BARFIELD whose telephone number is (571)272-6852. 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. 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. /ANTHONY D BARFIELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636 adb December 23, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 14, 2022
Application Filed
Sep 14, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 05, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 09, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 12, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Oct 15, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 13, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 13, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 14, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 05, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 16, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600480
VEHICLE PASSENGER SEAT ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594860
VEHICLE SEAT DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594859
VEHICLE SEAT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593921
SEAT SUPPORT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593918
CROSS-ELASTIC DIRECTOR'S CHAIR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+13.9%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1218 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month