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 Claims
The amendments and remarks filed on 13APR2026 have been entered and considered. Claims 35-54 are currently pending. Claims 35-52 & 54 have been amended. Claims 1-34 & 53 have been canceled by applicant. No claims have been added. Claims 35-52 & 54 are under examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's amendments filed 13APR2026 regarding the claim objections have been fully considered and have been found to obviate the objection. Therefore, the claim objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments/amendments filed 13APR2026 regarding the drawing objections have been fully considered and are addressed below:
The examiner notes that the supplemental content Drawings show Figure 3 as being legible Therefore, the objection is withdrawn.
The examiner notes that the objections to figures 8 & 10 for missing “no” labels has been addressed by applicant’s amendments. Therefore, the related drawing objections to Figures 8 & 10 have been withdrawn.
The examiner notes that the objections to Figure 1 regarding the missing sensing units 400 has been addressed by applicant’s amendments. Therefore, the related drawing objections to Figure 1 have been withdrawn.
The examiner notes that TOF sensor 308 from Figure 5 has bee amended in the specification page 40 such that the component of Figure 5 is now supported by the specification. Therefore, the related drawing objection to Figure 5 has been withdrawn.
The examiner notes that Regulator 147 has bee amended in the specification page 35 such that the regulator now recites 137 . Therefore, the related drawing objection to Figure 5 has been withdrawn.
The drawings were objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include reference characters as shown in Figure 3. The amendments to the drawing obviates this objection and is therefore withdrawn.
Regarding the objection to Figure 1 of parts 600 & 10 both pointing to the same component, the applicant’s arguments obviate the objection. Therefore, the objection has been withdrawn.
The arguments regarding Figure 3 parts 167 and 103 obviates the objection. Therefore, the objection has been withdrawn.
The arguments regarding Figure 13 parts 500, 400, 217 obviates the objection. Therefore, the objection has been withdrawn.
The arguments regarding Figure 18 parts 243 and 247 obviates the objection. Therefore, the objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments/amendments filed 13APR2026 regarding the specification objections have been fully considered and have been found to obviate the objections. Therefore, the specification objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant's amendments filed 13APR2026 regarding the112(f) interpretations have been fully considered and have been found to obviate the interpretation. Therefore, the 112(f) interpretation has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 13APR2026 regarding the rejections under 35 USC 112(b)have been fully considered and have been found to obviate the rejections. Therefore, the 112(b) rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant's amendments filed 13APR2026 regarding the rejections under 35 USC 101 have been fully considered and have been found to obviate the rejections. Therefore, the 101 rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant's amendments filed 13APR2026 regarding the rejections under 35 USC 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and have been found to obviate the rejection. Therefore, the 102(a)(1) rejection has been withdrawn. A new ground for rejection under 35 U.S.C 103(a) has been provided below.
Applicant's arguments filed 13APR2026 regarding the rejections under 35 USC 103(a) have been fully considered and have been found to be not persuasive. Parts deemed not persuasive discussed below:
Applicant states (Pages 14-16 of the Remarks regarding the Ahmed et al. (WO Publication 2015134654) Reference):
Ahmed also lacks the claimed "second measurement mode" in which measurements are performed "repeatedly regardless of the motion state of the wearer," because Ahmed's algorithm always adapts sampling rate to motion and has no motion- insensitive mode. Finally, Ahmed does not disclose entering the first or second measurement mode "based on first contextual data received by the wireless communicator via an external device"; its modes are triggered internally by its own accelerometer. Ahmed does not have a configuration where it does not perform a measurement if the user is in a certain motion state. In relation to claim 36, the Examiner referred to paragraph [0068] of Ahmed to disclose a button which may be pressed down to activate the bracelet to begin storing information. The button press does appear to trigger the performance of measurements, but this is not linked to the motion state of the wearer. Therefore, performing measurements in response to a button press does not achieve the claimed limitations of "determine from the contextual data whether the wearer of the wearable article is in the first motion state; in response to the wearer being in the first motion state, perform a measurement using the sensor of the wearable article; and in response to the wearer being in the second motion state, not perform a measurement using the sensor". Furthermore, Ahmed fails to disclose that the first and second measurement modes are entered based on "first contextual data received by the wireless communicator via an external device". While Ahmed may have internal modes based on its own accelerometer, it does not teach receiving an external wireless trigger from an external device to select between the claimed modes.
However, the arguments are not persuasive because Ahmed utilizing the continuous algorithm does not mean that Ahmed doesn’t use two modes of operations that function based on received information. Ahmed is shown to operate certain operation standards per the detected motion as an optimization means in Ahmed ¶0124 (“upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a first higher level of motion, the processing module may activate the light emitters at a first higher duty cycle and sample the reflected light using light detectors sampling at a first higher sampling rate. Upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a second lower level of motion, the processing module may activate the light emitters at a second lower duty cycle and sample the reflected light using light detectors sampling at a second lower sampling rate. That is, the duty cycle of the light emitters and the corresponding sampling rate of the light detectors may be adjusted in a graduated or continuous manner based on the motion status or level of motion of the user. This adjustment ensures that heart rate data is detected at a sufficiently high frequency during motion to reliably detect all of the heart beats of the user.”). This shows that at each motion state Ahmed would have it’s own set of device logic and therefore has a more than one measurement mode as required by the claim limitations. Furthermore, the use of a wireless communication with an external source can be found in Ahmed in portions such as Ahed ¶0135. Since it is only required that contextual data for motion states is obtained by the claim limitations, the use of a button push for input regarding the user would read on the limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation since this is providing contextual data about the motion states.
Applicant states (see Pages 17-18 of the Remarks regarding the Ahmed et al. (WO Publication 2015134654) in view of Grassere et al. (WO Publication 2018060291):
Grassere teaches performing measurements only when motion is below a threshold and then rejecting data if motion becomes too high during the measurement window; its goal is high-quality single measurements, not a second measurement mode that performs repeated measurements regardless of motion state. Ahmed's continuous, graduated duty-cycle adjustment based on motion and Grassere's low-motion-only approach with data rejection are technically incompatible in the manner required to reach the claimed second measurement mode. Neither reference teaches or suggests entering the first or second measurement mode based on "first contextual data received by the wireless communicator via an external device." Specifically, Grassere discloses a measuring device. Grassere is focused on obtaining high quality measurements, and thus only starts measurements when the motion information is below a threshold. If so, the device runs a test algorithm to determine that the test response of the sensor is correct. Once sufficient data has been performed, the processor executes a signal selection process. Ahmed and Grassere have different purposes. Ahmed is directed to continuous measurement, and increasing duty cycle as motion increases. Meanwhile, Grassere is focused on performing measurements only when the user is in low motion, and performs further checks to reject pulses if motion was too high during the measurement period. Thus, Ahmed are in many ways technically incompatible. Moreover, any apparent combination of Ahmed and Grassere would not result in a "second measurement" mode where "the controller is configured to repeatedly perform measurements using the sensor regardless of the motion state of the wearer". In Ahmed, the motion state is always used to adapt the sampling rate. In Grassere, measurements are only performed when the user is in a low motion state. Furthermore, Ahmed and Grassere fail to disclose that the first and second measurement modes are entered based on "first contextual data received by the wireless communicator via an external device". While Ahmed and Grassere may have internal modes based on its own accelerometer, they do not teach receiving an external wireless trigger from an external device to select between the claimed modes.
However, the examiner is not persuaded because both Grassere and Ahmed are compatible since both inventions focus on managing sensor activity based on a detected motion state from related contextual data to optimize data quality. Ahmed and Grassere have a clear overlap in scope since Ahmed explicitly discloses adapting to a low motion for data rejection (Ahmed ¶0131 “Shorter-wavelength LEDs may require more power than is required by other types of heart rate sensors, such as, a piezo-sensor or an infrared sensor. Therefore, an exemplary wearable system may provide and use a unique combination of sensors— one or more light detectors for periods where motion is expected and one or more piezo and/or infrared sensors for low motion periods (e.g., sleep)— to save battery life. Certain other embodiments of a wearable system may exclude piezo-sensors and/or infrared sensors.”) which is the main concept in Grassere. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to combine the references by applying Grassere’s threshold filtering as a standard pre filtering to Ahmed’s adaptive controls. The combination serves as a predictable arrangement of known sensor data optimization & management techniques.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 35-52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 35:
Claim 35 recites the limitation " contextual data " in Line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if “contextual data” in line 9 is referring to “first contextual data” in line 3 of claim 35. It is further unclear if “the contextual data” in line 12 is referring to “first contextual data” in line 3 or “contextual data” in line 9. For the purpose of examination, the examiner Is interpreting this to mean the contextual data is referring to the first contextual data of Line 3.
Claims 36- 52 are further rejected for depending upon the rejected claim 35.
Regarding Claim 39:
Claim 39 recites the limitation " determining from the second contextual data " in Line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 40-44 are further rejected for depending upon the rejected claim 39.
Regarding Claim 43:
Claim 43 recites the limitation " determining from the second contextual data " in Lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 44 is further rejected for depending upon the rejected claim 43.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 39-52 and 54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahmed et al. (WO Publication 2015134654; Previously Cited) in view of Grassere et al. (WO Publication 2018060291; Previously Cited).
Regarding claim 35, Ahmed discloses continuous physiological monitoring & interpretations (Ahmed Abstract) and further discloses a wearable article (Ahmed ¶0011 “ a device includes a wearable strap configured to be couplable to an appendage of a user,”), comprising: a sensor (Ahmed ¶0233 “The modes may include the use of optical detectors (e.g., light detectors), light emitters, motion sensors, a processing module, algorithms, other sensors, a peak detection technique, a frequency domain technique, variable optical characteristics, non-optical techniques, and so on.”); a wireless communicator (Ahmed ¶0084 “The network interface 614 is configured to wirelessly communicate data to an external network. Some embodiments of the wearable system may be configured to stream information wirelessly to a social network. In some embodiments, data streamed from a user's wearable system to an external network may be accessed by the user via a website. The network interface may be configured such that data collected by the system may be streamed wirelessly.”); and a controller (Ahmed ¶0219 “The processor 2310, which may include one or more microprocessors or other types of controllers, can perform a series of instructions that manipulate data.”) in communication with the sensor and the wireless communicator (Ahmed ¶0135 “In some embodiments, the processing module may be configured to automatically adjust a rate at which data is transmitted by the wireless transmitter to minimize power consumption while ensuring that raw and processed data generated by the system is reliably transmitted to external computing devices.“), the wireless communicator is configured to receive first contextual data via an external device (Ahmed ¶0084 “The network interface 614 is configured to wirelessly communicate data to an external network. Some embodiments of the wearable system may be configured to stream information wirelessly to a social network. In some embodiments, data streamed from a user's wearable system to an external network may be accessed by the user via a website. The network interface may be configured such that data collected by the system may be streamed wirelessly.”), the controller is configured to determine, based on the first contextual data, whether to enter a first measurement mode or a second measurement mode the controller is configured to enter the first measurement mode based on the determination (Ahmed ¶0132 “For example, upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a first higher level of motion (e.g., exercising), one or more light emitters may be activated to emit light at a first wavelength. Upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a second lower level of motion (e.g., at rest), non-light based sensors may be activated.”) wherein in the first measurement mode, the controller is configured to: obtain contextual data indicative of whether a wearer of the wearable article is in a first motion state or a second motion state representative of a higher degree of activity of the wearer than the first motion state (Ahmed ¶0132 “For example, upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a first higher level of motion (e.g., exercising), one or more light emitters may be activated to emit light at a first wavelength. Upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a second lower level of motion (e.g., at rest), non-light based sensors may be activated.”); determine from the contextual data whether the wearer of the wearable article is in the first motion state (Ahmed ¶0132 “second lower level of motion (e.g., at rest)”); and in response to the wearer being in the first motion state, perform a measurement using the sensor (Ahmed ¶0124 “upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a first higher level of motion, the processing module may activate the light emitters at a first higher duty cycle and sample the reflected light using light detectors sampling at a first higher sampling rate. Upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a second lower level of motion, the processing module may activate the light emitters at a second lower duty cycle and sample the reflected light using light detectors sampling at a second lower sampling rate. That is, the duty cycle of the light emitters and the corresponding sampling rate of the light detectors may be adjusted in a graduated or continuous manner based on the motion status or level of motion of the user. This adjustment ensures that heart rate data is detected at a sufficiently high frequency during motion to reliably detect all of the heart beats of the user.”).; the controller is configured to enter the second measurement mode based on the determination; wherein in the second measurement mode, the controller is configured to repeatedly perform measurements using the sensor regardless of the motion state of the wearer (Ahmed ¶0124 “upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a first higher level of motion, the processing module may activate the light emitters at a first higher duty cycle and sample the reflected light using light detectors sampling at a first higher sampling rate. Upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a second lower level of motion, the processing module may activate the light emitters at a second lower duty cycle and sample the reflected light using light detectors sampling at a second lower sampling rate. That is, the duty cycle of the light emitters and the corresponding sampling rate of the light detectors may be adjusted in a graduated or continuous manner based on the motion status or level of motion of the user. This adjustment ensures that heart rate data is detected at a sufficiently high frequency during motion to reliably detect all of the heart beats of the user.”).
Ahmed does not further disclose in response to the wearer being in the first motion state, performing a measurement using a sensor of the wearable article, and in response to the wearer being in the second motion state, not perform a measurement using the sensor. Grassere further discloses in response to the wearer being in the first motion state, performing a measurement using a sensor of the wearable article, and in response to the wearer being in the second motion state, not perform a measurement using the sensor (Grassere Page 13 Paragraph 6 “ If the motion information is larger than the motion threshold value, the processor may decide to not switch to the active state and start a restart timer which provides a time delay (step 212), e.g. 5-30 seconds, before a new measurement cycle is triggered (including the buffering of new motion data, determining motion information and the checking whether the motion information is below or above a certain threshold as described above with reference to steps 202-208).”).
Before the effective filing date, one of ordinary skill in the art would think to combined the monitoring techniques of Ahmed with instructions wherein in response to the wearer being in the first motion state, performing a measurement using a sensor of the wearable article, and in response to the wearer being in the second motion state, not perform a measurement using the sensor, as taught by Grassere, for the purpose of saving battery life (Ahmed ¶0130) and avoiding bad quality data.
Regarding claim 36, claim 35 is obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed further discloses wherein in the first measurement mode, the controller is configured to only perform the measurement using the sensor when the contextual data indicates that the wearer is in the first motion state (Ahmed ¶0067 “ In other embodiments, the button may be disposed and configured such that it may be pressed manually at the discretion of a user to begin storing information or otherwise to mark the start or end of an activity period.”; ¶0073).
Regarding claim 37, claim 35 is obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed further discloses wherein in response to the wearer being in the first motion state, the controller is configured to direct a memory of the wearable article to store the data (Ahmed ¶0006 “The processor may be further configured to operate the heart rate monitoring system to obtain continuous heart rate data using one of the two or more different modes and to store the continuous heart rate data in the memory.”).
Regarding claim 38, claim 35 is obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed further discloses wherein in response to the wearer being in the first motion state, the controller is configured to perform a plurality of measurements using the sensor over a first predetermined time period. (Ahmed ¶0142 “ the intensity score is calculated based on the user's heart rate reserve (HR ) as detected continuously throughout the desired time period, for example, throughout the entire day.”; ¶0124).
Regarding claim 39, claim 35 is obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed does not further disclose wherein the controller is configured to determine from the second contextual data whether the wearer of the wearable article has been in the first motion state for more than a first predetermined time period; and in response to the wearer being in the first motion state for more than the first predetermined time period, performs the measurement using the sensor of the wearable article. Grassere in a similar field of endeavor of vital sign monitoring teaches determining from the second contextual data whether the wearer of the wearable article has been in the first motion state for more than a first predetermined time period; and in response to the wearer being in the first motion state for more than the first predetermined time period, performs the measurement using the sensor of the wearable article (Grassere Page 11 “If the motion information is larger than the motion threshold value, the processor may decide to not switch to the active state and start a restart timer which provides a time delay (step 212), e.g. 5-30 seconds, before a new measurement cycle is triggered (including the buffering of new motion data, determining motion information and the checking whether the motion information is below or above a certain threshold as described above with reference to steps 202-208)”). Before the effective filing date, one of ordinary skill in the art would think to combined the monitoring techniques of Ahmed with instructions wherein the controller is configured to determine from the second contextual data whether the wearer of the wearable article has been in the first motion state for more than a first predetermined time period; and in response to the wearer being in the first motion state for more than the first predetermined time period, performs the measurement using the sensor of the wearable article, as taught by Grassere, for the purpose of saving battery life (Ahmed ¶0130).
Regarding claim 40, claims 35 & 39 are obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed does not further disclose wherein in response to the wearer being in the first motion state for more than the first predetermined time period, the controller is configured to perform a plurality of measurements using the sensor. Grassere further teaches wherein in response to the wearer being in the first motion state for more than the first predetermined time period, the controller is configured to perform a plurality of measurements using the sensor (Grassere Page 11 “If the motion information is larger than the motion threshold value, the processor may decide to not switch to the active state and start a restart timer which provides a time delay (step 212), e.g. 5-30 seconds, before a new measurement cycle is triggered (including the buffering of new motion data, determining motion information and the checking whether the motion information is below or above a certain threshold as described above with reference to steps 202-208)”). Before the effective filing date, one of ordinary skill in the art would think to combined the monitoring techniques of Ahmed with instructions wherein the controller determines from the contextual data whether the wearer of the wearable article has been in the first motion state for more than a first predetermined time period; and in response to the wearer being in the first motion state for more than the first predetermined time period, performs the measurement using the sensor of the wearable article, as taught by Grassere, for the purpose of saving battery life (Ahmed ¶0130).
Regarding claim 41, claims 35 & 39-40 are obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed further discloses wherein the controller is configured to perform measurements using the sensor until an exit condition is reached (Ahmed ¶0073 “ In some embodiments, the sensor used for, e.g., measuring heart rate or GSR or any combination of these, may be used to indicate whether the user is wearing the wearable system or not. In some embodiments, power to the one or more LEDs may be cut off as soon as this situation is detected, and reset once the user has put the wearable system back on their wrist.”).
Regarding claim 42, claims 35 & 39-41 are obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed does not further disclose wherein the exit condition is determined to be reached if more than a second predetermined time period has elapsed. Grassere further teaches wherein the exit condition is determined to be reached if more than a second predetermined time period has elapsed (Grassere Page 12 “ For example, when a first reject has been determined, then the delay timer may be set to a one-minute time delay before a new measurement cycle is trigged. If the processor determines that the reject is the second consecutive reject (step 226), the processor may set the delay timer to a third delay period that is longer when compared to second delay period, e.g. a delay of two minutes instead of one minute (step 227) . If the reject is the third consecutive reject (or more) yet another delay period may be set that may be different from the first and second delay period.”).
Before the effective filing date, one of ordinary skill in the art would think to combined the monitoring techniques of Ahmed with instructions wherein the exit condition is determined to be reached if more than a second predetermined time period has elapsed, as taught by Grassere, for the purpose of saving battery life (Ahmed ¶0130).
Regarding claim 43, claims 35 & 39-42 are obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed does disclose wherein the exit condition is determined to be reached if the controller determines from the second contextual data that the wearer has transitioned from the first motion state to the second motion state. Grassere further teaches wherein the exit condition is determined to be reached if the controller determines from the second contextual data that the wearer has transitioned from the first motion state to the second motion state (Grassere Page 8 “The opto-electronic sensor is only activated if the user is not moving or at least moving with an intensity that does not significantly affect the optical response signal. This way, the energy consumption of the measuring device can be reduced while at the same time the risk that the measured optical response signal is affected by motion noise can be significantly reduced.”).
Before the effective filing date, one of ordinary skill in the art would think to combined the monitoring techniques of Ahmed with instructions wherein the exit condition is determined to be reached if the controller determines from the second contextual data that the wearer has transitioned from the first motion state to the second motion state, as taught by Grassere, for the purpose of saving battery life (Ahmed ¶0130) and avoiding bad quality data.
Regarding claim 44, claims 35 & 39-43 are obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed further discloses wherein the exit condition is determined to be reached if the controller determines that one or more of the measurements performed using the sensor do not satisfy a quality metric (Ahmed ¶0073 “ In some embodiments, the sensor used for, e.g., measuring heart rate or GSR or any combination of these, may be used to indicate whether the user is wearing the wearable system or not. In some embodiments, power to the one or more LEDs may be cut off as soon as this situation is detected, and reset once the user has put the wearable system back on their wrist.”).
Regarding claim 45, claim 35 is obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed further discloses wherein in the first measurement mode, the controller is configured to determine whether the wearable article is being worn, and in response to determining that the wearable article is being worn and the wearer is in the first motion state, the controller is configured to perform the measurement using the sensor (Ahmed ¶0073 “In some embodiments, the wearable system may further be configured such that a button underneath the system may be pressed against the user's wrist, thus triggering the system to begin one or more of collecting data, calculating metrics and communicating the information to a network. In some embodiments, the sensor used for, e.g., measuring heart rate or GSR or any combination of these, may be used to indicate whether the user is wearing the wearable system or not”; ¶0075).
Regarding claim 46, claims 35 & 45 are obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed further discloses wherein in response to determining that the wearable article is being worn, the controller is configured to obtain the second contextual data so as to determine whether the wearer of the wearable article is in the first motion state (Ahmed ¶0124 The processing module may process the motion data to determine a motion status of the user which indicates the level of motion of the user, for example, exercise, light motion (e.g., walking), no motion or rest, sleep, and the like. The processing module may adjust the duty cycle of one or more light emitters and the corresponding sampling rate of the one or more light detectors based on the motion status.”, where the device is programmed to shut off when not being worn as described in ¶0073 and therefore must be worn by the user to collect data.).
Regarding claim 47, claims 35 & 45 are obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed further discloses wherein in response to determining that the wearable article is being worn, the controller is configured to transition from a first power mode to a second power mode that consumes more power than the first power mode (Ahmed ¶0073 “ In some embodiments, power to the one or more LEDs may be cut off as soon as this situation is detected, and reset once the user has put the wearable system back on their wrist.” Showing that the system powers on when being worn).
Regarding claim 48, claims 35 & 45-47 are obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed further discloses wherein when in the second power mode, the controller is configured to obtain the second contextual data so as to determine whether the wearer of the wearable article is in the first motion state (Ahmed ¶0075 “In some embodiments, an application associated with data from an exemplary wearable system (e.g., a mobile communication device application) may include a user input component for enabling additional contextual data, e.g., emotional (e.g., the user's feelings), perceived intensity, and the like. When the data is uploaded from the wearable system directly or indirectly to a website, the website may record a user's "Vibes" alongside their duration of exercise and sleep.”).
Regarding claim 49, claim 35 is obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed further discloses wherein the contextual data indicative of whether the wearer of the wearable article is in the first motion state or the second motion state comprises motion data for the wearer, and the controller is configured to determine whether the wearer is in the first or second motion state from the motion data (Ahmed ¶0124 “the processing module may receive data on the motion of the user using, for example, an accelerometer. The processing module may process the motion data to determine a motion status of the user which indicates the level of motion of the user, for example, exercise, light motion (e.g., walking), no motion or rest, sleep, and the like.”).
Regarding claim 50, claim 35 is obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed further discloses wherein the contextual data indicative of whether the wearer of the wearable article is in the first motion state or the second motion state comprises location data for the wearer, and the controller determines whether the wearer is in the first or second motion state from the location data (Ahmed ¶0235 “The condition may include, without limitation, an accuracy of heart rate detection determined using a statistical analysis to provide a confidence level in the accuracy, a power consumption, a battery charge level, a user activity, a location of the sensor or motion of the sensor, an environmental or contextual condition (e.g., ambient light conditions), a physiological condition, an active condition, an inactive condition, and so on. This may include detecting a change in the condition, responsively selecting a different one of the two or more different modes, and storing additional continuous heart rate data obtained using at least one of the two or more different modes.”).
Regarding claim 51, claim 35 is obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed further discloses wherein the contextual data indicative of whether the wearer of the wearable article is in the first motion state or the second motion state comprises an input from a user indicating that the wearer is in the first motion state (Ahmed ¶0182 “ In some cases, the feedback panel 1538 may prompt the user to confirm whether he/she indeed performed that activity in a user field 1548. This user input may be displayed and/or used to improve an understanding of the user's health and exercise routines.”).
Regarding claim 52, claim 35 is obvious over Ahmed et al. combined with Grassere. Ahmed further discloses wherein the controller is operable to use the measurement performed in the first measurement mode to configure an algorithm which receives, as input, one or more measurements from the sensor (Ahmed ¶0154 “The training data set is used to train a machine learning system to predict the cardiovascular intensities experienced by the individuals based on the heart rate and other personal data. The trained system models a regression in which the coefficient estimates correspond to the weights or coefficients of the weighting scheme. In the training phase, user input on perceived exertion and the intensity scores are compared. The learning algorithm also alters the weighs based on the improving or declining health of a user as well as their qualitative feedback. This yields a unique algorithm that incorporates physiology, qualitative feedback, and quantitative data.”).
Regarding claim 54, Ahmed discloses continuous physiological monitoring & interpretations (Ahmed Abstract) and further discloses a method performed by a wearable article (Ahmed ¶0219 “The processor 2310, which may include one or more microprocessors or other types of controllers, can perform a series of instructions that manipulate data.”), receiving, by a wireless communicator of the wearable article, first contextual data via an external device (Ahmed ¶0084 “The network interface 614 is configured to wirelessly communicate data to an external network. Some embodiments of the wearable system may be configured to stream information wirelessly to a social network. In some embodiments, data streamed from a user's wearable system to an external network may be accessed by the user via a website. The network interface may be configured such that data collected by the system may be streamed wirelessly.”); the method comprising: determining, by a controller of the wearable article, based on the first contextual data whether to enter a first measurement mode or a second measurement mode, entering, by the controller, the first measurement mode based on the determination, (Ahmed ¶0132 “For example, upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a first higher level of motion (e.g., exercising), one or more light emitters may be activated to emit light at a first wavelength. Upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a second lower level of motion (e.g., at rest), non-light based sensors may be activated.”) entering, by the controller, the first measurement mode based on the determination, and in the first measurement mode: obtaining second contextual data indicative of whether a wearer of the wearable article is in a first motion state or a second motion state representative of a higher degree of activity of the wearer than the first motion state (Ahmed ¶0132 “For example, upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a first higher level of motion (e.g., exercising), one or more light emitters may be activated to emit light at a first wavelength. Upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a second lower level of motion (e.g., at rest), non-light based sensors may be activated.”); determining from the second contextual data whether the wearer of the wearable article is in the first motion state (Ahmed ¶0132 “second lower level of motion (e.g., at rest)”); the method further comprising entering, by the controller, second measurement mode based on the determination, and in the second measurement mode, repeatedly performing measurements using the sensor of the wearable article regardless of the motion state of the wearer (Ahmed ¶0124 “upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a first higher level of motion, the processing module may activate the light emitters at a first higher duty cycle and sample the reflected light using light detectors sampling at a first higher sampling rate. Upon determining that the motion status indicates that the user is at a second lower level of motion, the processing module may activate the light emitters at a second lower duty cycle and sample the reflected light using light detectors sampling at a second lower sampling rate. That is, the duty cycle of the light emitters and the corresponding sampling rate of the light detectors may be adjusted in a graduated or continuous manner based on the motion status or level of motion of the user. This adjustment ensures that heart rate data is detected at a sufficiently high frequency during motion to reliably detect all of the heart beats of the user.”).
Ahmed does not further disclose in response to the wearer being in the first motion state, performing a measurement using a sensor of the wearable article, and in response to the wearer being in the second motion state, not perform a measurement using the sensor. Grassere further discloses in response to the wearer being in the first motion state, performing a measurement using a sensor of the wearable article, and in response to the wearer being in the second motion state, not perform a measurement using the sensor (Grassere Page 13 Paragraph 6 “ If the motion information is larger than the motion threshold value, the processor may decide to not switch to the active state and start a restart timer which provides a time delay (step 212), e.g. 5-30 seconds, before a new measurement cycle is triggered (including the buffering of new motion data, determining motion information and the checking whether the motion information is below or above a certain threshold as described above with reference to steps 202-208).”).
Before the effective filing date, one of ordinary skill in the art would think to combined the monitoring techniques of Ahmed with instructions wherein in response to the wearer being in the first motion state, performing a measurement using a sensor of the wearable article, and in response to the wearer being in the second motion state, not perform a measurement using the sensor, as taught by Grassere, for the purpose of saving battery life (Ahmed ¶0130) and avoiding bad quality data.
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Megan Fedorky whose telephone number is 571-272-2117. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 3PM-11PM 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, Jennifer McDonald can be reached on Mon-Fri 9AM-5PM ET. 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.
/MEGAN T FEDORKY/
Examiner, Art Unit 3796
/UNSU JUNG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Prosecution Insights