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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of group III in the reply filed on 10 February 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is not a serious search burden on the Examiner. This is not found persuasive because for the reasons outlined by the Examiner in the Restriction Requirement, there are features in the other non-elected claim groups that patentably distinguish them from the elected group. In this instance, for example, the Examiner would be required to search for temperature sensors (group IV), which are classified in a separate class from flow sensors.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Claim 17 is directed to a method of continuous flow measurement of a body fluid (process).
Step 2A, Prong One
The recited steps are directed to a mental process of performing concepts in a human mind or by a human using a pen and paper or being considered as methods of organizing human activity. See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(II) and (Ill). The limitation(s) of “sending to a user-device for display, an indication to mount the flow sensor on a portion of a skin surface of a body, the portion of the skin surface overlaying a subdermal conduit of the body fluid” and “determining a change in flow related to the body fluid through a segment of the subdermal conduit corresponding to a change related to the position of the body” is a process that, as drafted, covers performance of the limitation by a human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or being considered as methods of organizing human activity under the broadest reasonable standard interpretation. For example, these limitations are nothing more than instructing a user of a device to place the device on their own or someone else’s body, then looking at numbers on a chart or paper, and determining that there is a change in those numbers relating to a change in the position of the body.
Step 2A, Prong Two
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, claim 17 also recites “detecting, using the motion sensor, a first position of the body: sending, to the user-device for display, a second indication to adjust a position of the body to a second position of the body different from the first position; detecting, using the motion sensor, the second position of the body”. The detecting and sending amount to nothing more than the pre-solution activity of data gathering. The “user-device” and “display” are recited at a high-level of generality and amount to nothing more than parts of a generic computer. Merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer does not integrate a judicial exception into practical application.
Step 2B
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of sending and detecting amount to nothing more than mere pre-solution activity of data gathering, which does not amount to an inventive concept. The additional elements recited above are well known in the field of collecting and displaying data. For example, motion sensors are recited at a high level of generality and well known in the art to track body movements, which is supported by Table 1 of Porciuncula et al. Moreover, simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, e.g., a claim to an abstract idea requiring no more than a generic computer to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known to the industry, is discussed in Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 225, 110 USPQ2d at 1984. See MPEP § 2106.05(d). In this case, elements of general computer are being used to implement the abstract idea of “sending to a user-device for display, an indication to mount the flow sensor on a portion of a skin surface of a body, the portion of the skin surface overlaying a subdermal conduit of the body fluid” and “determining a change in flow related to the body fluid through a segment of the subdermal conduit corresponding to a change related to the position of the body”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Phua et al (U.S. 2009/0203988). Phua discloses a wireless (par. 0059), flexible flow sensor comprising a motion sensor (par. 0015-0016, “magnetic sensor”, with placement feedbacks to vary the placement of the magnetic sensor), the method comprising: sending to a user-device for display, an indication to mount the flow sensor on a portion of a skin surface of a body (“the signal acquisition module further comprises a placement mechanism for a user to manually or automatically adjust the position and orientation of the magnetic sensor. In another embodiment of the apparatus, the display/userinterface/alarm module displays the two measurable parameters: blood flow anomaly and measured pulse rate. In another embodiment of the apparatus, the display/userinterface/alarm module comprises a display, an alarm, and a user interface.”), the portion of the skin surface overlaying a subdermal conduit of the body fluid (par. 0011, “the magnetic source and sensor are placed at an offset position or angle with respect to the longitudinal axis of any major blood vessels near the surface of the skin.”); detecting, using the motion sensor, a first position of the body (see above par. 0016); sending, to the user-device for display, a second indication to adjust a position of the body to a second position of the body different from the first position (see above par. 0016); detecting, using the motion sensor, the second position of the body (see above, par. 0016); and determining a change in flow related to the body fluid through a segment of the subdermal conduit corresponding to a change related to the position of the body (“blood flow anomaly” in above par. 0016; also par. 0066 “hospitals can use the apparatus for monitoring patients; athletes can use the apparatus for monitoring their blood flow; elders can be monitored remotely with the wireless apparatus; blood flow anomalies can be detected in different circumstances such as long flight, rescues, and dangerous situations.”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEBORAH L MALAMUD whose telephone number is (571)272-2106. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 1:00-9:30 Eastern.
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, Unsu Jung can be reached at (571) 272-8506. 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.
/DEBORAH L MALAMUD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792