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 .
This Office action is responsive to an amendment filed April 15, 2026. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 21-27 have been canceled. Claims 1-4, 6, 9-13 & 16-20 have been amended.
Claim Objections
The objections are withdrawn due to amendments.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on June 18, 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-5 & 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sorrels (US 2003/0056274).
In regards to claim 1, Sorrels discloses a finger receptacle comprising:
an elongated, flexible sleeve 20 having a length defined between a proximal end and a distal end, the sleeve 20 further comprising a support base 40, a ceiling 34 and a top surface having a longitudinal axis (X) (see at least figs. 1-2 & 5 and par 0040-0041), whereby the sleeve 20 is adapted to bias toward a radially contracted state and when urged into a radially expanded state effects a radial compression action about the length of the sleeve 20 to releasably secure a finger within the receptacle and to exert a radial compression along a length of the finger (see at least par 0013 & 0047); and
PNG
media_image1.png
222
630
media_image1.png
Greyscale
at least one angled projection 36 extending from the ceiling 34 and top surface at the distal end of the sleeve 20 (see at least figs. 2 & 5), the at least one angled projection 36 angled inwardly from the longitudinal axis (X) of the ceiling 34 and adapted to contact a nail 38 of the finger releasably secured in the sleeve 20 at the distal end of the receptacle to affect a second compression action (see at least par 0021 & 0040).
In regards to claim 2, Sorrels discloses the finger receptacle according to claim 1, wherein the base and the ceiling 34 of the receptacle are flexibly connected by sides of the sleeve 20 (see at least figs. 5 & 7 and par 0011, 0013-0014, 0017-0019 & 0045).
In regards to claim 3, Sorrels discloses the finger receptacle according to claim 1, wherein the support base 40 and ceiling 34 are connected by sides defining a flexible material (see at least figs. 5 & 7 and par 0013 & 0047).
In regards to claim 4, Sorrels discloses the finger receptacle according to claim 2, wherein the support base 40, the ceiling 34, and the sides of the sleeve 20 are integrally formed (see at least figs. 5 & 7 and par 0011, 0013-0014, 0017-0019 & 0045).
In regards to claim 5, Sorrels discloses the finger receptacle according to claim 1, wherein the distal end of the sleeve 20 comprises a flared edge or an outwardly-curved perimeter (see at least figs. 2, 5 & 7).
In regards to claim 8, Sorrels discloses the finger receptacle according to claim 1, wherein sides of the receptacle define a window or cutaway (i.e., undercut) toward the distal end of the sleeve 20, the window configured to visibly frame or part frame an optimal incision area 44 (see at least fig. 6-9 and par 0041 & 0070).
In regards to claim 9, Sorrels discloses the finger receptacle according to claim 1, wherein the receptacle the one projection 36 define an angle (A) relative to the longitudinal axis X measuring between 10-40 degrees (see at least figs. 2 & 5).
In regards to claim 10, Sorrels discloses the finger receptacle according to claim 1, further comprising one or more alignment aide (i.e., shape at fingertip or color of protective portion) capable of enabling a visual and/or physical alignment with at least one cutting mechanism (i.e., shape at a fingertip tip end of the guard allows pad 44 of medical practitioner to remain uncovered, see par 0041; material that forms protective portion 46 of guard 20 may be dyed a different color than the material that forms less protective portion 48, see par 0049) (see at least figs. 1-2, 5 & 7 and par 0041 & 0049).
In regards to claim 11, Sorrels discloses the finger receptacle according to claim 10, wherein the alignment aide (i.e., shape at fingertip or color of protective portion) facilitates a connection with one or more cutting tools (i.e., a lancet or other cutting tools may be positioned to pierce the dorsal side of the finger in the guard 20) (see at least figs. 1-2, 5 & 7 and par 0041 & 0049).
Claim(s) 12 & 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto (JP 2005-131009).
In regards to claim 12, Matsumoto discloses a finger holding device comprising:
a (docking) base 30;
an elongate docking structure 3 comprising a docking arm 31 and docking foot (see at least figs. 1-2 & 19-21);
PNG
media_image2.png
340
686
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a finger receptacle 40, for finger compression, wherein the docking arm 31 is engaged with the finger receptacle 40 and movable there along, such that the device has a closed configuration (see at least fig. 1) in which the receptacle 40 is aligned alongside the docking arm 31 and rests adjacent the docking foot and an open configuration (see at least fig. 2) in which the receptacle 40 extends from the docking arm 31 and is non-adjacent the docking foot (see at least figs. 1-2 & 19-21); and
an attachment interface 50 associated with the docking base 30 capable of releasably mounting different types of interchangeable collector attachments to the device (e.g., interface 50 is fully capable of releasably mounting any collector attachment that includes similar railing) (see at least figs. 1-2, 5-7 & 19-21).
In regards to claim 14, Matsumoto discloses the finger holding device of claim 12 wherein the device further comprises an interchangeable collector attachment 22, wherein the collector attachment 22 is adapted to temporarily secure one or more fluid collectors 23 to the device (“the accommodating portion 22 is for holding the lancet body 20 and the biosensor 23,” “the blood B moves inside the capillary 23d by the capillary force generated in the capillary 23d [of the biosensor 23],” see machine translation) (see at least figs. 5-7, 10, 13-15 & 20).
In regards to claim 15, Matsumoto discloses the finger holding device according to claim numbered 12, wherein the docking arm 31 is engaged with a top surface engagement structure of the finger receptacle 40 and is slidable there along to facilitate movement of the device between the open (see fig. 2), closed (see fig. 1), and/or partially closed configurations (see at least fig. 1).
In regards to claim 16, Matsumoto discloses the finger holding device according to claim 12, wherein the docking arm 31 comprises a channel (i.e., groove) for receiving the top surface engagement structure of the finger receptacle 40 (i.e., “[t]he housing 30 accommodates various elements… and pair of guide portions 31 are provided…Each guide portion 31 is formed as a groove extending in the directions of arrows N’ and N”,” see machine translation) (see fig. 2).
In regards to claim 17, Matsumoto discloses the finger holding device according to claim 12, wherein the docking arm 31 further comprises a flexible catch (i.e., groove) for temporarily engaging the receptacle 40 and maintaining a one of the open, closed and/or partially closed configurations (i.e., “[t]he housing 30 accommodates various elements… and pair of guide portions 31 are provided…Each guide portion 31 is formed as a groove extending in the directions of arrows N’ and N”,” see machine translation) (see fig. 2).
In regards to claim 18, Matsumoto discloses the finger holding device according to claim 12, wherein the docking base 30 defines an inner compartment partially defining a fluidic pathway 23d within the device (i.e., “the blood B moves inside the capillary 23d by the capillary force generated in the capillary 23d [of the biosensor 23],” see machine translation) (see at least figs. 1 & 20).
In regards to claim 19, Matsumoto discloses the finger holding device according to claim 18, wherein the docking base 30 further comprises an aperture 53 connecting the fluidic pathway 23d from the inner compartment to the collector attachment 22 (i.e., “the blood B moves inside the capillary 23d by the capillary force generated in the capillary 23d [of the biosensor 23],” see machine translation) (see at least figs. 1-2 & 20).
In regards to claim 20, Matsumoto discloses the finger holding device according to claim 12, wherein the collector attachment 22 is slidable relative to the docking base 30 to selectively block the aperture 53 (“[a]s shown in FIGS. 2 and 3, the opening 53 is used when the lancet 2 is inserted, and has a notch 53 a. The notch 53a is for engaging a convex portion 22C of the lancet 2…,” see machine translation) (see at least figs. 1-2).
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.
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorrels (US 2003/0056274) in view of Geyer et al. (US 2007/0226866) (“Geyer” hereinafter).
In regards to claim 6, Sorrels discloses the finger receptacle according to claim 1, that fails to explicitly teach a finger receptacle wherein the top surface comprises an elongated ridge, centrally aligned with the longitudinal axis (X) and having one, two, or three cutaway or recessed sections formed therein. However, Geyer teaches that it is known to provide a finger receptacle wherein the top surface comprises an elongated ridge 21, centrally aligned with the longitudinal axis (X) and having one, two, or three cutaway or recessed sections 10 formed therein (see at least figs. 1 & 2A-B and par 0043-0051). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time Applicant’s invention was filed to provide the finger receptacle of Sorrels wherein the top surface comprises an elongated ridge, centrally aligned with the longitudinal axis (X) and having one, two, or three cutaway or recessed sections formed therein as taught by Geyer since such a modification would amount to applying a known technique (i.e., as taught by Geyer) to a known device (i.e., as taught by Geyer) ready for improvement to achieve a predictable result such as providing a reinforcing element that provides a high degree of stiffness and allows bending in a longitudinal direction but blocks bending in a lateral direction (see at least par 0015 & 0046-0047 of Geyer)--See KSR, 550 U.S. at___, 82 USPQ2d at 1396 (See MPEP § 214 3 for a discussion of the rationale(s) listed above. See also MPEP § 2144 - §2144.09 for additional guidance regarding support for obviousness determinations).
In regards to claim 7, Sorrels discloses the finger receptacle according to claim 1, that fails to explicitly teach a finger receptacle wherein the top surface defines an engagement structure, extending along a length thereof. However, Geyer teaches that it is known to provide a finger receptacle wherein the top surface defines an engagement structure 1, extending along a length thereof (see at least figs. 1 & 2A-B and par 0043-0051). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time Applicant’s invention was filed to provide the finger receptacle of Sorrels wherein the top surface defines an engagement structure, extending along a length thereof as taught by Geyer since such a modification would amount to applying a known technique (i.e., as taught by Geyer) to a known device (i.e., as taught by Geyer) ready for improvement to achieve a predictable result such as providing a reinforcing element that provides a high degree of stiffness and allows bending in a longitudinal direction but blocks bending in a lateral direction (see at least par 0015 & 0046-0047 of Geyer)--See KSR, 550 U.S. at___, 82 USPQ2d at 1396 (See MPEP § 214 3 for a discussion of the rationale(s) listed above. See also MPEP § 2144 - §2144.09 for additional guidance regarding support for obviousness determinations).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorrels (US 2003/0056274).
Although Sorrels discloses a finger receptacle having a single angled projection 36 define an angle (A) relative to the longitudinal axis X measuring between 10-40 degrees (see at least figs. 2 & 5), Sorrels discloses the finger receptacle according to claim 1, wherein the receptacle has two angled projections. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time Applicant’s invention was filed to provide the finger receptacle of Sorrels with two or more angled projections as claimed in order to limit an insertion depth of the protective guard on a user’s finger and inhibit protective guard from sliding up the finger during use (see at least par 0040 of Sorrels).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 15, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant contends that Sorrels fails to teach a sleeve that exerts a radial compression along a length of the finger because only one portion of the sleeve is flexible/elastic. The Office respectfully traverses. For example, having even a single flexible radial segment would naturally cause a radial compression. In fact, Sorrels clearly points out that “[t]he elastic material may expand when the protective guard is positioned on finger 22 or thumb 26. The elastic material may exert compressive force on finger 22 or thumb 26 to hold protective guard 20 on the finger or thumb,” [emphasis added]. Therefore, the compressive force is clearly a radial force that causes the sleeve that holds the sleeve 20 on the finger.
Applicant further contends that Sorrels does not disclose that the lip is configured to effect a second compression action on the finger nail in a downward direction relative to the longitudinal axis of the ceiling. The Office respectfully traverses because Sorrels clearly teaches that lip 36 is portion of the protective portion 46 that is made from stiff or inflexible material (see at least par 0062-0063) and that said lip 36 may contact a fingernail during use (see at least par 0013). The Office therefore submits that the lip 36 does effect a downward force onto the fingernail by account of the fact that the lip 36 is inflexible and contacts the finger during use.
In view of the foregoing, the rejections over at least Sorrels and Matsumoto are maintained.
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 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 RENE T TOWA whose telephone number is (313)446-6655. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9:00 AM-5:00 PM.
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, Jason M. Sims can be reached at 571-272-7540. 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.
/RENE T TOWA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights