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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on July 21, 2023 is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of the Preliminary Amendment filed on April 18, 2023. Accordingly, claims 1-10 and newly added claim 11 are currently pending in the application.
Claim Interpretation
According to MPEP 2112.02: Process Claims, it is noted that “Under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device” (emphasis added). It is also noted in that same MPEP section that “The Federal Circuit upheld the Board’s finding that "Donley inherently performs the function disclosed in the method claims on appeal when that device is used in ‘normal and usual operation’" and found that a prima facie case of anticipation was made out” (emphasis added). Id. at 138, 801 F.2d at 1326. It was up to applicant to prove that Donley's structure would not perform the claimed method when placed in ambient light.).”
With regard to claim 10, these claims present an energizing method according to the device of claims 1. Therefore, the argument made against claim 1 also applies, mutatis mutandis, to claim 10. In addition, it is clearly seen that claim 10 is a process claim which presents a process of using the device as claimed in claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7, 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Saue (JP 2017-537704 A).
Saue teaches an electrochemical device comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
350
642
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
466
530
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
458
860
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With regard to claims 1 and 10, a device (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, light band 6) comprising: a first conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, first electrode 15) and a second conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, second electrode 16); and a functional part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, electrical circuit 14, boost converter 18 and light emitting element 19a), wherein the first conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, first electrode 15) and the functional part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, electrical circuit 14, boost converter 18 and light emitting element 19a) are connected to each other, the second conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, second electrode 16) and the functional part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, electrical circuit 14, boost converter 18 and light emitting element 19a) are connected to each other, the first conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, first electrode 15) and the second conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, second electrode 16) are not in contact with each other; and the device (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, light band 6) is energized by bringing the first conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, first electrode 15) and the second conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, second electrode 16) into contact with a body (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0049]-[0058] and [0078]).
With regard to claim 2, a voltage boost circuit (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, boost converter 18), wherein an electromotive force (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, input potential Vin) generated between the first conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, first electrode 15) and the second conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, second electrode 16) is boosted by the voltage boost circuit (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, boost converter 18) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0049]-[0058] and [0078]).
With regard to claim 3, the first conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIGS. 2a, 2b, 2c and 3, first electrode 15) and the second conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIGS. 2a, 2b, 2c and 3, second electrode 16) have flexibility (toothbrush including a handle portion 11 and a head portion in the form of a bush head 12a).
With regard to claim 4, a measurement part (electronics) that measures (various functions) an internal impedance of the device and/or a predetermined voltage (various parameters) in the device (toothbrushes and shavers) (Paragraph: [0004]).
With regard to claim 7, the first conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, first electrode 15) has a standard electrode potential (standard electrode potential of the electrode material) different from that of the second conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, second electrode 16) (Paragraphs: [0049]-[0058]).
With regard to claim 8, a fixing part (such as toothbrush, shaver, and shaver) for fixing the first conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, first electrode 15) and the second conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, second electrode 16) in a state of being in contact with the body (FIG. 2a, 2b, 2c, 3, 4a, 4b and 5-8).
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saue in view of Masahisa et al. (JP 63-238853 A).
Saue teaches all that is claimed as discussed in the rejections of claims 1-4, 7, 8 and 10 above, but it does not specifically teach the following feature:
A predetermined sensor, wherein the sensor is operated by bringing the first conductive part and the second conductive part into contact with the body to be energized.
Masahisa et al. teaches an skin resistance measuring sensor comprising:
PNG
media_image4.png
328
580
media_image4.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 5, a predetermined sensor (FIG. 1, potentionmeter 5), wherein the sensor (FIG. 1, potentionmeter 5) is operated (by displaying the voltage value of potentionmeter 5) by bringing the first conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, first electrode 15) and the second conductive part (FIG. 1D in view of FIG. 9, second electrode 16) into contact with the body (FIG. 1, skin 1) to be energized.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrochemical device of Saue to use a predetermined sensor as taught by Masahisa et al. since Masahisa et al. teaches that such an arrangement is beneficial to estimate the age of a subject within a predetermined error range as disclosed in first paragraph at page 5/7 .
Claims 6 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saue in view of Kita (JP 05240970 A).
Saue teaches all that is claimed as discussed in the rejections of claims 1-4, 7, 8 and 10 above, but it does not specifically teach the following feature:
A communication part that transmits to another computer device the internal impedance of the device and/or the predetermined voltage in the device measured by the measurement part.
Kita teaches a sensor data processing system comprising:
PNG
media_image5.png
756
460
media_image5.png
Greyscale
With regard to claims 6 and 11, a communication part (FIG. 1, transmitter 30) that transmits to another computer device (FIG. 1 wristwatch 1) the internal impedance of the device and/or the predetermined voltage in the device measured by the measurement part (FIG. 1, sensor 31).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrochemical device of Saue to use a communication part as taught by Kita since Kita teaches that such an arrangement is beneficial to transmit sensor data to another computer device for displaying and storing the sensor data in a freely detachable manner as disclosed in the Abstract.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saue in view of Muroki (JP 08-173554 A).
Saue teaches all that is claimed as discussed in the rejections of claims 1-4, 7, 8 and 10 above, but it does not specifically teach the following feature:
An electrical stimulation generator that generates a current for giving an electrical stimulation to the body by a voltage generated by bringing the first conductive part and the second conductive part into contact with the body.
Muroki teaches a sensor data processing system comprising:
PNG
media_image6.png
374
570
media_image6.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim9, an electrical stimulation generator (FIG. 3, protective resistor R) that generates a current (FIG. 3, current I) for giving an electrical stimulation (energization stimulus) to the body by a voltage (FIG. 3, voltage ET) generated by bringing the first conductive part and the second conductive part into contact with the body (Paragraph: [0013]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrochemical device of Saue to use an electrical stimulation generator as taught by Muroki since Muroki teaches that such an arrangement is beneficial to prevent skin damage by using protective resistor at a skin non-contact portion as disclosed in the Abstract (Purpose).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant’ s attention is invited to the followings whose inventions disclose similar devices.
Liu (CN 112568906 A) teaches a wearable device.
Nakagawa (AU 2021289700 A1) teaches a sensor.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOAI-AN D. NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-2170. The examiner can normally be reached MON-THURS (7:00 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, LEE E. RODAK can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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.
HOAI-AN D. NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2858
/HOAI-AN D. NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858