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 § 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) 1-3, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zdeblick (US 2019/0261888) in view of Begriche (US 2018/0249767).
With regard to claim 1 Zdeblick discloses an electronic device, comprising:
a housing (1400 figure 27) forming an enclosed chamber, the housing having a top portion and a bottom portion (figures 27, 29);
one or more sensors (paragraph 110) provided within the chamber and configured to interface with a user to generate physiological data associated with the user (paragraph 110);
a set of electrodes (1432a, b) provided on the bottom portion of the housing, wherein each electrode in the set of electrodes is a single member having a corresponding inner electrode portion within the chamber and an outer electrode portion outside the housing (figures 27, 29; paragraph 228); and
a set of magnets (see discussion which follows) provided on the bottom portion of the housing (paragraph 102 “may be placed in and/or attached to the compartment 104, using buckles magnets, snaps, springs, clips, clasps, buttons, screws, or any other appropriate fastener”).
PNG
media_image1.png
504
611
media_image1.png
Greyscale
To the extent the phrase “and/or” in regard to the magnets may be construed to be an alternative to the snaps or electrodes (and not necessarily in addition to), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure the system to comprise a set of magnets provided on the bottom portion of the housing – before the earliest effective filing date of the current application. The reason for doing so would have been to form robust or additional fastening means using known and well understood techniques and structures as taught by Zdeblick. Further the location of the magnets on a defined bottom could be construed as less than clearly set forth. Begriche illustrates the desirability of alternative mounting structures and environments. Begriche teaches a biosensing garment – title. Begriche teaches the desirability of a system capable of attaching in a variety of applications – abstract, paragraphs 83, 104.
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to explicitly comprise: a set of magnets provided on the bottom portion of the housing in combination, as taught in part by Zdeblick and Begriche. The reason for doing so would have been to allow the system to be attached to a variety of structures, configurations, and applications, as taught by Zdeblick and Begriche.
With regard to claim 2 (depends from claim 1) Zdeblick does not disclose the claimed:
wherein the set of electrodes includes four snap connectors.
Begriche teaches wherein the set of electrodes includes four snap connectors – paragraphs 83, 104.
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to comprise: wherein the set of electrodes includes four snap connectors.
The reason for doing so would have been to allow the system to be attached to a variety of structures, configurations, and applications, as taught by Zdeblick and Begriche. Doing so would have been well within the purview of those skilled in the art within the lens of interchangeable structure types.
With regard to claim 3 (depends from claim 2) Zdeblick does not disclose the claimed:
wherein the snap connectors include a male snap connector, a female snap connector, or both.
Begriche teaches wherein the set of electrodes includes four snap connectors – paragraphs 83, 104.
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to comprise: wherein the snap connectors include a male snap connector, a female snap connector, or both, as taught by Begriche.
The reason for doing so would have been to allow the system to be attached to a variety of structures, configurations, and applications, as taught by Zdeblick and Begriche. Doing so would have been well within the purview of those skilled in the art within the lens of interchangeable structure types.
With regard to claim 7 Zdeblick and Begriche teach the electronic device of claim 1, further comprising: a set of bioimpedance electrodes (paragraph 117).
Claim(s) 4, 5, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zdeblick (US 2019/0261888) in view of Begriche (US 2018/0249767) in further view of Pandya (US 2019/0101870) and Lee (US 9237869).
With regard to claim 4 (depends from claim 1) Zdeblick does not disclose the claimed:
wherein the set of electrodes and the set of magnets are arranged in a circular configuration such that each magnet in the set of magnets is separated by a corresponding electrode in the set of electrodes.
Begriche teaches “FIG. 8A shows an arrangement of electrical connectors 840 (i.e., collectively a “biosensing garment connector region”), according to an embodiment. In some embodiments, conductive pathways described herein are connected to connectors A, B, and C at a connector area on the left side of the bra (from the wearer's perspective) via stainless steel snaps (e.g., comprising an S-spring socket and a hidden cap, or “snap cap”). The caps can comprise stainless steel, brass, or any other suitable (i.e., biocompatible) material. The connectors can be disposed on a connector base comprising a plurality of layers of heat adhesive TPU films and/or a flexible yet non-stretchable PET film, such that desired levels of support, reinforcement and insulation are achieved. In between the socket and the cap of each of the 5 snaps, a section (e.g., a round section) of conductive tape can be inserted/disposed to ensure a proper electrical connection between the hidden cap and the conductive pathway (e.g., conductive elastic, trace, wire, etc.) that is attached to it. For example, the conductive tape ring can be inserted in between the metal plate of the hidden cap and the conductive pathway prior to pressing the snap.” Paragraph 104. Figure 8a:
PNG
media_image2.png
261
345
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As previously stated Zdeblick teaches “In one aspect, the loose wearable component 102 comprises a compartment 104. The electronics module 106 may be configured to be removably attached to the compartment 104. By removably attached is meant that the electronic module 106 may be placed in and/or attached to the compartment 104, using buckles magnets, snaps, springs, clips, clasps, buttons, screws, or any other appropriate fastener, and/or any combination of fastening methods and subsequently removed. Alternatively or additionally, the compartment 104 may be configured such that the electronics module 106 can be placed in and/or attached to the compartment 104 by press fit, tension fit, shoe-in, snap fit, twist, or any other appropriate locking method and/or any combination of locking methods and subsequently removed. Alternatively or additionally, the compartment 104 may comprise a pocket in which the electronics module 106 can rest.” Paragraph 102.
Pandya teaches arranging sensors in a circular pattern to facilitate good sensor characteristics – figure 3, 4a, 5b, 5c, 5e.
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to comprise: wherein the set of electrodes and the set of magnets are arranged in a circular configuration such that each magnet in the set of magnets is separated by a corresponding electrode in the set of electrodes, as taught in part by Begriche, Pandya, and Zdeblick. The reason for doing so would have been to place in and/or attach to a compartment using known attachment means used in combination in known ways to achieve a distributed electrode/sensor/snap environment with excellent physical characteristics for applicant in, on, or with a structure capable of use with a user’s desired application and/or wearing structure, as taught by Begriche, Pandya, and Zdeblick.
Further It is noted that Applicant does not disclose any criticality to the shape of the configuration, or window, instead disclosing that they may be any one of a variety of shapes.
See Lee, which teaches comprising a housing window (Fig. 1C transmissive windows element 116), a sensor interfacing with skin of the user through the window (Fig. 1C, PPG sensor described in column 5, lines 14-43 and column 3, lines 27-40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify the electronic device of Zdeblick to include PPG sensors and a housing window for transmitting light to photodetectors for PPG, as Lee teaches that it provides an improvement to heart rate detection (column 10, lines 50-58 compensating for signal noise in ECG; column 11, lines 6-18).
Lee further teaches wherein the electrodes are symmetrically arranged around a perimeter of the housing window, (Fig. 1C, the two electrodes are concentric with the central center-most housing window of Lee) and a set of magnets arranged such that each magnet in the set of magnets is separated by a corresponding electrocardiogram electrode in the set of electrocardiogram electrodes (column 13, lines 19-34, each magnet is paired with a corresponding ECG electrode).
Lee does not teach wherein the housing window is circular.
It is noted that Applicant discloses no criticality to the shape of the housing window.
Therefore, it would have nevertheless have been prima facie obvious to modify the shape of the housing window of Lee to be circular, because it has been held that matters relating to ornamentation only which have no mechanical function cannot be relied upon to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947)
Although Zdeblick fails to be explicit with the location of the magnets with respect to the electrodes, it nevertheless would have been prima facie obvious to rearrange the magnets and electrodes of the Zdeblick reference, insofar as proscribing a specific location for the magnets as between the electrodes in an alternating fashion, because it has been held that rearranging well-known devices holds no patentable significance, see MPEP § 2144.04 In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice).
With regard to claim 5 (depends from claim 4) Zdeblick does not disclose the claimed: wherein the interior bottom portion of the housing includes a housing window, the housing window having a circular shape and being concentric with the circular arrangement of the set of electrodes and the set of magnets.
Begriche teaches “FIG. 8A shows an arrangement of electrical connectors 840 (i.e., collectively a “biosensing garment connector region”), according to an embodiment. In some embodiments, conductive pathways described herein are connected to connectors A, B, and C at a connector area on the left side of the bra (from the wearer's perspective) via stainless steel snaps (e.g., comprising an S-spring socket and a hidden cap, or “snap cap”). The caps can comprise stainless steel, brass, or any other suitable (i.e., biocompatible) material. The connectors can be disposed on a connector base comprising a plurality of layers of heat adhesive TPU films and/or a flexible yet non-stretchable PET film, such that desired levels of support, reinforcement and insulation are achieved. In between the socket and the cap of each of the 5 snaps, a section (e.g., a round section) of conductive tape can be inserted/disposed to ensure a proper electrical connection between the hidden cap and the conductive pathway (e.g., conductive elastic, trace, wire, etc.) that is attached to it. For example, the conductive tape ring can be inserted in between the metal plate of the hidden cap and the conductive pathway prior to pressing the snap.” Paragraph 104. Figure 8a:
PNG
media_image2.png
261
345
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As previously stated Zdeblick teaches “In one aspect, the loose wearable component 102 comprises a compartment 104. The electronics module 106 may be configured to be removably attached to the compartment 104. By removably attached is meant that the electronic module 106 may be placed in and/or attached to the compartment 104, using buckles magnets, snaps, springs, clips, clasps, buttons, screws, or any other appropriate fastener, and/or any combination of fastening methods and subsequently removed. Alternatively or additionally, the compartment 104 may be configured such that the electronics module 106 can be placed in and/or attached to the compartment 104 by press fit, tension fit, shoe-in, snap fit, twist, or any other appropriate locking method and/or any combination of locking methods and subsequently removed. Alternatively or additionally, the compartment 104 may comprise a pocket in which the electronics module 106 can rest.” Paragraph 102.
Pandya teaches arranging sensors in a circular pattern to facilitate good sensor characteristics – figure 3, 4a, 5b, 5c, 5e.
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to comprise: wherein the interior bottom portion of the housing includes a housing window, the housing window having a circular shape and being concentric with the circular arrangement of the set of electrodes and the set of magnets, as taught in part by Begriche, Pandya, Lee, and Zdeblick. The reason for doing so would have been to arrange the sensor elements in a pattern desirable for a positive or improvement sensor measurement simultaneously with mounting and support means which are structurally close and similarly arranged to facilitate short lead connections and excellent structural support due to the geometric arrangement, as taught by Begriche, Pandya, Lee, and Zdeblick. Further see Begriche’s disclosure relative to mounting and diverse/unique application configurations.
With regard to claim 6 Zdeblick, Begriche, Pandya, and Lee teach the electronic device of claim 5, wherein the one or more sensors interface with the user via the housing window (the sensors have to be capable of interacting with the user. The windows provide the structural and physical parameters of the housing to allow said interaction. The nature of the window tailored to the sensor type.)
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zdeblick (US 2019/0261888) in view of Begriche (US 2018/0249767) in further view of Libbus (US 2013/0338448).
With regard to claim 8 (depends from claim 1) Zdeblick does not disclose the claimed: further comprising: a first printed circuit board (PCB) provided within the chamber, the first PCB located proximate to the top portion of the housing; a second PCB provided within the chamber, the second PCB being separate and distinct from the first PCB and located proximally below the first PCB; and a battery provided within the chamber, wherein the battery is sandwiched between the first PCB and the second PCB.
a first printed circuit board (PCB) provided within the chamber, the first PCB located proximate to the top portion of the housing (paragraph 78);
a second PCB provided within the chamber, the second PCB being separate and distinct from the first PCB and located proximally below the first PCB (paragraphs 78-79); and
a battery provided within the chamber, wherein the battery is sandwiched between the first PCB and the second PCB (paragraph 70)
Zdeblick teaches that all of the electronic components are mounted to a single PCB.
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to comprise: a first printed circuit board (PCB) provided within the chamber, the first PCB located proximate to the top portion of the housing; a second PCB provided within the chamber, the second PCB being separate and distinct from the first PCB and located proximally below the first PCB; and a battery provided within the chamber, wherein the battery is sandwiched between the first PCB and the second PCB, as taught by Libbus. The reason for doing so would have been provide excellent packaging considerations and structural support for circuit structure as taught by Libbus. A reason for doing so would have been to shorten the electrical lines between components to improve the electrical robustness of the system by limiting the environmental interference and self interference of adjoining parts. Further it has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Claim(s) 9, 10, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zdeblick (US 2019/0261888) in view of Begriche (US 2018/0249767) in further view of Libbus (US 2013/0338448) in further view of Hjelm (US 2011/0022411).
With regard to claim 9 (depends from claim 8) Zdeblick does not disclose the claimed: a near field communications (NFC) module provided on the first PCB, the second PCB, or both.
Libbus teaches a wireless module paragraph 84.
Hjelm teaches a NFC module. See paragraphs 14-15.
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to comprise: a near field communications (NFC) module provided on the first PCB, the second PCB, or both.
The reason for doing so would have been to provide a wireless communication protocol and structure to enable the system to communicate wirelessly to facilitate additional functions and features as taught by Libbus and Hjelm. The use of NFC is desirable for close range communication with a reduced risk of interception due to the close range nature thereof.
With regard to claim 10 (depends from claim 8) Zdeblick does not disclose the claimed: wherein the first PCB includes a first near field communications (NFC) module and a first antenna of the first NFC module located proximate to the first PCB.
Libbus teaches a wireless module paragraph 84.
Hjelm teaches a NFC module. See paragraphs 14-15.
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to comprise: wherein the first PCB includes a first near field communications (NFC) module and a first antenna of the first NFC module located proximate to the first PCB. The reason for doing so would have been to provide a wireless communication protocol and structure to enable the system to communicate wirelessly to facilitate additional functions and features as taught by Libbus and Hjelm. The use of NFC is desirable for close range communication with a reduced risk of interception due to the close range nature thereof. A reason for doing so would have been to locate the antenna and associated structures in a location with excellent structural support and interference resistant characteristics.
With regard to claim 11 (depends from claim 10) Zdeblick does not disclose the claimed: wherein a second antenna of the first NFC module is located proximate to the second PCB.
Libbus teaches a wireless module paragraph 84.
Hjelm teaches a NFC module. See paragraphs 14-15. Hjelm further teaches wherein the first PCB includes a first near field communications (NFC) module and a first antenna of the first NFC module located proximate to the first PCB (paragraph 3).
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to comprise: a second antenna of the first NFC module is located proximate to the second PCB, as taught by Hjelm. The use of NFC is desirable for close range communication with a reduced risk of interception due to the close range nature thereof. A reason for doing so would have been to locate the antenna and associated structures in a location with excellent structural support and interference resistant characteristics. Hjelm teaches NFC can increase security of sensitive medical data (paragraph 23) and allows for retrievable of data at any time (paragraph 6).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zdeblick (US 2019/0261888) in view of Begriche (US 2018/0249767) in further view of Libbus (US 2013/0338448) in further view of Hjelm (US 2011/0022411) in further view of Biederman (US 2018/0026678).
With regard to claim 12 (depends from claim 10) Zdeblick does not disclose the claimed:
wherein the second PCB includes a second NFC module, the second NFC module being separate and distinct from the first NFC module, and wherein the first NFC module is configured for data communication and the second NFC module is configured for power transmission.
Biederman teaches a power gating technique using an NFC module for wearable devices (Abstract).
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to comprise: wherein the second PCB includes a second NFC module, the second NFC module being separate and distinct from the first NFC module, and wherein the first NFC module is configured for data communication and the second NFC module is configured for power transmission, as taught by Hjelm and Biederman. The reason for doing so would have been to provide a second NFC module to improve wireless features including separating power and communication lines and/or provide redundant support features as taught by Hjelm and Biederman. Another reason for doing so would have been to preserve power by utilizing power gated enabled NFC functions as taught by Biederman paragraph 12.
Claim(s) 13-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zdeblick (US 2019/0261888) in view of Begriche (US 2018/0249767) in further view of Rothkopf (US 2020/0233380).
With regard to claim 13 (depends from claim 1) Zdeblick does not disclose the claimed:
wherein the bottom portion of the housing includes a housing window, and wherein the one or more sensors include one or more proximity sensors, the one or more proximity sensors being configured to use the housing window to measure a distance between the housing and a surface of an object outside the housing.
Rothkopf teaches a bottom portion having a housing with sensors configured to use the housing window. Figure 16.
PNG
media_image3.png
426
446
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Paragraph 94: The device 100 may also include a sensor input 318 produced using one or more sensors that may be configured to monitor and detect various environmental conditions. For example, the sensor input 318 may include signals or data produced using an ambient light sensor, proximity sensor, temperature sensor, barometric pressure sensor, or other sensor for monitoring environmental conditions surrounding or near the device. In general, the sensor input 318 may be used to adapt the functionality of the device 100 to conform to the one or more environmental conditions. For example, the brightness of the display output 304, the volume of the audio output 308, and/or the operation of the input to the device 100 may be based on the sensor input 318.
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to comprise: wherein the bottom portion of the housing includes a housing window, and wherein the one or more sensors include one or more proximity sensors, the one or more proximity sensors being configured to use the housing window to measure a distance between the housing and a surface of an object outside the housing, as taught by Rothkopf.
The reason for doing so would have been to measure the proximity and environmental conditions including those pertaining to a user, as taught by Rothkopf. A reason for doing so would have been to allow the system to measure and obtain information for tracking and display to a user, as taught by Rothkopf.
With regard to claim 14 (depends from claim 13) Zdeblick does not disclose the claimed:
wherein the physiological data is generated when the measured distance is below a threshold.
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to comprise: the physiological data is generated when the measured distance is below a threshold. The reason for doing so would have been to reasonably enable the operations and functions set forth by Rothkopf. The sensor plainly doesn’t work at an infinite distance. There must in all practical terms be a minimum distance at which the sensors can effectively work. Thus setting the system to record data as taught by Rothkopf below a threshold value where the system actually is capable of practically recording the data is nothing more than achieving the operational system within the lens of obviousness and practical reality of such a system and well within the purview of those having ordinary skill in the art to which the invention pertains.
With regard to claim 15 (depends from claim 1) Zdeblick does not disclose the claimed:
further comprising: a screen provided on the top portion of the housing and configured to display a user interface based at least in part on (i) a button included in the electronic device being activated, or (ii) a status of at least one magnet in the set of magnets; wherein the user interface displayed is a watch user interface or a patch user interface.
Rothkopf teaches a display 11 on a top side figure 1 and a sensor window on a reverse side figure 16. Rothkopf teaches alignment magnets paragraph 25. See paragraph 79 regarding wireless communication. Paragraph 209 discussed magnetic docking systems and magnetic transmission of power. Paragraph 94 teaches adjusting the brightness based on proximity detection. Paragraph 250 discussed explicit adjustment of the display based on direct input. See paragraph 251 equating the crown to a button structure. Similarly see paragraph 77. See paragraph 84.
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to comprise: a screen provided on the top portion of the housing and configured to display a user interface based at least in part on (i) a button included in the electronic device being activated, or (ii) a status of at least one magnet in the set of magnets; wherein the user interface displayed is a watch user interface or a patch user interface, as taught by Rothkopf. The reason for doing so would have been to allow the screen to be controlled with normal inputs including button, crown, magnetic proximity sensor, docking operation, and connection to a patch system, as taught by Rothkopf.
With regard to claim 16 (depends from claim 15) Zdeblick does not disclose the claimed:
wherein the patch user interface is displayed when the button is activated, and wherein the watch user interface is displayed when the button is not activated.
Rothkopf teaches a display 11 on a top side figure 1 and a sensor window on a reverse side figure 16. Rothkopf teaches alignment magnets paragraph 25. See paragraph 79 regarding wireless communication. Paragraph 209 discussed magnetic docking systems and magnetic transmission of power. Paragraph 94 teaches adjusting the brightness based on proximity detection. Paragraph 250 discussed explicit adjustment of the display based on direct input. See paragraph 251 equating the crown to a button structure. Similarly see paragraph 77. See paragraph 84.Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to comprise: wherein the patch user interface is displayed when the button is activated, and wherein the watch user interface is displayed when the button is not activated.
The reason for doing so would have been to indicate the operational mode and or system condition corresponding to said button. A reason for doing so would have been to indicate the mode of the crown or input as it defines other modes. A reason for doing so would have been to indicate a docking status/mode and/or any other power consumption mode that may influence the operation of the device according to the mode, such as brightness and corresponding drain on power. Thus a user can be properly informed about the operational condition of the device and plan accordingly for its operation.
With regard to claim 17 (depends from claim 15) Zdeblick does not disclose the claimed:
wherein the patch user interface is displayed when the status of the at least one magnet indicates that the at least one magnet is proximate to a patch assembly, and wherein the watch user interface is displayed when the status of the at least one magnet indicates the at least one magnet is at least a predetermined distance from the patch assembly.
Rothkopf teaches a display 11 on a top side figure 1 and a sensor window on a reverse side figure 16. Rothkopf teaches alignment magnets paragraph 25. See paragraph 79 regarding wireless communication. Paragraph 209 discussed magnetic docking systems and magnetic transmission of power. Paragraph 94 teaches adjusting the brightness based on proximity detection. Paragraph 250 discussed explicit adjustment of the display based on direct input. See paragraph 251 equating the crown to a button structure. Similarly see paragraph 77. See paragraph 84.
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to comprise: wherein the patch user interface is displayed when the status of the at least one magnet indicates that the at least one magnet is proximate to a patch assembly, and wherein the watch user interface is displayed when the status of the at least one magnet indicates the at least one magnet is at least a predetermined distance from the patch assembly. A reason for doing so would have been to indicate the mode of the crown or input as it defines other modes. A reason for doing so would have been to indicate a docking status/mode and/or any other power consumption mode that may influence the operation of the device according to the mode, such as brightness and corresponding drain on power. Thus a user can be properly informed about the operational condition of the device and plan accordingly for its operation. A reason for doing so would have been to indicate to a user that the magnets are aligned and thus the system is in a docking status and receiving power so that a user may be confident that docking operation has been successfully performed.
With regard to claim 18 (depends from claim 1) Zdeblick does not disclose the claimed:
wherein the one or more sensors are further configured to generate environmental data associated with an environment of the user.
Rothkopf teaches a bottom portion having a housing with sensors configured to use the housing window. Figure 16.
PNG
media_image3.png
426
446
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Paragraph 94: The device 100 may also include a sensor input 318 produced using one or more sensors that may be configured to monitor and detect various environmental conditions. For example, the sensor input 318 may include signals or data produced using an ambient light sensor, proximity sensor, temperature sensor, barometric pressure sensor, or other sensor for monitoring environmental conditions surrounding or near the device. In general, the sensor input 318 may be used to adapt the functionality of the device 100 to conform to the one or more environmental conditions. For example, the brightness of the display output 304, the volume of the audio output 308, and/or the operation of the input to the device 100 may be based on the sensor input 318.
Rothkopf teaches a display 11 on a top side figure 1 and a sensor window on a reverse side figure 16. Rothkopf teaches alignment magnets paragraph 25. See paragraph 79 regarding wireless communication. Paragraph 209 discussed magnetic docking systems and magnetic transmission of power. Paragraph 94 teaches adjusting the brightness based on proximity detection. Paragraph 250 discussed explicit adjustment of the display based on direct input. See paragraph 251 equating the crown to a button structure. Similarly see paragraph 77. See paragraph 84.
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Zdeblick’s system to comprise: wherein the one or more sensors are further configured to generate environmental data associated with an environment of the user, as taught by Rothkopf. The reason for doing so would have been to generate information of the surrounding environment, as taught by Rothkopf, including user values, as taught by Rothkopf, to assist the user in obtaining, tracking, and providing said information, as taught by Rothkopf, in addition to automatic control of functions and operations of the system, as taught by Rothkopf.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lee (US 2019/0239769) teaches an electronic device including detachable measurement module and attachment pad – title, abstract, figure 1-4.
Mazar (US 2016/0228060) teaches patient worn sensor assembly – title, abstract, figures 1-5b
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN KAYES whose telephone number is (571)272-8931. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6.
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, Regis Betsch can be reached at 571-270-7101. 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.
/SEAN KAYES/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2844