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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 5, 8 and 22 have been considered but are moot due to new grounds of rejections cited below.
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 1, 5 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Marchitto et al. (US 20040236269).
Regarding claim 1, Marchitto et al. teach A sensor device for detecting properties of a skin area (Note abstract) comprising:
at least one sensor unit;(50, Fig. 4) and
a support device (membrane 18, par. 0101) connected to the sensor unit, wherein the support device can be connected to the skin area to be detected,
wherein the sensor unit comprises a transmitter for outputting an electrical and/or magnetic signal to the skin area to be detected,(Note claim 32, a source of an alternating magnetic field to generate eddy currents in said tissue) and a receiver for measuring a signal originating from the skin area, which signal results from the signal output by the transmitter, (Note claim 32, a detector to detect said eddy currents)
wherein the at least one sensor unit comprises an eddy current testing device, (Note claim 32, a controller to monitor said eddy currents) and
wherein the sensor device is configured to measure an impedance of the skin area. (Note par. 0024, An electric current generated between active and return electrodes at the site of interest or eddy currents at the site of interest generated via an alternating magnetic field may be monitored to provide information about conductivity, impedance or hydration of the altered tissue.)
Regarding claim 5, Marchitto et al. teach the transmitter and/or the receiver comprise a coil. ([0066] Alternatively, feedback control of electrical conductivity of the treated tissue is achieved by using applied magnetic fields and monitoring the eddy currents in the target tissue. By exposing the treated tissue to a magnetic field, for example, at a frequency between 1 kHz and 2.4 GHz, which may be produced by an induction coil or other source that generates an alternating magnetic field, eddy currents are generated in the tissue. Eddy currents induced by a changing magnetic field concentrate near the surface adjacent to an excitation coil.)
Regarding claim 24, Marchitto et al. teach wherein the at least one sensor unit is insulated and/or configured to be spaced apart from the skin, such that the at least one sensor unit is not in direct contact with the skin when the sensor device is connected to the skin. (Note ablation site 19. Fig. 4, (0104 FIG. 4 depicts an alternate embodiment of the device 50. A piezoelectric actuator 12 functioning as a vibrating probe is associated with at least one electrode 42 that is in electrical contact with the ablation site 19 of the membrane 18.)
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 8 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marchitto et al. (US 20040236269) Brettschneider et al. (DE 102015225847 A1).
Marchitto et al. teach the instant invention except the following claim limitations.
Regarding claim 22, Marchitto t et al. does not teach wherein the sensor device detects an active ingredient in a skin area.
Brettschneider et al. teach wherein the sensor device detects an active ingredient in a skin area. (Note abstract)
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 Marchitto et al. to include the teaching of wherein the sensor device detects an active ingredient in a skin area to detect a binding particle in a liquid located in the detection region of the skin. (Note abstract)
Regarding claim 8, Marchitto et al. does not teach wherein an evaluation device for receiving and evaluating the detected and/or measured data.
Brettschneider et al. teach wherein an evaluation device for receiving and evaluating the detected and/or measured data. (Note par. 0047, The evaluation unit 106 is designed to evaluate the magnetic field strength for the detection of the particle 120 using the sensor signal 124.)
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 Marchitto et al. to include the teaching of wherein an evaluation device for receiving and evaluating the detected and/or measured data to detect a binding particle in a liquid located in the detection region of the skin. (Note abstract)
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marchitto et al. (US 20040236269) in view of Ko (US 20220072325).
Marchitto et al. teach the instant invention except the following claim limitations.
Regarding claim 10, Marchitto et al. does not teach wherein the sensor device comprises a plurality of sensor units the sensor units being arranged in an array.
Ko teach wherein the sensor device comprises a plurality of sensor units the sensor units being arranged in an array . (Note 250, Fig. 2)
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 Marchitto et al. to include the teaching of a plurality of sensor units the sensor units being arranged in an array to increase the sensing area capability of the device.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marchitto et al. (US 20040236269) in view of Varghese et al. (US 20200345263).
Marchitto et al. teach the instant invention except the following claim limitations.
Regarding claim 2, Marchitto et al. does not teach wherein the support device comprises a preferably adhesive film.
Varghese et al. teach wherein the support device comprises a preferably adhesive film. (Note par. 0039, For example, each electrode may be partially embedded in a pad. In some embodiments, the at least two electrodes 108 (or a pad comprising the at least two electrodes 108) may comprise an adhesive surface that enables the at least two electrodes 108 (or pad comprising the at least two electrodes 108) to be adhered to skin.)
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 Marchitto et al. to include the teaching of wherein the support device comprises a preferably adhesive film to secure the device to the skin.
Regarding claim 3, Marchitto et al. does not teach an adhesive fixing device for arranging the sensor unit and/or the support device on the skin area.
Varghese et al. teach an adhesive fixing device (adhesion) for arranging the sensor unit and/or the support device on the skin area. (Note par. 0039, For example, each electrode may be partially embedded in a pad. In some embodiments, the at least two electrodes 108 (or a pad comprising the at least two electrodes 108) may comprise an adhesive surface that enables the at least two electrodes 108 (or pad comprising the at least two electrodes 108) to be adhered to skin.)
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 Marchitto et al. to include the teaching of an adhesive fixing device for arranging the sensor unit and/or the support device on the skin area to secure the device to the skin.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marchitto et al. (US 20040236269) in view of Varghese et al. (US 20200345263) further in view of Jain et al. (US 20210236844).
Marchitto et al. teach the instant invention except the following claim limitations.
Regarding claim 4, Marchitto et al. does not teach wherein the fixing device comprises a biasing device for pressing the sensor unit and/or the support device onto the skin area.
Varghese et al. teach wherein the fixing device comprises a biasing device for pressing the sensor unit and/or the support device onto the skin area. (Note par. 0029, In one approach, the phototherapy garment may include an elastic gather, elastic band, or the like to provide pressure to hold the housing 12 against the skin of the patient.)
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 Marchitto et al. to include the teaching of wherein the fixing device comprises a biasing device for pressing the sensor unit and/or the support device onto the skin area to provide pressure to hold the device to the skin. (Note Varghese et al. par. 0029)
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marchitto et al. (US 20040236269) in view of Hunter et al. (US 20110054354).
Marchitto et al. teach the instant invention except the following claim limitations.
Regarding claim 9, Marchitto et al. does not teach wherein the sensor device has a maximum width of 100mm and or a maximum length of 100mm.
Hunter et al. teach the device having length of 100 mm. (Note par. 0215)
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 Marchitto et al. to include the teaching of wherein the sensor device has a maximum width of 100mm and or a maximum length of 100mm to meet the design specification of the manufacturer.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marchitto et al. (US 20040236269) in view of Varghese et al. (US 20200345263) further in view of Jain et al. (US 20210236844) further in view of Flyash et al. (US 20150328474).
Marchitto et al. teach the instant invention except the following claim limitations.
Regarding claim 23, Marchitto et al. does not teach wherein biasing device comprises at least one spring for pressing the sensor unit and/or the support device onto the skin area.
Flyash et al. teach wherein biasing device comprises at least one spring for pressing the sensor unit and/or the support device onto the skin area. (Note par. 0051, The temperature sensor 644 may be located in a spring-loaded or fixedly attached probe 704 having a small thermal mass, as compared to the electrodes, and adapted for sliding movement across the subject skin 212.)
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 Marchitto et al. to include the teaching of wherein biasing device comprises at least one spring for pressing the sensor unit and/or the support device onto the skin area to provide rapid disposals of electrodes. (Note Flyash et al. par. 0052)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEMETRIUS R PRETLOW whose telephone number is (571)272-3441. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 5:30-1:30.
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 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.
/DEMETRIUS R PRETLOW/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/JERMELE M HOLLINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights