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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/21/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 10/21/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-34 are pending in this application.
Claims 1, 13, and 23 have been amended. Claims 4- 5, 14- 16, and 26- 27 are cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive/ moot.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Main Argument (pages 10- 12) under Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Applicant asserts that neither Nikolai, Somes, nor Jasperse teaches the field of view including substantially the entire opening of the circuit board, and the opening configured to provide the camera with a controlled view of the wet reagent test device
Reply: The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Nikolai teaches the circuit board (50) with an aperture (58). The imaging device (82) is placed above the circuit board (80), where the camera has an optical line of sight of the test strip (Nikolai [0061]). The field of view of the camera includes the entire aperture (Nikolai [Fig.2]) .
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 6-9, 13, 17-19, 23-25, and 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nikolai Dechev (US 20200124587 A1) (Hereinafter Nikolai) in view of Jason Buck Somes (US 20200386753 A1) (hereinafter Somes) further in view of Jeffrey R. Jasperse (US 20140028857 A1) (hereinafter Jasperse):
Regarding Claim 1, Nikolai teaches a method ([0004] teach a method), comprising:
positioning a wet reagent test device in a field of view of a camera sensor ([0061] teaches the positioning of the testing strip in line of sight of the camera), the field of view of the camera sensor passing through an opening extending between a first major surface and a second major surface of a substrate of a circuit board (Fig. 2 teaches the camera sensor passing through an opening extending between the two major surfaces of the circuit board (part number 50)), the wet reagent test device having a volume of a sample deposited thereon such that a reagent in the wet reagent test device may react with a target constituent if such target constituent is present in the sample ([0069]- [0070] teaches the reagent pads (part 204) which absorbs a set volume of the sample deposited. The pads having a reaction based on tested targets present in the sample), the field of view including substantially the entire opening of the circuit board, and the opening configured to provide the camera with a controlled view of the wet reagent test device ([0061], and Fig.2 teach the circuit board (50) with an aperture (58). where the camera has an optical line of sight of the test strip. The field of view of the camera includes the entire aperture and view of the reagent test strip);
illuminating the wet reagent test device with light generated by a plurality of light sources mounted on the second major surface of the substrate of the circuit board ([0079] and Fig. 2 teach the plurality of light sources (Parts 54-57) that are mounted on the second major surface of the circuit board (part 50)) …, a portion of the light being a reflectance optical signal formed by the light reflecting off of the wet reagent test device pad and passing through the opening in the substrate of the circuit board ([0066] and Fig 2 teach the reflection of light off of the wet testing strip),
Nikolai does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Somes teaches detecting the reflectance optical signal by the camera sensor so as to generate an image of at least a portion of the reagent pad ([0027] teaches the capturing of the image of the test strip with the least amount of noise).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai to add the teachings of Somes as disclosed up to improve the image capturing and the reading capabilities of the test strips (Somes [0018]).
Somes does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Jasperse teaches by supplying a level of electricity to each of the light sources such that each light source contributes to illumination at an amount calculated to provide a controlled illumination at the wet reagent test device (“In a preferred embodiment, the circuit board 118 is arranged such that each of the light sources 120a-d can have its current independently adjusted. Usually a processor executing program logic would be used to adjust the current to each of the light sources 120a-d, as will be described in greater detail below” (0033); “The illumination system includes a processor for adjusting the flux output of one or both of said at least two light sources to compensate for any non-uniform illumination on a target area caused by the discrepancy in distances of the individual light sources to the target area on account of a tilt angle.” [0019]),
wherein the controlled illumination is illumination with a substantially uniform intensity at the wet reagent test device (“the luminous flux of the first light source 120a and second light source 120b are either set or adjusted such that illumination at the first surface point S.sub.T is substantially equivalent to the illumination at the second surface point S.sub. B. This can be done by adjusting the current to either one or both of the first light source 120a and the second light source 120b.” (0035); “non-reactive pad by illuminating the pad “[0009]).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes to further add the teachings of Jasperse as disclosed above to improve the appearance and quality of the resulting images (Jasperse [0017]).
Regarding Claim 2, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the method of claim 1, Nikolai further teaches analyzing the image by a processor executing processor executable code stored in a non-transitory computer readable medium ([0005] teaches the processor analyzing the sample. [0025] teaches the memory sending instructions to processor to analyze the data) to determine a presence or an absence of the target constituent being in the sample ([0070] and [0071] teach the determining of or the absence of targets results in the analysis using software).
Regarding Claim 3, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the method of claim 2. Nikolai further teaches wherein analyzing the image by the processor executing processor executable code is defined further as analyzing pixels ([0058] teaches the color pixels from the camera in a form of a grid) within the image for a predetermined color indicative of the presence of the target constituent being in the sample ([0069]- [0072] teaches the color change of the pad passed on the analysis of the sample and the usage of the images to be analyzed for the purpose of calorimetric test).
Regarding Claim 6, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the method of claim 1 Somes further teaches wherein the controlled illumination is a designed intensity at the wet reagent test device ([0027] teaches the direction and the focus of the light at the test strip).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai to add the teachings of Somes as disclosed up to improve the image capturing and the reading capabilities of the test strips (Somes [0018]).
Regarding Claim 7, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the method of claim 1. Nikolai further teaches wherein the substrate has a first side, a second side opposite the first side, and an intermediate region between the first side and the second side, and wherein a first group of the light sources are positioned adjacent to the first side of the substrate ( (Fig. 2] teaches a first group of light sources (part number 54) on a first side of the substrate and on the second group), and a second group of the light sources are positioned within the intermediate region of the substrate (Nicolai (Fig.2] teaches a second light source (part number 52) that is positioned within the intermediate region. (0072] teaches the controlling of the illumination system), ….
Nikolai does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Jasperse teaches wherein illuminating the wet reagent test device with light includes providing a first amount of electricity to the first group of the light sources, and a second amount of electricity to the second group of the light sources, wherein the first amount of electricity is greater than the second amount of electricity (“the illumination system includes a processor for adjusting the flux output of one or both of said at least two light sources to compensate for any non-uniform illumination on a target area caused by the discrepancy in distances of the individual light sources to the target area on account of a tilt angle.” (0019); note: the processor controlled illumination system adjusts the amount of electricity supplied to different light sources to optimize illumination).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes to further add the teachings of Jasperse as disclosed above to improve the appearance and quality of the resulting images (Jasperse [0017]).
Regarding Claim 8, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the method of claim 7. Somes further teaches wherein the first amount of electricity operates a first light source within the first group of the light sources at a first brightness, and the second amount of electricity operates a second light source within the second group of the light sources at a second brightness, with the first brightness greater than the second brightness ([0042] teaches a first and a second lighting sources. [0099] teaches how different lighting elements can be controlled to emit light at different brightness levels. The brightness level is in relation which the electricity level).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai to add the teachings of Somes as disclosed up to improve the image capturing and the reading capabilities of the test strips (Somes [0018]).
Regarding Claim 9, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the method of claim 1. Nikolai further teaches wherein the light sources are arranged in a planar relationship (Fig. 2 teaches the light source is disposed in a plane manner).
Regarding Claim 13, Nikolai teaches a reagent analyzer ([0013] teaches an analyzer using a regent pad), comprising:
a circuit board having a substrate, and a plurality of conductive leads extending on or in the substrate (Fig. 2 and [0061] teaches the circuit board and the plurality of conductive leads (part number 72)), the substrate having a first major surface and a second major surface, the first major surface being opposite the second major surface, the substrate having an opening extending between the first major surface and the second major surface (Fig. 2 and [0061] teaches the first and second major surfaces. The first surface is opposite of the second surface and there is an opining extending between the surfaces);
a first light source attached to the second major surface of the substrate ([0079] and Fig. 2 teach the plurality of light sources (Parts 54-57) that are mounted on the second major surface of the circuit board (part 50));
a second light source attached to the second major surface of the substrate ([0079) and (Fig. 2) teach the plurality of light sources (Parts 54-57) that are mounted on the second major surface of the circuit board (part 50));
an imaging system having a field of view including substantially the entire opening of the substrate, ([0061], and Fig.2 teach the circuit board (50) with an aperture (58). where the camera has an optical line of sight of the test strip. The field of view of the camera includes the entire aperture and view of the reagent test strip)and extending through the opening formed in the substrate to provide a controlled view of the wet reagent test device and configured to capture an image of a wet reagent test device positioned at a read position in the field of view (Fig. 2 teaches the camera sensor passing through an opening extending between the two major surfaces of the circuit board (part number 50)), the image having a plurality of pixels ([0058] teaches the color pixels from the camera in a form of a grid); and
…, and analyze pixels of the image to determine a presence or an absence of a target constituent being in a sample applied to the wet reagent pad ([0033] teach the processor analyzing and sending the data to the user. [0070]- [0072] teach the determining of or the absence of targets results in the analysis using the processor and images from the color cameras);
wherein the first major surface faces the imaging system (Fig. 2 teaches the first major surface facing the camera and the second major surface where the light sources is attached).
Nikolai does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Somes teaches a processor configured to receive the image ([0094], teaches the processor receiving the image from the camera).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai to add the teachings of Somes as disclosed up to improve the image capturing and the reading capabilities of the test strips (Somes [0018]).
Somes does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Jasperse teaches circuitry configured to supply electricity to the first and second light sources such that the first and second light sources contribute to illumination of a wet reagent test device (“In a preferred embodiment, the circuit board 118 is arranged such that each of the light sources 120a-d can have its current independently adjusted. Usually a processor executing program logic would be used to adjust the current to each of the light sources 120a-d, as will be described in greater detail below” [0033]; “The illumination system includes a processor for adjusting the flux output of one or both of said at least two light sources to compensate for any non-uniform illumination on a target area caused by the discrepancy in distances of the individual light sources to the target area on account of a tilt angle.” [0019]) at an amount calculated to provide a controlled illumination wherein the controlled illumination is a substantially uniform intensity (“the luminous flux of the first light source 120a and second light source 120b are either set or adjusted such that illumination at the first surface point S.sub.T is substantially equivalent to the illumination at the second surface point S.sub. B. This can be done by adjusting the current to either one or both of the first light source 120a and the second light source 120b.” [0035]; “non-reactive pad by illuminating the pad “[0009]).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes to further add the teachings of Jasperse as disclosed above to improve the appearance and quality of the resulting images (Jasperse [0017]).
Regarding Claim 17, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the method of claim 13. Nikolai further teaches wherein the substrate has a first side, a second side opposite the first side, and an intermediate region between the first side and the second side, and wherein the first light source is positioned adjacent to the first side of the substrate (Fig. 2 teaches a first group of light sources (part number 54) on a first side of the substrate and on the second group), and the second light source is positioned within the intermediate region of the substrate ( Fig.2 teaches a second light source (part number 52) that is positioned within the intermediate region. [0072] teaches the controlling of the illumination system) ….
Nikolai does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Jasperse teaches the circuitry configured to provide a first amount of electricity to the first light source, and a second amount of electricity to the second light source, wherein the first amount of electricity is greater than the second amount of electricity (“the illumination system includes a processor for adjusting the flux output of one or both of said at least two light sources to compensate for any non-uniform illumination on a target area caused by the discrepancy in distances of the individual light sources to the target area on account of a tilt angle.” [0019]; note: the processor controlled illumination system adjusts the amount of electricity supplied to different light sources to optimize illumination).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes to further add the teachings of Jasperse as disclosed above to improve the appearance and quality of the resulting images (Jasperse [0017]).
Regarding Claim 18, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the method of claim 17.
Somes further teaches the first amount of electricity operates the first light source at a first brightness, and the second amount of electricity operates the second light source at a second brightness, with the first brightness greater than the second brightness ([0042] teaches a first and a second lighting sources. [0099] teaches the different lighting elements are controlled to emit light at different brightness levels. The brightness level is in relation which the electricity level).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai to add the teachings of Somes as disclosed up to improve the image capturing and the reading capabilities of the test strips (Somes [0018]).
Regarding Claim 19, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the method of claim 13. Nikolai further teaches wherein the second major surface of the substrate is planar (Fig. 2 teaches the light source is disposed in a plane manner that is connected the second major surface).
Regarding Claim 23, Nikolai teaches an apparatus, comprising:
a camera sensor having a field of view within the cavity (Fig. 2 teaches a camera having a field of view within the cavity);
a sample tray positioned within the cavity, the sample tray having a sample holder within the field of view of the camera sensor, the sample tray being positioned a distance away from the camera sensor ([0061] and Fig. 2 teaches a sample tray (part number 30) that is position with the cavity. The sample tray is withing the field of view of the camera sensor. The sample is positioned at a fixed distance from the camera);
a circuit board positioned within the cavity between the camera sensor and the sample tray ([0061] and Fig. 2 teaches a circuit board (part number 50) that is within the cavity and is between the camera and the sample tray), the circuit board having a substrate, and a plurality of conductive leads extending on or in the substrate ([0061] and Fig. 2 teaches the conductive leads (part number 72) that are extending in the substrate), the substrate having a first major surface facing the camera sensor and a second major surface facing the sample tray ([0061] and Fig. 2 teaches the first surface facing the camera and the second facing the sample tray), the first major surface being opposite of the second major surface, the substrate having an opening extending between the first major surface and the second major surface, the opening positioned within the field of view of the camera sensor so that the field of view of the camera includes substantially the entire opening and passes through the opening so as to provide the camera sensor with a controlled view of the sample holder of the sample tray ([0061] and Fig. 2 teaches the first and the second surfaces being opposite of each other. The opening is extending between the surfaces and creating a field of view for the camera to face the sample tray);
multiple light sources attached to the second major surface of the substrate, and connected to at least a portion of the plurality of conductive leads extending on the substrate ([0061] and Fig. 2 teaches the second surface having the multiple light source and is connected to the conductive leads); and
circuitry attached to the conductive leads and configured to supply electricity via the conductive leads to the light sources ([0061] and Fig. 2 teaches the electrical source that are connecting the leads to the light source), …
Nikolai does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Somes teaches a housing surrounding a cavity ([0019] and FIG. 10 teaches a housing that is surrounding a cavity), the housing being opaque to visible light ([0072] teaches the housing elements that prevent light from entering the housing).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai to add the teachings of Somes as disclosed up to improve the image capturing and the reading capabilities of the test strips (Somes [0018]).
Somes does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Jasperse teaches the circuitry configured to supply electricity to each of the light sources such that each light source contributes to illumination of the sample holder of the sample tray at an amount calculated to provide controlled illumination at the sample holder (“In a preferred embodiment, the circuit board 118 is arranged such that each of the light sources 120a-d can have its current independently adjusted. Usually a processor executing program logic would be used to adjust the current to each of the light sources 120a-d, as will be described in greater detail below” (0033); “The illumination system includes a processor for adjusting the flux output of one or both of said at least two light sources to compensate for any non-uniform illumination on a target area caused by the discrepancy in distances of the individual light sources to the target area on account of a tilt angle.” (0019)), wherein the controlled illumination is a substantially uniform intensity across an extent of the sample tray (“the luminous flux of the first light source 120a and second light source 120b are either set or adjusted such that illumination at the first surface point S.sub.T is substantially equivalent to the illumination at the second surface point S.sub. B. This can be done by adjusting the current to either one or both of the first light source 120a and the second light source 120b.” (0035); “non-reactive pad by illuminating the pad “(0009)).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes to further add the teachings of Jasperse as disclosed above to improve the appearance and quality of the resulting images (Jasperse [0017]).
Regarding Claim 24, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the apparatus of claim 23. Nikolai further teaches wherein the multiple light sources are arranged and supported in a planar configuration ([0061] and Fig. 2 teaches the light source that contains multiple light sources that are arrange in a planar configuration).
Regarding Claim 25, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the apparatus of claim 24.
Nikolai further teaches wherein the second major surface of the substrate is planar (Fig. 2 teaches the light source is disposed in a plane manner that is connected the second major surface).
Regarding Claim 28, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the apparatus of claim 24. Nikolai further teaches wherein the substrate has a first side, a second side opposite the first side, and an intermediate region between the first side and the second side, and wherein a first group of the light sources are positioned adjacent to the first side of the substrate (Fig. 2 teaches a first group of light sources (part number 54) on a first side of the substrate and on the second group), and a second group of the light sources are positioned within the intermediate region of the substrate (Fig.2 teaches a second light source (part number 52) that is positioned within the intermediate region. [0072] teaches the controlling of the illumination system), ….
Nikolai does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Jasperse teaches the circuitry provides a first amount of electricity to the first group of the light sources, and a second amount of electricity to the second group of the light sources, wherein the first amount of electricity is greater than the second amount of electricity (“the illumination system includes a processor for adjusting the flux output of one or both of said at least two light sources to compensate for any non-uniform illumination on a target area caused by the discrepancy in distances of the individual light sources to the target area on account of a tilt angle.” [0019]; note: the processor controlled illumination system adjusts the amount of electricity supplied to different light sources to optimize illumination).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes to further add the teachings of Jasperse as disclosed above to improve the appearance and quality of the resulting images (Jasperse [0017]).
Regarding Claim 29, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the apparatus of claim 28. Somes further teaches the first amount of electricity operates a first light source within the first group of the light sources at a first brightness, and the second amount of electricity operates a second light source within the second group of the light sources at a second brightness, with the first brightness greater than the second brightness ([0042] teaches a first and a second lighting sources. [0099] teaches how different lighting elements can be controlled to emit light at different brightness levels. The brightness level is in relation which the electricity level).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai to add the teachings of Somes as disclosed up to improve the image capturing and the reading capabilities of the test strips (Somes [0018]).
Regarding Claim 30, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the apparatus of claim 23. Nikolai further teaches wherein the sample holder has a first major axis and a first minor axis, and wherein the opening in the substrate has a second major axis parallel to the first major axis ([0017], FIG. 2 and FIG. 3 teaches the sample holder having a two major sides in parallel and a minor side that is perpendicular).
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nikolai Dechev (US 20200124587 A1) (Hereinafter Nikolai) in view of Jason Buck Somes (US 20200386753 A1) (hereinafter Somes) in view of Jeffrey R. Jasperse (US 20140028857 A1) (hereinafter Jasperse) further in view of James A. Profitt (US 20110223673 A1) (hereinafter James).
Regarding Claim 10, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the method of claim 1; however, do not appear to explicitly teach directing the light onto a first boundary of a first polarizer, the first polarizer having a first transmission axis and being configured to transmit from a second boundary of the first polarizer a portion of the light that is polarized in a direction parallel to the first transmission axis; and
directing the reflectance optical signal onto a third boundary of a second polarizer, the second polarizer having a second transmission axis and being configured to transmit from a fourth boundary of the second polarizer a portion of the reflectance optical signal that is polarized in a direction parallel to the second transmission axis.
However, in an analogous art, James teaches directing the light onto a first boundary of a first polarizer, the first polarizer having a first transmission axis and being configured to transmit from a second boundary of the first polarizer a portion of the light that is polarized in a direction parallel to the first transmission axis (FIG. 3, FIG. 8, and [0030] teaches a first polarizer (part number 72) that has a first transmission axis and transmits the directing light from a first boundary to the second. [0033] teaches parallel polarization direction); and
directing the reflectance optical signal onto a third boundary of a second polarizer, the second polarizer having a second transmission axis and being configured to transmit from a fourth boundary of the second polarizer a portion of the reflectance optical signal that is polarized in a direction parallel to the second transmission axis (FIG. 3, and FIG. 8 teach a second polarizer (part number 74) where the reflected optical signal is into the third boundary and the polarizer having a second axis and transmit from a fourth boundary. [0033] teaches parallel polarization direction).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes, and Jasperse to further add the teachings of James as disclosed above to improve detection simplicity and to improve the image quality and analysis by reducing noise (James [0052]).
Regarding Claim 11, Nikolai in view of Somes, Jasperse, and James teach the method of claim 10. James further teaches the second transmission axis of the second polarizer is substantially perpendicular to the first transmission axis of the first polarizer (Fig. 7A & 7B teaches the first Polarizer (part number 72) being perpendicular to second Polarizer (part number 74)).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes, and Jasperse to further add the teachings of James as disclosed above to improve detection simplicity and to improve the image quality and analysis by reducing noise (James [0052]).
Regarding Claim 12, Nikolai in view of Somes, Jasperse, and James teach the method of claim 10. James further teaches the second polarizer is movably attached to the camera sensor such that the second transmission axis of the second polarizer is adjustable ([0035] teaches the adjusting of the position of the polarizer. (FIG. 3 teaches the second polarizer being attached to the camera sensor).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes, and Jasperse to further add the teachings of James as disclosed above to improve detection simplicity and to improve the image quality and analysis by reducing noise (James [0052]).
Claims 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nikolai Dechev (US 20200124587 A1) (Hereinafter Nikolai) in view of Jason Buck Somes (US 20200386753 A1) (hereinafter Somes) in view of Jeffrey R. Jasperse (US 20140028857 A1) (hereinafter Jasperse) further in view of Nizar Mullani (US 20040201846 A1) (hereinafter Mullani):
Regarding Claim 20, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the method of claim 13. Nikolai further teaches wherein the opening is a first opening (Fig.2, teaches an opening (part 58) with a first and second opening).
Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse do not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Mullani teaches a first polarizer having a first transmission axis, a first boundary facing the light source such that light generated by the light source is incident on the first boundary ([0065] teaches a ring polarizer (58) where the first boundary is facing the light sources (46)), a second boundary facing the wet reagent test device, and a second opening extending between the first boundary and the second boundary ([0065] teaches the second face of the ring polarizer facing the test subject), the first polarizer being configured to transmit from the second boundary a portion of the light generated by the light source that is polarized in a direction parallel to the first transmission axis, the first opening overlapping the second opening ([0065] teaches the ring polarizer transmits the illumination from the LED to the second boundary, and the opening is between the two boundaries, the two opening of are overlapping); and
a second polarizer having a second transmission axis, a third boundary facing the first opening of the substrate such that light reflected by the wet reagent device is incident on the third boundary ([0065] teaches the second polarizer, where the first boundary of the center polarizer 56 is facing the opening where light reflected from the subject is incident on the first boundary), and a fourth boundary facing the imaging system, the second polarizer being configured to transmit from the fourth boundary a portion of the light reflected by the wet reagent device that is polarized in a direction parallel to the second transmission axis ([0065] teaches the second polarizer, where the second boundary of the center polarizer 56 is facing the camera).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes, and Jasperse, to further add the teachings of Mullani as disclosed above to improve the illumination of the test subject (Mullani [0052]).
Regarding Claim 21, Nikolai in view of Somes, Jasperse and Mullani teach the method of claim 20. Mullani further teaches wherein the second transmission axis of the second polarizer is substantially perpendicular to the first transmission axis of the first polarizer ([0027] teaches the first and second polarizers being 90 degrees out of phase of each other).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes, and Jasperse, to further add the teachings of Mullani as disclosed above to improve the illumination of the test subject (Mullani [0052]).
Regarding Claim 22, Nikolai in view of Somes, Jasperse and Mullani teach the method of claim 21. Mullani further teaches wherein the second polarizer is movably attached to the imaging system such that the second transmission axis of the second polarizer is adjustable ([0064] teaches the polarizer is attached to a spacer mover that adjusts the polarizer to the camera and the transmission axis).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes, and Jasperse, to further add the teachings of Mullani as disclosed above to improve the illumination of the test subject (Mullani [0052]).
Claims 31-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nikolai Dechev (US 20200124587 A1) (Hereinafter Nikolai) in view of Jason Buck Somes (US 20200386753 A1) (hereinafter Somes) in view of Jeffrey R. Jasperse (US 20140028857 A1) (hereinafter Jasperse) in view of Nizar Mullani (US 20040201846 A1) (hereinafter Mullani) further in view of James A. Profitt (US 20110223673 A1) (hereinafter James):
Regarding Claim 31, Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse teach the apparatus of claim 23. Nikolai further teaches wherein the opening is a first opening,(Fig.2, teaches an opening (part 58) with a first and second opening).
Nikolai in view of Somes and Jasperse do not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Mullani teaches a first polarizer positioned within the cavity between the light source and the sample tray ([0065] teaches the ring polarizer where the polarizer is placed between the illumination LEDs and the test subject),
the first polarizer having a first transmission axis, a first boundary facing the light source such that light generated by the light source is incident on the first boundary ([0065] teaches a ring polarizer (58) where the first boundary is facing the light sources (46)), a second boundary facing the sample tray, and a second opening extending between the first boundary and the second boundary ([0065] teaches the second face of the ring polarizer facing the test subject), the first polarizer being configured to transmit from the second boundary a portion of the light generated by the light source that is polarized in a direction parallel to the first transmission axis ([0065] teaches the ring polarizer transmits the illumination from the LED to the second boundary, and the opening is between the two boundaries); and
the second polarizer having a second transmission axis, a third boundary facing the first opening of the substrate such that light reflected by the sample tray is incident on the third boundary, ([0065] teaches the second polarizer, where the first boundary of the center polarizer 56 is facing the opening where light reflected from the subject is incident on the first boundary), and a fourth boundary facing the camera sensor, the second polarizer being configured to transmit from the fourth boundary a portion of the light reflected by the sample tray that is polarized in a direction parallel to the second transmission axis ([0065] teaches the second polarizer, where the second boundary of the center polarizer 56 is facing the camera).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes, and Jasperse, to further add the teachings of Mullani as disclosed above to improve the illumination of the test subject (Mullani [0052]).
Mullani does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, James teaches a second polarizer attached to the camera sensor ([0030] and Fig. 3 teach the polarizer attached to the camera)
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes, Jasperse, and Mullani to further add the teachings of James as disclosed above to improve detection simplicity and to improve the image quality and analysis by reducing noise (James [0052]).
Regarding Claim 32, Nikolai in view of Somes, Jasperse, Mullani, and James teach the apparatus of claim 31. Mullani further teaches wherein the second transmission axis of the second polarizer is substantially perpendicular to the first transmission axis of the first polarizer ([0027] teaches the first and second polarizers being 90 degrees out of phase of each other).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes, and Jasperse, to further add the teachings of Mullani as disclosed above to improve the illumination of the test subject (Mullani [0052]).
Regarding Claim 33, Nikolai in view of Somes, Jasperse, Mullani, and James teach the apparatus of claim 32. Mullani further teaches wherein the second polarizer is movably attached to the camera sensor such that the second transmission axis of the second polarizer is adjustable ([0064] teaches the polarizer is attached to a spacer mover that adjusts the polarizer to the camera and the transmission axis).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Somes, and Jasperse, to further add the teachings of Mullani as disclosed above to improve the illumination of the test subject (Mullani [0052]).
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nikolai Dechev (US 20200124587 A1) (Hereinafter Nikolai) in view of Nizar Mullani (US 20040201846 A1) (hereinafter Mullani) further in view of James A. Profitt (US 20110223673 A1) (hereinafter James):
Regarding Claim 34, Nikolai teaches an apparatus, comprising:
a circuit board having a substrate, the substrate having a first major surface and a second major surface, the first major surface being opposite the second major surface, and a first opening extending between the first major surface and the second major surface (Fig. 2 and [0061] teach the first and second major surfaces of a circuit board. The first surface is opposite of the second surface and there is an opening extending between the surfaces),
a light source attached to the second major surface of the substrate (Fig. 2 teaches the first major surface facing the camera and the second major surface where the light sources is attached);
a camera sensor having a field of view extending through the first opening formed in the substrate (Fig. 2 teaches the camera sensor passing through an opening extending between the two major surfaces of the circuit board (part number 50)), and
a sample tray having a sample holder within the field of view of the camera sensor, the sample tray being positioned a distance away from the camera sensor ([0061) and (Fig. 2] teaches a sample tray (part number 30) that is position with the cavity. The sample tray is withing the field of view of the camera sensor. The sample is positioned at a fixed distance from the camera).
Nikolai does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Mullani teaches
a first polarizer having a first transmission axis, a first boundary facing the light source ([0065] teaches a ring polarizer (58) where the first boundary is facing the light sources (46)), a second boundary opposite the first boundary, and a second opening extending between the first boundary and the second boundary, the second opening overlapping the first opening ([0065] teaches the ring polarizer transmits the illumination from the LED to the second boundary, and the opening is between the two boundaries, the two opening of are overlapping);
the second opening formed in the first polarizer ([0065] teaches the ring polarizer that forms the second opening);
a second polarizer having a second transmission axis substantially perpendicular to the first transmission axis, ([0065] teaches the second polarizer, where the first boundary of the center polarizer 56 is facing the opening where light reflected from the subject is incident on the first boundary).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai to add the teachings of Mullani as disclosed above to improve the illumination of the test subject (Mullani [0052]).
Mullani does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, James teaches the second polarizer being attached to the camera sensor ([0030] and Fig. 3 teach the polarizer attached to the camera).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the test strip analysis as disclosed by Nikolai in view of Mullani to further add the teachings of James as disclosed above to improve detection simplicity and to improve the image quality and analysis by reducing noise (James [0052]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHMOUD KAMAL ABOUZAHRA whose telephone number is (703)756-1694. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 AM to 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, Jamie Atala can be reached at (571) 272-7384. 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.
/MAHMOUD KAMAL ABOUZAHRA/Examiner, Art Unit 2486 /JAMIE J ATALA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2486