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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the elements of Fig. 1 are not clearly labeled with clear symbols/text/legend[s] to demonstrate what they represent from the drawing itelf. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1-10 contain part numbers. Remove them.
For Claim 7, remove the quotations.
Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains part numbers and it is longer than the 150 word limit. Emend to address these concerns. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiang (USPGPN 20150015187) in view of Zacurate (“Zacurate 500BL Fingertip Pulse Oximeter Blood Oxygen Saturation Monitor with Batteries Included (Navy Blue),” Zacurate, Amazon.com, First Published for sale Jan 13 2017, Accessed Online Mar 7, https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06Y2FFQB9/ref=ask_ql_qh_dp_hza ; hereinafter Zacur), as evidenced by Tateda et al (USPGPN 20150297079)
Independent Claim 1, Xiang teaches a circuit (Figs. 1-7, ¶’s [39-46]) for indicating a power supply by applying a double-color light-emitting diode (LED), characterized in that the circuit comprises:
an MCU module (200 in Fig. 1, U4 in Fig. 2);
a double-color LED module, including a double-color LED and connected to the MCU module (LEDs 1-4, see Fig. 2, ¶’s [52, 53, 59, 74-76, esp. 75]);
a voltage measurement module connected to the MCU module (600, Fig. 1);
a rechargeable battery module connected to the voltage measurement module (300, in Fig. 1, ¶’s [48, 49, 53, 56, 100, 105]); and
a power supply input module, which is suitable for connection with an external power supply and is connected to the MCU module and the rechargeable battery module (80, 100, see Figs. [1, 4]);
wherein the MCU module is suitable for controlling the double-color LED according to the states of the power supply input module and the rechargeable battery module, so that the device presents a visual result directly observable by the human eyes (¶’s [74-76], see further ¶’s [52, 53, 59, 99-119]).
Xiang is silent to a circuit inside a finger clip type pulse oximeter,
Zacur teaches a finger clip type pulse oximeter (page 1 of the attachment shows a finger clip type oximeter with a battery meter/level-indicator on the LCD screen, which is analogous to an LED type battery level indicator as in Xiang and the present application, where a microprocessor, LEDs for the pulse oximetry function, battery charging, internal battery, etc. would likely be used analogously to both Xiang and the present application as well, see as evidence Tateda Figs. [1, 7, 8] & title). One of ordinary skill in the art understands that by having the smaller footprint LEDs of Xiang, rather than the LCD of Zacur, it would be more efficient. In addition, one of ordinary skill in the art understands that by have the reduced footprint of Xiang with the simpler display (which e.g. can be transmitted to an external display not running by the power of the finger clip type pulse oximeter), it can reduce the size, power consumption, and manufacturing cost of the device (¶’s [65-67, esp. 67] of Tateda).
One of ordinary skill in the art understands that a finger clip type pulse oximeter is beneficial in that it can provide valuable health information without an invasive test (e.g. blood sample not required). Blood oxygen saturation levels can be life saving esp. when one is concerned about respiratory issues. It can also inform a user about quality of sleep, etc.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the circuit of Xiang in the analogous finger clip type pulse oximeter of Zacur [with the modifications of Zacur, e.g. reducing the size of the display, or not even using a display on the pulse oximeter at all] to provide improved efficiency, size, and costs, and further provide a circuit which can provide beneficial respiratory information on the human using it in a small, non-invasive footprint.
Dependent Claim 2, the combination of Xiang and Zacur teaches with the power supply input module including a socket U2, a fuse F2 is connected between the socket U2 and the output terminal of the power supply input module; the output terminal of the power supply input module is connected to the rechargeable battery module, and connected to the MCU module through an insertion detection module (compare Figs. [1, 4] of Xiang, fuse F1, socket L1, ¶’s [83, 84], with ¶[83] describing connection/detection to U4).
Dependent Claim 3, the combination of Xiang and Zacur teaches the insertion detection module includes a resistor R1, which has one terminal connected to the MCU module U1 and the other terminal connected to the output terminal of the power supply input module (resistors are shown in Figs. 2 & 4 between input and the microprocessor, where to understand that the battery is being charged and so flash the LED1 as described in ¶[76], Xiang must understand that the insertion detection has occurred, thus it is met at least by R5).
Dependent Claim 4, the combination of Xiang and Zacur teaches the rechargeable battery module comprises a lithium battery (Zacur has on page 7 that AAA batteries are used, where on of ordinary skill in the art understands this can include lithium AAA batteries; where, Xiang is silent to lithium batteries, therefore, it would be obvious to use the design choice of lithium AAA batteries due to their high reliability, longevity, and performance, corresponding to battery 300 of Xiang), and a charging management chip connected to the output terminal of the power supply input module (U1, see Fig. 4 of Xiang);
the lithium battery, with its negative electrode grounded, has its positive electrode connected to the charging management chip and connected to the MCU module U1 through the voltage measurement module (comparing Figs. [1, 2, 4] of Xiang).
Dependent Claim 5, the combination of Xiang and Zacur teaches the voltage measurement module includes resistors R7 and R8, one terminal of the resistor R7 being connected to the positive electrode of the lithium battery BAT1; the resistor R8 has its one terminal grounded, and the other terminal connected to the other terminal of the resistor R7 and then connected to the MCU module (R6, R7 of Fig. 3, compare Figs. [1-4] in Xiang)
Dependent Claim 6, the combination of Xiang and Zacur teaches the double-color LED D1 comprises a first LED capable of exhibiting a first color, and a second LED capable of exhibiting a second color, with the first color different from the second color; the double-color LED module further comprises resistors R4 and R5; the anode of the first LED is connected to a VDD pin of the MCU module U1 through the resistor R4, and the anode of the second LED is connected to the same VDD pin of the MCU module U1 through the resistor R5; the cathode of the first LED is directly connected to one I/O pin of the MCU module U1, and the cathode of the second LED is directly connected to the other I/O pin of the MCU module U1 (¶[75], Fig. 2 of Xiang demonstrates these features).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiang (USPGPN 20150015187) in view of Zacur, further in view of Kawada et al (USPGPN 20110211325), Tateda et al (USPGPN 20150297079)
Dependent Claim 8, the combination of Xiang and Zacur teaches the charging management chip has a VIN pin connected to the power supply input module, a BAT pin connected to the lithium battery BAT1 for charging current output, and a CHG pin connected to an indication LED D2 for charging state output (Xiang teaches U1 is connected to the circuit of Fig. 2 via comparison of Figs. [1, 2, 4], and is thus connected to the four LEDs, while ¶[76] describes an indication for charging state output)
Xiang is silent to the indication LED capable of exhibiting a third color.
Kawada teaches the indication LED capable of exhibiting a third color (¶’s [60, 63] describes three or more colors [vs the two colors of Xiang] for display elements seen at least in Fig. 6, where to have a third color would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to provide improved convenience/reliability that the different information may be more easily identified over two colors)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Xiang in view of Zacur with Kawada to provide improved convenience and reliability.
Claims 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiang (USPGPN 20150015187) in view of Zacur, as evidenced by Olsson et al (USPN 11894707) and Tateda et al (USPGPN 20150297079)
Dependent Claim 9, the combination of Xiang and Zacur teaches a method, applied to a finger clip type pulse oximeter, for indicating a power supply by applying the circuit according to claim 1, characterized in that the method is specifically as follows:
when the power supply input module is connected to the external power supply, and the lithium battery BAT1 of the rechargeable battery module is being charged, the MCU module U1 controls the first LED of the double-color LED D1 to flash in the first color at a predetermined frequency (¶[76] of Xiang describes this feature);
when the power supply input module is connected to the external power supply, and the lithium battery BAT1 of the rechargeable battery module is fully charged, the MCU module U1 controls the first LED of the double-color LED D1 to be always on in the first color (¶[76] of Xiang describes this feature);
when the power supply input module is not connected to the external power supply, and the MCU module U1 detects that the voltage of the detection terminal of the voltage measurement module is lower than a first predetermined voltage, the MCU module U1 controls the second LED of the double-color LED D1 to be always on in the second color (¶[76] of Xiang describes this feature);
when the power supply input module is not connected to the external power supply, and the MCU module U1 detects that the voltage of the detection terminal of the voltage measurement module is lower than a second predetermined voltage, the MCU module U1 controls the second LED of the double-color LED D1 to flash in the second color at a predetermined frequency (while Xiang does not explicitly teach this flashing, the predetermined frequency for another LED is described in ¶[76], and the choice to turn off less/more LEDs in the 3 LEDs of the 2nd color [LED2, LED3, LED4] vs. flashing one of these LEDs is simply a design choice, which would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art [noted that the first LED is already flashing for a similar effect], see for instance Figs. [1-7, esp. 7] of Olsson in an analogous operation);
wherein the second predetermined voltage is lower than the first predetermined voltage (¶[76] of Xiang).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiang (USPGPN 20150015187) in view of Zacur, further in view of Shivaraju (USPGPN 20210234140, hereinafter Shiva) as evidenced by Tateda & Xiang (USPGPN 20140375249,hereinafter Xiang2)
Dependent Claim 10, the combination of Xiang and Zacur teaches an oximeter for indicating a power supply by applying a double-color LED, characterized in that: the oximeter, being of a finger clip type pulse oximeter, comprises a body and a circuit according to claim 1; and the double-color LED set corresponding to the indication position.
Xiang is silent to the body is provided on the surface with a display screen and an indication position located on one side of the display screen, with the LED set corresponding to the indication position.
Shiva teaches the body is provided on the surface with a display screen and an indication position located on one side of the display screen, with the LED set corresponding to the indication position (Figs. [1, 4, 6, 7, esp. 6, 7] shows LED 604 to the side of display screen 116 ¶[39], where one of ordinary skill in the art understands that redundant screens can be beneficial as they can show different information, and for a smaller screen, the smaller screen will most often use less energy than the larger screen, so use of the smaller screen, esp. when the larger screen is not needed, can provide improved efficiency over having to rely on the larger screen all the time, as evidenced by Xiang2 in ¶’s [47-52, esp. 51] where basic information can be provided by the LEDs, while more detailed [and more power intensive to process/display] information can be displayed by the LCD screen for improved convenience to the user for that information).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Xiang in view of Zacur with Shiva to provide improved efficiency and convenience due to the redundancy of having both the LEDs of Xiang and the display screen of Zacur.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN T TRISCHLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0651. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30A-3:30P (often working later), M-F, ET, Flexible. 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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 5712722312. 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.
/JOHN T TRISCHLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859