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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
No limitations were interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites “the control unit is configured to simulate an optical effect of the external pressure by simulating a pulse wave signal of a human body, by the changing of the transmissivity, without application of pressure by a person” in lines 9-11, which is new matter. At most, the specification of the published application indicates “the pulse wave generation apparatus 2 may simulate the pulse wave signal PPG of the human body” in ¶¶ [0117], [0128]; “The memory 253 may store data for generating the pulse wave light of the pulse wave generation apparatus 2” in ¶ [0078]; “The memory 253 may output the stored data to the calculation unit 252” in ¶ [0078]; and “The calculation unit 252 may output the generated optical adjustment signal LCS (see FIG. 10) to the optical adjustment unit 22” in ¶ [0078]. However, there is no indication that the control unit is configured to perform the simulation without application of pressure by a person, and the specification does not depict a simulation mode.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-9, 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “simulate an optical effect of the external pressure by simulating a pulse wave signal of a human body, by the changing of the transmissivity, without application of pressure by a person” in lines 9-11. First, it is unclear what “an optical effect of the external pressure” means. One of ordinary skill in the art would not understand how an optical effect is a property of the external pressure, and the specification does not provide clarification. Page 8 of the Amendment filed 12/03/2025 indicates that “it was not the quantity of pressure that gave rise to the optical effect, but the fact that an actual human finger pressing down upon the surface of the sensor is the pressure that exerts the optical effect of incident light”. However, this statement describes “the optical effect of incident light”, and it does not clarify what “an optical effect of the external” means. Additionally, this recitation appears to contradict the recitation of “without application of pressure by a person” of line 11 of claim 1. Second, “simulate an optical effect of the external pressure by simulating a pulse wave signal of a human body” suggests that the simulation of the optical effect is achieved by simulating a pulse wave signal of a human body, which is unclear. One of ordinary skill would not understand how simulating any pulse wave signal amounts to simulating an optical effect of an external pressure sensed by a pressure sensor.
Claims 2-9 are rejected by virtue of their dependence from claim 1.
Claim 2 recites “wherein the pressure measurement value includes a plurality of values” in line 2. It is unclear how a single pressure measurement value includes a plurality of values. Claim 8, 11, and 17 recite similar features, so they are rejected on similar grounds. For the purposes of examination, (A) the recitations “a pressure measurement value” claims 1 and 10 will be interpreted to recite “at least one pressure measurement value”, and (B) recitations of “the pressure measurement value” in claims 2, 8, 11, and 17 will be interpreted to be “the at least one pressure measurement value”.
Claims 12-16 and 18-20 are rejected by virtue of their dependence from claims 11 and 17, respectively.
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, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0356345 A1 (Li) (previously cited) in view of US 2006/0104824 A1 (Schnall), US 2017/0031491 A1 (Bao) (previously cited), and US 2002/0159491 A1 (Jiang) (previously cited).
With regards to claim 1, Li teaches a pulse wave generation apparatus (¶ [0057] and Fig. 1 depict a pressure visualization device for use in the field of blood pressure monitoring, wherein the device is capable of visualizing pressure changes (i.e., pulses)), comprising: a pressure sensor configured to sense an external pressure (¶¶ [0057]-[0058], [0060] and Fig. 1 depict a piezoelectric module 20 configured to sense a pressure signal); an optical adjustor configured to change an emittance of light in a simulation mode (¶ [0061] disclose an electrochromic module 30 configured to emit light and displaying detected pressure, which provides a visual simulation of the pressure); and a control unit outputting an optical adjustment signal for changing the emission of light based on a pressure measurement value received from the pressure sensor to the optical adjustment unit (¶¶ [0073], [0075] discloses a current amplifying circuit configured to amplify a minute current to drive the electrochromic layer 30 to emit light efficiently, wherein the piezoelectric module 20 generates the current based on the applied pressure), wherein the control unit is configured to simulate an optical effect of the external pressure by simulating a pulse wave signal of a human body, by the changing of the emittance (¶ [0061] discloses visualization of the pressure signal; ¶ [0057] discloses sensing a pressure change on the surface of the test subject. The above disclosures indicate that the control unit is configured to simulate a pulse wave signal when the surface of the test subject conveys a pressure signal reflective of the pulse wave signal).
Li is silent regarding whether the control unit is configured to simulate the optical effect without application of pressure by a person.
In the same field of endeavor of generating a pulse wave, Schnall teaches simulating an optical effect of a pulse wave without application of pressure by a person (¶ [0106] and Fig. 16 depict a model 150 comprising a light source 153 driven by a function generator 154 which is capable of generating waveforms 155 simulating the optical density changes accompanying the pulse wave in the given body part). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control unit of Li to incorporate that it simulates the optical effect without application of pressure by a person as taught by Schnall. The motivation would have been to provide the device with calibration functionalities, which substantially improves the diagnostic performance and/or the reproducibility of the measurements when using probes for the non-invasive detection of various medical conditions (see ¶¶ [0034]-[0035] of Schnall).
The above combination is silent regarding changing the transmissivity of light.
In the same field of endeavor of electrochromic devices, Bao teaches electrochromic device circuitry for controlling optical properties, such as optical transmission, absorption, reflectance, and/or emittance, in a continual and reversible manner based on application of a voltage (¶ [0073]), wherein the optical properties are responsive to an electronic force sensors (¶ [0074]). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the optical adjustment unit of Li to incorporate changing the transmissivity of light based on a force/pressure value as taught by Bao. The motivation would have been to improve the visualization of the pressure.
Although Li teaches a resin layer 60 underneath the electrochromic module 30 (Fig. 1 of Li), wherein the resin layer 60 is a SU-8 negative photoresist (¶ [0091] of Li), the above combination is silent regarding a reflection unit reflecting the light.
In a system relevant to the problem of guiding light, Jiang teaches depositing a reflective material on a photoresist SU-8 (¶ [0029]). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the resin layer 60 of Li of the above combination to incorporate that a reflective material is deposited on top of the resin layer as taught by Jiang. The motivation would have been to improve visualization of the changes in the optical properties of the electrochromic module by reflecting more light.
With regards to claim 5, the above combination teaches or suggests the optical adjustor includes a lower electrode, an upper electrode, and an electrochromic layer interposed between the lower electrode and the upper electrode (Fig. 1 and ¶ [0059] of Li depicts the electrochromic module 30 comprising a lower electrode (third electrode 301), and upper electrode (fourth electrode 302) and an electrochromic layer 303 between 301 and 302).
With regards to claim 6, the above combination teaches or suggests the upper electrode or the lower electrode receives a voltage according to the optical adjustment signal and adjusts a transmissivity of the electrochromic layer (¶ [0075] of Li discloses a current is applied to the electrochromic module to emit the light; ¶ [0073] of Bao teaches optical transmission of the ECD being modulated based on application of a voltage; see the above combination of Li in view of Bao regarding the optical adjustment unit being configured to adjust a transmissivity of light).
Claims 2-3 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Schnall, Bao, and Jiang, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2012/0302902 A1 (Shin) (previously cited).
With regards to claim 2, the above combination teaches or suggests that the pressure measurement value includes a plurality of values (¶ [0075] of Li indicates that the current changes as the surface pressure of the detection subject changes, which indicates that the pressure sensor is configured for generating a plurality of pressure values), the control unit is configured to determine the optical adjustment signal based on each pressure change section (¶¶ [0073], [0075] of Li discloses a current amplifying circuit configured to amplify a minute current to drive the electrochromic layer 30 to emit light efficiently, wherein the piezoelectric module 20 generates the current based on the applied pressure. The Examiner asserts that the current amplifying circuit will necessarily determine a current signal corresponding to changes in pressure).
The above combination is silent regarding whether the control unit is configured to detect the plurality of values sensed by the pressure sensor as first to N-th pressure sections, wherein N is a positive integer.
In the same field of endeavor of determining pulse waves, Shin teaches a control unit (¶ [0048] discloses a computer/monitor comprising a pulse wave amplitude detection unit) configured to detect the plurality of values sensed by the pressure sensor as first to N-th pressure sections, wherein N is a positive integer (¶ [0016] discloses a pressure sensor for determining a pulse wave, and dividing the pulse wave signals into a plurality of window sections; ¶ [0061] teaches the pulse wave amplitude detection unit divides pulse wave signal into a plurality of window sections based on the number of waveforms, which is a positive integer). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control unit of the above combination to incorporate that it is configured to detect the plurality of values sensed by the pressure sensor as first to N-th pressure sections, wherein N is a positive integer, as taught by Shin. The motivation would have been to identify individual pulsations, thereby allowing for a more detailed determination of features of the pulse wave.
Because the above combination of Li in view of Shin teaches or suggests the current amplifying circuit of Li generating a current signal that reflects the pulse wave of Shin, the above combination results in the current amplifying circuit of Li calculating the optical adjustment signal corresponding to each of the first to N-th pressure sections of Shin.
With regards to claim 3, the above combination teaches or suggests that the optical adjustment signal has a waveform including a peak in each of the first to N-th pressure sections (¶ [0065] of Shin teaches each window having a minimum amplitude value of the pulse wave; ¶¶ [0073], [0075] of Li teaches the current corresponding to the pressure sensor being amplified and driving; The above combination of Li in view of Shin teaches or suggests the current amplifying circuit of LI generating a current signal that reflects the pulse wave of Shin).
With regards to claim 8, the above combination teaches or suggests that the pressure measurement value includes a plurality of values (¶ [0075] of Li indicates that the current changes as the surface pressure of the detection subject changes, which indicates that the pressure sensor is configured for generating a plurality of pressure values), the control unit is configured to determine the optical adjustment signal corresponding to each pressure change section (¶¶ [0073], [0075] of Li discloses a current amplifying circuit configured to amplify a minute current to drive the electrochromic layer 30 to emit light efficiently, wherein the piezoelectric module 20 generates the current based on the applied pressure. The Examiner asserts that the current amplifying circuit will necessarily determine a current signal corresponding to changes in pressure).
The above combination is silent regarding whether the control unit is configured to detect the plurality of values as first to N-th pressure sections, and determine the optical adjustment signal based on the first to N-th pressure sections, the determined optical adjustment signal including a plurality of waveforms, each of the plurality of waveforms having a different amplitude.
In the same field of endeavor of determining pulse waves, Shin teaches a control unit (¶ [0048] discloses a computer/monitor comprising a pulse wave amplitude detection unit) configured to determine the pressure measurement value sensed by the pressure sensor as first to N-th pressure sections (¶ [0016] discloses a pressure sensor for determining a pulse wave, and dividing the pulse wave signals into a plurality of window sections; ¶ [0061] teaches the pulse wave amplitude detection unit divides pulse wave signal into a plurality of window sections based on the number of waveforms, which is a positive integer), and determined the pressure sections including a plurality of waveforms, each of the plurality of waveforms having a different amplitude (¶ [0016] discloses the feature window corresponding to at least one wave because each window has a minimum amplitude pulse; Fig. 7 depicts at least one minimum amplitude value of a feature window being different from that of a different feature window; ¶ [0049] discloses a minimum amplitude value and a maximum amplitude value in each window). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control unit of the above combination to incorporate that it is configured to detect the pressure measurement value sensed by the pressure sensor as first to N-th pressure sections, and the determined the pressure sections including a plurality of waveforms, each of the plurality of waveforms having a different amplitude as taught by Shin. The motivation would have been to identify individual pulsations, thereby allowing for a more detailed determination of features of the pulse wave.
Because the above combination of Li in view of Shin teaches or suggests the current amplifying circuit of Li generating a current signal that reflects the pulse wave of Shin, the above combination results in the current amplifying circuit of Li determining the optical adjustment signal based on the first to N-th pressure sections, the determined optical adjustment signal including a plurality of waveforms, each of the plurality of waveforms having a different amplitude.
With regards to claim 9, the above combination teaches or suggests that the a first amplitude of a first waveform of the plurality of waveforms is greater than a second amplitude of a second waveform of the plurality of waveforms (Fig. 7 depicts at least one minimum amplitude value of a feature window being different from that of a different feature window; ¶¶ [0073], [0075] of Li teaches the current corresponding to the pressure sensor being amplified; The above combination of Li in view of Shin teaches or suggests the current amplifying circuit of LI generating a current signal that reflects the pulse wave of Shin).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Schnall, Bao, Jiang, and Shin, as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of 2010/0324430 A1 (Inoue) (previously cited).
With regards to claim 4, the above combination is silent regarding whether the pressure sections include an M-th pressure section, wherein M is an integer greater than 1 and smaller than N, and wherein the control unit is configured to calculate amplitudes of first to M-th optical adjustment signal portions so that the optical adjustment signal sequentially increases in the first to M-th pressure sections, and is configured to calculate amplitudes of M-th to N-th optical adjustment signal portions so that the optical adjustment signal sequentially decreases in the M-th to N-th pressure sections.
In a system relevant to the problem of pulse wave analysis, Inoue teaches that a pressure sensor is configured to determine pressure sections that include an M-th pressure section, wherein M is an integer greater than 1 and smaller than N, (Fig. 2 and ¶ [0043] depicts pulse wave amplitude values spanning from a first section to a last section (i.e., N-th), wherein a maximum amplitude value corresponds to an M-th section), wherein the pulse wave amplitudes of the first to M-th sections sequentially increases and the pulse wave amplitudes of the M-th to N-th sections sequentially decreases (Fig. 2). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the above combination to incorporate that the pressure sensor is configured to determine pressure sections that include an M-th pressure section, wherein M is an integer greater than 1 and smaller than N,, wherein the pulse wave amplitudes of the first to M-th sections sequentially increases and the pulse wave amplitudes of the M-th to N-th sections sequentially decreases as taught by Inoue. The motivation would have been to provide a more accurate representation of the pulse wave changes.
Because the above combination of Li in view of Shin teaches or suggests the current amplifying circuit of Li generating a current signal that reflects the pulse wave of Shin, the above combination results in the control unit being configured to calculate amplitudes of first to M-th optical adjustment signal portions so that the optical adjustment signal sequentially increases in the first to M-th pressure sections and being configured to calculate amplitudes of M-th to N-th optical adjustment signal portions so that the optical adjustment signal sequentially decreases in the M-th to N-th pressure sections.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Schnall, Bao and Jiang, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 9,581,876 B1 (Cho) (previously cited)
With regards to claim 7, the above combination is silent regarding a light scatterer disposed on one surface of the optical adjustor and configured to scatter light.
In a system relevant to the problem of modulating transmissivity of light, Cho teaches a light scatterer disposed on one surface of the optical adjustor and configured to scatter light (Fig. 3 and Col. 5, lines 18-61 depict an electrolyte layer 115 comprising scattering particles DP, wherein 115 is on a surface of a electrochromic layer of an optical adjustment unit). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the optical adjustor of the above combination to incorporate a light scatterer disposed on one surface of the optical adjustment unit and configured to scatter light as taught by Cho. The motivation would have been to improve the viewing angle of the device without increasing blurring (Col.1, lines 33-54 of Cho)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is allowed.
With regards to claim 10, the prior art does not teach or suggest an electronic display includes a main processor configured to control a display panel to emit the first light to the optical adjustor, configured to control a photo-sensor to sense a second light transmitted through the optical adjustor and reflected by the reflector to generate light sensing data, configured to control the optical adjustor to generate a pulse wave signal based on the light sensing data and the sensed first applied pressure, and configured to analyze the pulse wave signal to calculate a blood pressure, along with the other features of claim 10.
There are no prior art rejections of claims 11-20 by virtue of their dependence from claim 10.
Claims 11-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
US 2021/0356345 A1 (Li) teaches a pressure visualization device that can be used for blood pressure monitoring (¶ [0057]). However, Li is completely silent regarding an electronic display includes a main processor configured to control a display panel to emit the first light to the optical adjustor, configured to control a photo-sensor to sense a second light transmitted through the optical adjustor and reflected by the reflector to generate light sensing data, configured to control the optical adjustor to generate a pulse wave signal based on the light sensing data and the sensed first applied pressure, and configured to analyze the pulse wave signal to calculate a blood pressure. The state of the art provides no teaching or suggestion that would reasonably lead one of skill to arrive at the use of the pressure visualization device of Li with the claimed display device absent improper hindsight or an otherwise inarticulate combination of inadequate teachings.
US 2019/0380624 A1 (Ota) (previously cited) teaches calculation of a blood pressure using reflected light (¶ [0087]). However, Ota and the state of the art does not teach or suggest the use of a pulse wave generation device, which comprises an optical adjustor, in conjunction with a display device configured to transmit light to the optical adjustor.
Response to Arguments
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. §112
There are new grounds of rejections under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) necessitated by the claim amendments filed 12/03/2025.
Specifically, claim 1 was rejected for reciting “simulate an optical effect of the external pressure by simulating a pulse wave signal of a human body, by the changing of the transmissivity, without application of pressure by a person” in lines 9-11. Although page 8 of the Amendment filed 12/03/2025 indicates that “it was not the quantity of pressure that gave rise to the optical effect, but the fact that an actual human finger pressing down upon the surface of the sensor is the pressure that exerts the optical effect of incident light”, it is unclear what “an optical effect of the external pressure” means. The above arguments describe “the optical effect of incident light”, and it does not clarify what “an optical effect of the external” means. Additionally, this arguments rely upon an actual human finger pressing down upon the surface of the sensor, which appears to contradict the recitation of “without application of pressure by a person” of line 11 of claim 1.
Prior Art Rejections
Applicant's amendment and arguments filed 12/03/2025 with respect to the 35 USC 103 rejections set forth in the Non-Final Rejection mailed 09/26/2025 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Schnall. Specifically, the previously applied prior combination does not disclose simulating the optical effect of a pulse wave signal without application of pressure by a person but Schnall discloses this feature. Therefore, the previously applied 103 rejection has been modified to incorporate the teachings of Schnall.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL C KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-8637. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, Jacqueline Cheng can be reached at (571) 272-5596. 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.
/S.C.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/JACQUELINE CHENG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791