DETAILED ACTION
Note: The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Applicant’s arguments filed in the reply on November 4, 2025 were received and fully considered. Claims 1, 13, 18, and 19 were amended. Claims 12 and 32-34 were cancelled. Claims 38-41 are new. The current action is FINAL. Please see corresponding rejection headings and response to arguments section below for more detail.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 16 October 2025 and 4 January 2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(1)
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 11, 13-15, 18, 31, 35-37, and 39-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Savinen (US PG Pub. No. 2019/0192051 A1).
Savinen was applied in the previous office action.
With respect to claim 1, Savinen teaches a device for collecting and processing an electromyography (EMG) signal of a human body (par.0015 “NMT monitor may be used to monitor muscle response to electrical stimulation of a motor nerve… electromyography… multiple electrodes may be used to record the compound muscle potential”; see also Fig. 6), comprising: an electrode module configured to collect the EMG signal of the human body (simulating structure 600 collects EMG signals of the human body as depicted in Fig. 6; see also par.0049-50), the electrode module including a base structure (flexible substrate 602 and/or adhesive foam 604 in Fig. 6), at least two electrodes (first electrode 606, second electrode 608, and third electrode 610 in Fig. 6; see also par.0049-50), and a plurality of sucker structures (cushion 612, cushion 614, and cushion 616 in Fig. 6; see also par.0050 “Each electrode may be surrounded by a cushion of conductive gel in a sponge, including cushion 612, cushion 614, and cushion 616…enhance electrical coupling between the electrodes and skin of the patient”), the at least two electrodes being arranged at intervals on a surface of the base structure (electrodes 606, 608, and 610 are arranged at intervals on surface of base structure 602, as depicted in Fig. 6), the plurality of sucker structures being arranged in an array or randomly distributed on surfaces of the at least two electrodes or on a surface of the base structure (sucker structures 612/614/616 are distributed on surfaces of electrodes 606/608/610 and base structure 602, ad depicted in Fig. 6), wherein each of the sucker structures is a three-dimensional (3D) structure, and includes a hollow part, the hollow part having an opening used to contact a human skin at an end of the sucker structure (Fig. 6; par.0049-50 “the layer of adhesive foam 604 may include openings… surrounded by a cushion of conductive gel in a sponge… such that the electrodes electrically contact the skin of the patient via the conductive gel”; Note: Savinen’s disclosure of a conductive gel sponge and adhesive foam, the latter of which is generally understood in the art to have hollow portions allowing for at least air to travel therethrough, equates to the claimed “hollow part” when taking into consideration broadest reasonable interpretation).
With respect to claim 2, Savinen teaches wherein the at least two electrodes include a first electrode and a second electrode arranged side by side on the surface of the base structure (Fig. 6; par.0049-50).
With respect to claim 5, Savinen teaches wherein the electrode module includes a plurality of protruding structures located on surfaces of the at least two electrodes or a surface of the base structure (first electrode 162 and second electrode 164 are placed on flexible substrate 160, which “may be comprised of a suitable flexible, non-conductive material such as silicon, polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyethylene (PE), or other thermoplastic resins”, see par.0024; Fig. 1).
With respect to claim 7, Savinen teaches wherein the protruding structures are hollow inside, and a hollow part of each of the protruding structures has a filler (par.0049 “layer of adhesive foam 604 may include openings to accommodate each electrode”).
With respect to claim 11, Savinen teaches wherein the plurality of sucker structures are distributed on the surface of the base structure around the at least two electrodes (Fig. 6; par.0049-50).
With respect to claim 13, Savinen teaches wherein the sucker structure further includes a middle structure located in the hollow part of the sucker structure, wherein a part of the middle structure is connected to a side wall of the sucker structure where the hollow part is located (Fig. 6; par.0050).
With respect to claim 14, Savinen teaches wherein the middle structure divides the hollow part of the sucker structure into a plurality of interconnected spatial areas (par.0024 “the connecting region”; see Fig. 1).
With respect to claim 15, Savinen teaches wherein the electrode module further includes a plurality of bump structures located on the surface of the base structure or the surfaces of the at least two electrodes (Figs 7-8 similarly depict three electrodes with a bump structure located on the surface of the electrodes).
With respect to claim 18, Savinen teaches wherein the electrode module further includes a plurality of air holes located on the electrodes and/or the base structure to make the electrode module have a certain air permeability (par.0053 “cut-outs or openings to accommodate electrodes”).
With respect to claim 31, Savinen teaches wherein the protruding structures are arranged in an array or randomly distributed on the surfaces of the at least two electrodes or the surface of the base structure (Figs. 6-8).
With respect to claim 34, Savinen teaches wherein the base structure is made of a flexible insulating material (par.0055 “insulating material… coupled to flexible substrate”).
With respect to claim 35, Savinen teaches wherein two of the at least two electrodes in the electrode module are arranged at intervals along a length direction of a muscle fiber (par.0062).
With respect to claim 36, Savinen teaches wherein the at least two electrodes include a metal fabric electrode, a conductive silicon electrode, a hydrogel electrode, or a metal electrode (par.0027 “silver… electrodes”).
With respect to claim 37, Savinen teaches wherein the filler is an elastic material with conductivity (par.0050 “cushion of conductive gel in a sponge”).
With respect to claim 39, Savinen teaches wherein the plurality of protruding structures and the at least two electrodes are distributed on different surfaces of the base structure (Fig. 1 shows first electrode 162 is placed on surface near user’s thumb, while second electrode 164 is placed on a different surface placed central to user’s palm).
With respect to claim 40, Savinen teaches 40. (New) The device of claim 5, wherein the plurality of the protruding structures are made of an elastic material including at least one of a soft polyvinyl chloride (PVC), a resin, or a silicone (par.0024 “Flexible substrate 160 may be comprised of a suitable flexible, non-conductive material such as silicon, polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyethylene (PE), or other thermoplastic resins”).
With respect to claim 41, Savinen teaches wherein the middle structure is made of soft and deformable material with a certain elasticity (par.0024 “the connecting region (and/or other areas of the flexible substrate) may include areas of additional flexibility, such as areas 168. These areas may be comprised of a different material than the rest of the flexible substrate, where the different material is more flexible than the rest of the flexible substrate”).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savinen in view of Jooris et al. (WO 2020/165042 A1) (hereinafter “Jooris”).
Jooris was applied in the previous office action.
With respect to claim 3, Savinen teaches a device for collecting and processing an electromyography (EMG) signal of a human body, as established above.
However, Savinen does not explicitly teach wherein the at least two electrodes further include a reference electrode, and the first electrode, the reference electrode and the second electrode are arranged side by side in sequence on the surface of the base structure; or the at least two electrodes further include a third electrode and a fourth electrode arranged side by side on the surface of the base structure, wherein the first electrode is arranged side by side with the third electrode, and the second electrode is arranged side by side with the fourth electrode.
Jooris teaches device for collecting and processing an electromyography (EMG) signal of a human body, wherein the at least two electrodes further include a reference electrode, and the first electrode, the reference electrode and the second electrode are arranged side by side in sequence on the surface of the base structure; or the at least two electrodes further include a third electrode and a fourth electrode arranged side by side on the surface of the base structure, wherein the first electrode is arranged side by side with the third electrode, and the second electrode is arranged side by side with the fourth electrode (pg. 47, lines 34+; pg.51, lines 6+).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art (“PHOSITA”) when the invention was filed to modify Savinen to incorporate additional electrodes, reference electrode, etc. in order to aid in acquiring electrical activity data from the subject muscle tissue, and for outputting an EMG data component of the measured data, as evidence by Jooris.
Claims 17, 32, 33, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savinen.
With respect to claims 17, 32, and 33, Savinen teaches a device for collecting and processing an electromyography (EMG) signal of a human body, as established above.
Although Savinen does not explicitly teach wherein a distribution density of the plurality of bump structures is in a range of 2 pieces/2.25 mm2-10 pieces/2.25 mm2 (claim 17), wherein a height of each of the protruding structures is in a range of 0.5 mm-10 mm (claim 32), and wherein heights of the plurality of bump structures are in a range of 10 µm-80 µm (claim 33), further modification to include these features would have been prima facie obvious to PHOSITA when the invention was filed since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
With respect to claim 38, Savinen teaches wherein each of the at least two electrodes includes a first electrode part and a second electrode part, the first electrode part and the second electrode part are connected with each other, wherein the first electrode part is configured to contact the human skin, and the second electrode part is configured to connect with a data wire so as to transmit an EMG signal collected by the first electrode part (par.0025; Fig. 1). Although Savinen does not explicitly teach the first electrode part and the second electrode part have a height difference, such a modification would have been prima facie obvious to PHOSITA when the invention was filed since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention (in this case, the placement of the first electrode part with respect to the placement of the second electrode part such that there would be a “height difference”) involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed with respect to the prior art rejections raised in the previous office action have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Specifically, Applicant argues that Savinen does not teach wherein each of the sucker structures is a three-dimensional (3D) structure, and includes a hollow part, the hollow part having an opening used to contact a human skin at an end of the sucker structure (as was previously recited in now cancelled claim 12, now incorporated into amended claim 1). Applicant appears to take issue with Savinen’s disclosure of “a cushion of conductive gel” in [0049]-[0050] in arguing that Savinen does not teach a hollow part having an opening used to contact a human skin, as set forth in the current amendment. While it is true that Savinen’s cushions 612/614/616 utilize a conductive gel, the cited portions also expressly disclose the following:
[0049]… A plurality of electrodes may be coupled to flexible substrate 602 and/or adhesive foam 604, including a first electrode 606, a second electrode 608, and a third electrode 610 (in some examples, third electrode 610 may be omitted from stimulating structure 600). In some examples, the layer of adhesive foam 604 may include openings to accommodate each electrode, and each electrode may be directly coupled to the flexible substrate 602. In other examples, each electrode may be directly coupled to the layer of adhesive foam. In either example, front faces of the electrodes are not covered by the adhesive foam such that the electrodes are capable of making electrical contact with the skin of a patient.
[0050] Each electrode may be surrounded by a cushion of conductive gel in a sponge, including cushion 612, cushion 614, and cushion 616. The cushions of conductive gel may enhance electrical coupling between the electrodes and skin of the patient. The cushions may be coupled directly to the flexible substrate or to the layer of adhesive foam. While not shown in FIG. 6, in some examples, the conductive gel sponges may be coupled across the front faces of the electrodes, such that the electrodes electrically contact the skin of the patient via the conductive gel.
From the bolded portions above, Examiner argues that Savinen’s disclosure of its conductive gel sponge and adhesive foam, the latter of which is generally understood in the art to have hollow portions allowing for at least air to travel therethrough, equates to the claimed “hollow part” when taking into consideration broadest reasonable interpretation. Applicant also contends that the claimed sucker structure and hollow part “creates a tighter fit of the electrodes to the skin of the patient by generating negative pressure adhesion using the hollow part” (remarks, pg. 10). This is not persuasive because nothing from the claims, as currently recited, sets forth this feature and/or any specific material that distinguishes over Savinen. Notwithstanding, Examiner argues that Savinen’s adhesive foam and conductive gel sponge would be fully capable of generating negative pressure adhesion (via pressing against the skin) as it is known in the art that foam/sponge materials are capable of being compressed, changing shape, etc. via applying pressure thereto.
For at least these reasons, the anticipation rejection is maintained. Please see prior art section above for more detail.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 PUYA AGAHI whose telephone number is (571)270-1906. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM - 5 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, Alexander Valvis can be reached at 5712724233. 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.
/PUYA AGAHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights