This Office action is in response to application filed on 5/12/2023.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon,
or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Regarding claim 11, the examiner submits that under Step 1 of the 2024 Guidance Update on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility, Including on Artificial Intelligence (see also 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance) for evaluating claim for eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, the claim is to a machine, which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
Continuing with the analysis, under Step 2A - Prong One of the test, the limitations (see italic font below) of:
“A capacitive transimpedance amplifying device, the capacitive transimpedance amplifying device sampling a detection signal multiple times and sampling an inversion of the detection signal multiple times in predetermined sampling sequence during a sampling period to cancel a noise signal of the detection signal and thereby obtain a target signal of the detection signal” falls into the grouping of mathematical concepts, i.e., sampling the detection signal and inversion of the detection signal which involve transforming a continuous-time signal.
“wherein the first switch and the second switch are scheduled to be turned on in a first time slot, to be turned off in a second time slot, to be turned off in a third time slot, and to be turned on in a fourth time slot, the first electrode and the second electrode are coupled with the first inverting input node and the first output node respectively during the first time slot and the fourth time slot to allow the first capacitor to sample the detection signal during the first time slot and the fourth time slot, and the first time slot, the second time slot, the third time slot, and the fourth time slot are four consecutive time slots included in the sampling period” falls into the groupings of mental process, i.e., switching on/off without requiring a physical machine/device, and mathematical concept, i.e., sampling the detection signal that involves transforming a continuous-time signal.
“wherein the third switch and the fourth switch are scheduled to be turned off in the first time slot, to be turned on in the second time slot, to be turned on in the third time slot, and to be turned off in the fourth time slot, and the second electrode and the first electrode are coupled with the first inverting input node and the first output node respectively during the second time slot and the third time slot to allow the first capacitor to sample the inversion of the detection signal during the second time slot and the third time slot” falls into the groupings of mental process, i.e., switching on/off without requiring a physical machine/device, and mathematical concepts, i.e., sampling the inversion of the detection signal involving transforming a continuous-time signal.
“wherein the detection signal includes the target signal and the noise signal during the first time slot and the fourth time slot, and the detection signal includes the noise signal but does not include the target signal during the second time slot and the third time slot” falls into the grouping of mental process, i.e., concepts performed in human mind including observation, evaluation, judgement and/or opinion.
Furthermore, under Step 2A - Prong Two of the test, this judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the additional elements (see non-italic font below) recited in the claim:
“A capacitive transimpedance amplifying device, the capacitive transimpedance amplifying device sampling a detection signal multiple times and sampling an inversion of the detection signal multiple times in predetermined sampling sequence during a sampling period to cancel a noise signal of the detection signal and thereby obtain a target signal of the detection signal the capacitive transimpedance amplifying device comprising: a first capacitive transimpedance amplifier including: a first operational amplifier including a first input node, a first inverting input node, and a first output node, wherein the first input node is for receiving a first reference voltage and the first inverting input node is for receiving the detection signal; a first capacitor including a first electrode and a second electrode; a first switch set between the first electrode and the first inverting input node; a second switch set between the second electrode and the first output node” generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, see MPEP 2106.05(h), use a capacitive transimpedance amplifying device to obtain target signal that is recited at a high level of generality, see MPEP 2106.05(d), and obtaining target signal is data gathering performed insignificantly extra-solution activities, see MPEP 2106.05(g).
“wherein the first switch and the second switch are scheduled to be turned on in a first time slot, to be turned off in a second time slot, to be turned off in a third time slot, and to be turned on in a fourth time slot, the first electrode and the second electrode are coupled with the first inverting input node and the first output node respectively during the first time slot and the fourth time slot to allow the first capacitor to sample the detection signal during the first time slot and the fourth time slot, and the first time slot, the second time slot, the third time slot, and the fourth time slot are four consecutive time slots included in the sampling period” using switches, electrodes (i.e., electrical components) coupling with input/output node (i.e., computer components) which are recited at a high level of generality, see MPEP 2106.05(d).
“a third switch set between the second electrode and the first inverting input node; and a fourth switch set between the first electrode and the first output node, wherein the third switch and the fourth switch are scheduled to be turned off in the first time slot, to be turned on in the second time slot, to be turned on in the third time slot, and to be turned off in the fourth time slot, and the second electrode and the first electrode are coupled with the first inverting input node and the first output node respectively during the second time slot and the third time slot to allow the first capacitor to sample the inversion of the detection signal during the second time slot and the third time slot” using switches, electrodes (i.e., electrical components) coupling with input/output node (i.e., computer components) which are recited at a high level of generality, see MPEP 2106.05(d).
Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered individually and in combination, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea when considering the claims as a whole. The claims are directed to a judicial exception under Step 2A of the test.
Additionally, under Step 2B of the test, claim 11 does not include additional elements that, when considered individually and in combination, are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements:
recite extra-solution activities (i.e., mere data gathering), using conventional equipment (a capacitive transimpedance amplifying device) and electrodes (electrical components) coupling with input/output node (computer components) specified at a high level of generality, which as indicated in the MPEP: "Use of a machine that contributes only nominally or insignificantly to the execution of the claimed method (e.g., in a data gathering step) would not provide significantly more", see MPEP 2106.05(b), section III; and "Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to data) or simply adding general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical concept/equation) does not provide significantly more" (see MPEP 2106.05(f), item 2).
The claim, when considered as a whole, does not provide significantly more under Step 2B of the test. Based on the analysis, the claim is not patent eligible.
Similarly, independent claim 1 is directed to a judicial exception (abstract idea) without significantly more as explained above with regards to claim 11.
Regarding claim 18, the examiner submits that under Step 1 of the 2024 Guidance Update on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility, Including on Artificial Intelligence (see also 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance) for evaluating claim for eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, the claim is to a process, which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
Continuing with the analysis, under Step 2A - Prong One of the test, the limitations (see italic font below) of:
“A method for sampling a signal, the method performed by a capacitive transimpedance amplifying device and used for sampling a detection signal multiple times and sampling an inversion of the detection signal multiple times in predetermined sampling sequence during a sampling period to cancel a noise signal of the detection signal and thereby obtain a target signal of the detection signal” falls into the grouping of mathematical concepts, i.e., sampling the detection signal and inversion of the detection signal which involve transforming a continuous-time signal.
“sampling the detection signal instead of the inversion of the detection signal during a first time slot and a fourth time slot; and sampling the inversion of the detection signal instead of the detection signal during a second time slot and a third time slot” falls into the grouping of mathematical concepts, i.e., sampling the detection signal and inversion of the detection signal which involve transforming a continuous-time signal.
“wherein the first time slot, the second time slot, the third time slot, and the fourth time slot are four consecutive time slots included in the sampling period, the detection signal includes the target signal and the noise signal during the first time slot and the fourth time slot, and the detection signal includes the noise signal but does not include the target signal during the second time slot and the third time slot” falls into the grouping of mental processes.
Thus, claim 18 recites a judicial exception under Step 2A - Prong One of the test.
Furthermore, under Step 2A - Prong Two of the test, the additional elements (see non-italic font below) recited in the claim:
“A method for sampling a signal, the method performed by a capacitive transimpedance amplifying device and used for sampling a detection signal multiple times and sampling an inversion of the detection signal multiple times in predetermined sampling sequence during a sampling period to cancel a noise signal of the detection signal and thereby obtain a target signal of the detection signal” generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, see MPEP 2106.05(h), use a capacitive transimpedance amplifying device to obtain target signal that is recited at a high level of generality, see MPEP 2106.05(d), and obtaining target signal is data gathering performed insignificantly extra-solution activities, see MPEP 2106.05(g).
Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered individually and in
combination, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea when considering the claims as a whole. The claims are directed to a judicial exception under Step 2A of the test.
Additionally, under Step 2B of the test, claim 18 does not include additional elements that, when considered individually and in combination, are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements:
recite extra-solution activities (i.e., mere data gathering), using conventional equipment (a capacitive transimpedance amplifying device) and electrodes (electrical components), coupling with input/output node (computer components) specified at a high level of generality, which as indicated in the MPEP: "Use of a machine that contributes only nominally or insignificantly to the execution of the claimed method (e.g., in a data gathering step) would not provide significantly more", see MPEP 2106.05(b), section III; and "Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to data) or simply adding general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical concept/equation) does not provide significantly more" (see MPEP 2106.05(f), item 2).
The claim, when considered as a whole, does not provide significantly more under Step 2B of the test. Based on the analysis, the claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding the dependent claims 2-10, 12-17, and 19-20, they are also directed to the non-statutory subject matter because:
they just extend the abstract idea of the independent claim by additional limitations, that under the broadest interpretation in light of the specification, cover performance of the limitations using mathematical concepts, and
the additional elements recited in the dependent claims, when considered individually and in combination, refer to extra-solution activities (e.g., mere data gathering) (claims 3-4 and 13), and/or conventional circuit components (i.e., electrodes) used to facilitate the application of the abstract idea (claims 2-10, 12-17, and 19-20), which as indicated in the Office's guidance does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (Step 2A -Prong Two) and/or does not provide significantly more (Step 2B).
Examiner’s Note
Claims 1-20 are considered novel and non-obvious subject matter with respect to the prior art, but as currently presented are non-statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101 as set forth in this Office action.
The following is an examiner's statement claims distinguished over the prior art.
The prior art US patent 10,624,542 of Richards discloses “removing a component of a signal corresponding to ambient light in a photoplethysmographic sensor device, including capturing a first detected light signal representing an ambient light at a first time to generate a source light signal and capturing a second detected light signal and generating a first output signal based on the second detected light signal adjusted by the first detected light signal, and capturing a third detected light signal, and generating a second output signal based on the third detected light signal adjusted by the first detected light signal,” see Abstract.
The prior art US patent 9,717,424 of Kulach discloses “receiving a reflection of the transmitted light, a photometric front end for generating a photoplethysmogram
(PPG) signal based on the received reflection, and a processor configured to select an intensity level for the emitter based on a comparison of a determined component of the PPG signal and a reference value,” see Abstract.
The prior art, A Low-Power CMOS Front-End for Photoplethysmographic Signal Acquisition With Robust DC Photocurrent Rejection of Wong et al., discloses “A micro-power CMOS front-end, consisting of a transimpedance amplifier (TIA) and an ultralow cutoff frequency lowpass filter for the acquisition of photoplethysmographic signal (PPG) is presented. Robust dc photocurrent rejection for the pulsed signal source is achieved through a sample-and-hold stage in the feed-forward signal path and an error amplifier in the feedback path”, see Abstract.
The prior art, 14.85 ɥW Analog Front-End for Photoplethysmography Acquisition with 142-dBW Gain and 64.2-pArms Noise of Lin et al., discloses “A low-power, high-gain, and low-noise analog front-end (AFE) for wearable photoplethysmography (PPG) acquisition systems is designed and fabricated in a 0.35 ɥm CMOS process. A high transimpedance gain of 142 dBW and a low input-referred noise of only 64.2 pArms was achieved,” see Abstract.
However, none of the prior art in individual or in combination that teaches or suggests “the first electrode and the second electrode are coupled with the first inverting input node and the first output node respectively during the first time slot and the fourth time slot to allow the first capacitor to sample the detection signal during the first time slot and the fourth time slot, and the second electrode and the first electrode are coupled with the first inverting input node and the first output node respectively during the second time slot and the third time slot to allow the first capacitor to sample the inversion of the detection signal during the second time slot and the third time slot, wherein the detection signal includes the controllable-light signal and the ambient-light
signal during the first time slot and the fourth time slot, and the detection signal includes
the ambient-light signal but does not include the controllable-light signal during the second time slot and the third time slot” as recited in claim 1.
“the first electrode and the second electrode are coupled with the first inverting input node and the first output node respectively during the first time slot and the fourth time slot to allow the first capacitor to sample the detection signal during the first time slot and the fourth time slot, and the second electrode and the first electrode are coupled with the first inverting input node and the first output node respectively during the second time slot and the third time slot to allow the first capacitor to sample the inversion of the detection signal during the second time slot and the third time slot,
wherein the detection signal includes the target signal and the noise signal during the first time slot and the fourth time slot, and the detection signal includes the noise signal but does not include the target signal during the second time slot and the third time slot” as recited in claim 11.
“sampling the detection signal instead of the inversion of the detection signal during a first time slot and a fourth time slot; and sampling the inversion of the detection signal instead of the detection signal during a second time slot and a third time slot, the detection signal includes the target signal and the noise signal during the first time slot and the fourth time slot, and the detection signal includes the noise signal but does not include the target signal during the second time slot and the third time slot” as recited in claim 18.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to LYNDA DINH whose telephone number is (571) 270-
7150. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10 AM - 6 PM ET.
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, Arleen M Vazquez can be reached on 571-272-2619. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppairmy.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LYNDA DINH/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/LINA CORDERO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights