DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Specification
2. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paras. [0017] and [0026] on first occurrence in the specification. Applicant is required to expand all abbreviations at first occurrence with its respective abbreviation.
Further, Applicant misspells “Wi-Fi” as “WIFI” in paras. [0013], [0050], and [0052].
The use of the terms "Bluetooth", "Wi-Fi", and "ZigBee", {paras. [0013], [0050], and [0052]} which are trade names or marks used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The terms should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the terms should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3. Claims 3 and 9 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 3 contains the trademark/trade names "Bluetooth", "WIFI" [sic], and "ZigBee". Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe a communication module and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the second wireless communication module" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. As written, it is unclear if “the second wireless communication module” is referring to the claim limitation recited in claim 5, or if there is an additional second wireless communication module introduced in claim 9. For the purposes of examination, Examiner will interpret “the second wireless communication module” to be any wireless communication module configured to transmit data to and from a scale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
4. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Bassez (US 20170360331 A1).
In regard to claim 1, Bassez teaches an electronic ruler [electronic tape measure] for pets {para. [0054] defines a "patient" to include any animal, and therefore it is obvious that this device could be used to measure any pet]}, comprising:
a displacement sensor module [measuring module 22, tension sensor 64];
a controller [control module 60, analysis module 76, measuring module 22];
a first display [interface 68];
a first wireless communication module [wireless communication module 72]; and
a control key [trigger 70];
wherein:
the displacement sensor module comprises a tape or reel [tape 20];
the tape or reel is configured to convert a physical length of a pet to be measured into a displacement length through a rotation angle of the tape or reel {described in paras. [0080]-[0082]}, and
the displacement length is further converted into an electrical signal {converting a sensor output to an electrical signal is a well understood practice, para. [0065] describes electronically determining a measurement};
the controller is configured to calculate and convert the electrical signal into a length value in a set unit {para. [0065] describes electronically determining a measurement}, and display the length value on the first display {para. [0109] describes displaying a measurement on interface 68}; and
the first wireless communication module is configured to transmit the length value to an upper computer {para. [0129] describes the communication module of the tape measure communicating the measurement to the base 14}, and the control key is configured to set the parameters of the length value {described in para. [0108]} and confirm the transmission of the length value to the upper computer {paras. [0039]-[0047] describe an embodiment in which a user would use the trigger 70 to begin and end a measurement, and begin another measurement in response to an alert; paras. [0100]-[0104] describe sending the alert to the operator when the measurement deviates from a normal reference value - therefore the trigger is used in response to confirm the base receiving the measurement}.
5. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bassez as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Li (US 1187514 B2).
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
In regard to claim 2, Bassez teaches the electronic ruler of claim 1.
Although Bassez teaches an electronic ruler with a tension sensor, commonly made with capacitive elements, Bassez does not teach the use of an absolute capacitive grating sensor or an optical grating sensor.
However, Li teaches an electronic tape measure with an absolute grating sensor, and even further states that using a capacitance-grating sensor is well known in the field of digital display measuring tapes [col. 1 lines 45-47].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted Li’s capacitance-grating sensor for Bassez’s electronic ruler’s displacement sensor – a well-known engineering practice – in order to better conserve power, as taught by Li [col. 1 lines 47-49].
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
6. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bassez as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim (KR 20220052087 A).
In regard to claim 3, Bassez teaches the electronic ruler of claim 1.
Although Bassez teaches the use of a wireless communication module using radio transmission {para. [0104]}, and although radio transmission can be a form of NFC module, Bassez is not explicit as to the use of an NFC module and/or an Ethernet module, nor a Bluetooth module, a WIFI module, and/or a ZigBee module (emphasis added for claim limitations rejected under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) above).
However, Kim also teaches an electronic ruler for pets, as well as a Bluetooth module for wireless communication [page 7 para. 4 describes an electronic tape measure that performs wireless communication with a Bluetooth module].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Kim’s Bluetooth module – a short-range radio frequency – as Bassez’s radio-based wireless communication module – a well-known engineering practice.
7. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bassez in view of Kim as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Renpho - Ref X2 (Tape User Manual) ("User Manual for Renpho Smart Body Tape Measure Model: RF-BMF01", Renpho).
In regard to claim 4, Bassez teaches the electronic ruler of claim 1, wherein to set the parameters of the length value comprises one or more of the following:
setting or selecting a position where the length value belongs to the pet {para. [0127] describes selecting an altitude (described as a location on a body part)},
selecting to delete or reserve the length value {para. [0125] describes an operator inputting to opt to save a measurement}, and
setting or selecting the length value as an absolute length or a relative length {para. [0027] describes setting a measurement as a reference value, making other measurements in the same altitude relative length measurements}.
Bassez does not teach selecting an average/sum/difference of several length values.
However, Kim teaches an electronic ruler for pets wherein setting a length value comprises selecting an average/sum/difference of several length values {para. [0158] describes a user selecting data, page 3 para. 7 describes selecting an average of both a dog's chest and abdominal circumferences].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Kim’s selection of average values to set a length value with Bassez’s electronic ruler in order to better determine a body condition score for a pet, as described by Kim [page 9 para. 9 describe that the accuracy of an estimated body condition score is increased when utilizing multiple average circumferences from multiple locations].
Bassez in view of Kim does not teach setting a unit of the length value.
However, Renpho - Ref X2 (Tape User Manual) teaches an electronic tape measure that allows an operator to set a unit of length [page 5 describes changing the units between inches or centimeters and length or circumference].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Renpho - Ref X2 (Tape User Manual)’s setting of units with Bassez in view of Kim’s electronic ruler in order to better accommodate a user familiar with empirical or metric units, a well-known practice.
8. Claims 5, 7-8, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bassez in view of Kim as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) (YouTube video clip entitled "RENPHO Best Bluetooth Smart Body Tape Measure In Depth Review..." by user "GetFITby50").
In regard to claim 5, Bassez teaches the electronic ruler and upper computer of claim 1, as well as wherein:
the upper computer comprises a memory {para. [0103} describes an embodiment where a consistency control module 60 is in the base 14, para. [0116] describes that the electronic modules may include conventional electronics such as a memory} and a second display {para. [0107] describes that the interface may be on the tape measure and on the base, para. [0028] describes a preferred embodiment where the base is separate from the tape measure, such as a computer, tablet, or telephone, thus creating a second display};
perform wireless communication with the electronic ruler for pets through the first wireless communication module {para. [0129] describes the communication module of the tape measure communicating the measurement to the base 14}; and
the electronic ruler for pets digitally acquires the length data of a body part of the pet {described in paras. [0080]-[0082]}, and the first wireless communication module is configured to transmit the length data and receive a control signal transmitted by the upper computer {para. [0129] describes the wireless communication}.
Bassez does not teach that the upper computer is configured to calculate and convert the pet body index data.
However, Kim teaches an electronic tape measure for pets with an upper computer that is configured to:
calculate and convert the pet body index data [page 3 paras. 1-3 describes calculating body points of a dog and converting that data to body mass index data].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Kim’s calculation and conversion to pet body index data with Bassez’s electronic ruler in order to better indicate the ratio of muscle mass to fat in a body composition of a pet, as taught by Kim [page 3 para. 3].
Bassez in view of Kim does not teach that the memory is configured to save the pet body index data or that the second display is configured to display the pet body index data.
However, Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) also teaches a body index measurement system using an electronic ruler with an upper computer and first display, as well as a second display {smartphone via application as shown at [06:23]}, wherein:
the memory is configured to save body index data {[06:23] shows a screenshot of the phone app that shows stored body mass index data}; and,
the second display is configured to display body index data {shown at [06:23]} and
exhibit a setup interface for interaction with the electronic ruler {shown at [07:20]}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50)’s use of saving and displaying body index data on a smartphone with Bassez in view of Kim’s electronic ruler using a telephone or tablet as a secondary screen in order to better relate historic data points to a user, as taught by GitFITby50 {[06:23]}, and to have used Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50)’s displaying of a setup interface with Bassez in view of Kim’s electronic ruler in order to better provide instruction for a user {shown at [07:20]}.
In regard to claim 7, Bassez further teaches wherein the electronic rule comprises keys [trigger] for numbering and confirming the measured length data before the first wireless communication module transmits the length data {described in para. [0108]} and confirm the transmission of the length value to the upper computer {paras. [0039]-[0047] describe an embodiment in which a user would use the trigger 70 to begin and end a measurement, and begin another measurement in response to an alert; paras. [0100]-[0104] describe sending the alert to the operator when the measurement deviates from a normal reference value - therefore the trigger is used in response to confirm the base receiving the measurement}.
In regard to claim 8, Bassez further teaches wherein the length data comprises one or more length data of neck circumference, chest circumference, body length, body height, leg length, tail length, claw width, mouth circumference, and leg circumference {para. [0052] describes that a preferred measurement includes the measurement of a length of leg}.
In regard to claim 11, Bassez further teaches wherein the upper computer is an intelligent terminal device, a server or a PC computer {para. [0116] describes that the electronic modules may include conventional electronics such as a processor, data memory, and software – which can obviously determine a computer}.
9. Claims 6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bassez in view of Kim and Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) as applied to claims 5, 7-8, and 11 above, and further in view of Renpho - Ref W3 (Scale User Manual) ("Renpho Mini Smart Body Fat Scale Model: R-A009 User Manual", Renpho).
In regard to claim 6, Bassez further teaches wherein the upper computer is configured to:
perform wireless communication with the electronic ruler through the first wireless communication module {para. [0129] describes the wireless communication};
the electronic ruler digitally acquires the length data of the body part of the pet {para. [0065] describes electronically determining a measurement}, and
the first wireless communication module is configured to transmit the length data and receive the control signal transmitted by the upper computer {para. [0129] describes the wireless communication}.
Bassez does not teach that the upper computer is configured to calculate and convert the pet body index data or that the upper computer calculates BMI and BCS scores for the pet according to the variety of the pet, the length data and the weight data.
However, Kim teaches an electronic ruler for pets with an upper computer that is configured to:
calculate and convert the pet body index data [page 3 paras. 1-3 describes calculating body points of a dog and converting that data to body mass index data], and
the upper computer calculates BMI [described on page 3 para. 3] and BCS scores for the pet according to the variety of the pet, the length data and the weight data [page 9 para. 9 describes using circumference and weight to determine BCS, and page 3 para. 2 describes that the weight and type of dog can adjust the body score with a length measurement].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Kim’s calculation and conversion of BMI and BCS data based on a variety of a pet, length data, and weight data with Bassez’s electronic ruler in order to better indicate the ratio of muscle mass to fat in a body composition of a pet, as taught by Kim [page 3 para. 3], as well as to better determine a body condition score for a pet, as described by Kim [page 9 para. 9 describe that the accuracy of an estimated body condition score is increased when utilizing multiple average circumferences from multiple locations].
Bassez in view of Kim does not teach a measurement system that further comprises an electronic scale.
However, Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) teaches a measurement system of a smartphone application, an electronic tape measure, and an electronic scale {[06:23] shows measurements taken from electronic scale, electronic scale described audibly from [03:20]-[03:34]}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50)’s electronic scale with Bassez in view of Kim’s measurement system in order to better calculate characteristics such as weight, body fat, fat-free body weight, etc. as taught by GitFITby50 {shown at [07:20]}.
Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) does not teach a scale comprising a second wireless communication module or that the electronic scale digitally acquires weight data of the pet and the second wireless communication module is configured to transmit the weight data and receive the control signal transmitted by the upper computer.
However, Renpho - Ref W3 (Scale User Manual) teaches that the electronic scale comprises:
a second wireless communication module {page 6 para. 1 describes a Bluetooth scale connection, page 9 top right image shows a scale and electronic tape measure both connected wirelessly via Bluetooth};
the electronic scale digitally acquires weight data [described on page 10], and
the second wireless communication module is configured to transmit the weight data and receive the control signal transmitted by the upper computer [shown on page 10 in the right image].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Renpho - Ref W3 (Scale User Manual)’s electronic scale with Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50)’s measurement system because Renpho - Ref W3 (Scale User Manual) teaches the same system as Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50). Furthermore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Renpho - Ref W3 (Scale User Manual)’s second wireless communication module with Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50)’s measurement system scale in order to better connect a plurality of devices to a system as described by Renpho {page 9 top right image}, and to have used Renpho - Ref W3 (Scale User Manual)’s scale with a second wireless communication module to acquire data and communicate with an upper computer with Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50)’s measurement system in order to better test a user for a variety of characteristics such as body water, bone mass, body fat, etc. as taught by Renpho - W3 [page 2 para. 1].
In regard to claim 13, Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) teach the measurement system of claim 5.
Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) does not teach a pet accessories recommendation system configured to complete one or more of the following pet accessories recommendations according to the length data and/or the weight data:
calculating a space size of an outer box required by the pet, calculating a size of the pet's clothes or shoes and socks, and calculating a caloric value and/or food intake and/or amount of exercise required by the pet per day.
However, Renpho - Ref W3 (Scale User Manual) teaches that the measurement system completes a calculation of a caloric requirement required per day [page 2 describes testing basal metabolic rate (BMR)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Renpho - Ref W3 (Scale User Manual)’s electronic scale with Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50)’s measurement system because Renpho - Ref W3 (Scale User Manual) teaches the same system as Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50). Furthermore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Renpho - Ref W3 (Scale User Manual)’s calculation of BMR with Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50)’s measurement system in order to better determine the minimum calories required by a pet per day, as describes by Renpho - Ref W3 (Scale User Manual) [page 2, testing BMR].
10. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) as applied to claims 5, 7-8, and 11 above, and further in view of Renpho - Ref V3 (YouTube, Renpho) (YouTube video clip entitled "RENPHO Smart Body Tape Measure: Hands-On Review from Medical Doctor Stavros Matsoukas," by user "Renpho") and Renpho - Ref W2 (YouTube, dr.tylerrauwolf) (YouTube video clip entitled "RENPHO Smart Scale App Tutorial & Features," by user "dr.tylerrauwolf").
In regard to claim 9, Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) teach the measurement system of claim 5, and Bassez further teaches that the measurement received by the first wireless communication module is time stamped {para. [0083]}.
Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) does not teach that the length data displayed on the display comprises:
under a length index, the horizontal axis is a set time range interval, and the vertical axis is a connection graph of the length data in the time range interval.
However, Renpho - Ref V3 (YouTube, Renpho) teaches that the length data displayed on the display comprises:
under a length index, the horizontal axis is a set time range interval {shown at [5:57]}, and the vertical axis is a connection graph of the length data in the time range interval {shown at [5:57]}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Renpho - Ref V3 (YouTube, Renpho)’s measurement system with Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50)’s measurement system because Renpho - Ref V3 (YouTube, Renpho) teaches the same system as Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Renpho - Ref V3 (YouTube, Renpho)’s display of length data with Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50)’s measurement system in order to better display length data trends over time, as shown by Renpho - Ref V3 (YouTube, Renpho) {shown at [5:57]}.
Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) and in view of Renpho - Ref V3 (YouTube, Renpho) does not teach a second wireless communication module, on which information received comprises a measurement time of the weight data; and
the weight data displayed on the display comprises:
under a weight index, the horizontal axis is a set time range interval, and the vertical axis is a connection graph of the weight data in the time range interval.
However, Renpho - Ref W2 (YouTube, dr.tylerrauwolf) teaches that the system includes a scale [electronic smart scale] comprising a second wireless communication module [wirelessly transmits data to smartphone app], on which information received comprises a measurement time of the weight data {shown at [06:06]}; and
the weight data displayed on the display comprises:
under a weight index, the horizontal axis is a set time range interval {shown at [06:06]}, and the vertical axis is a connection graph of the weight data in the time range interval {shown at [06:06]}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Renpho - Ref W2 (YouTube, dr.tylerrauwolf)’s measurement system with Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) and in view of Renpho - Ref V3 (YouTube, Renpho)’s measurement system because Renpho - Ref W2 (YouTube, dr.tylerrauwolf) teaches the same system as Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) and Renpho - V3. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Renpho - Ref W2 (YouTube, dr.tylerrauwolf)’s display of weight data with Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) and in view of Renpho - Ref V3 (YouTube, Renpho)’s measurement system in order to better display weight data trends over time, as shown by Renpho - Ref W2 (YouTube, dr.tylerrauwolf) {shown at [06:06]}.
11. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) as applied to claims 5, 7-8, and 11 above, and further in view of Renpho - Ref X2 (Tape User Manual).
In regard to claim 10, Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) teaches the measurement system of claim 5.
Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) does not teach wherein the control signal comprises setting a numbering of the measured length data, a unit and a transmission mode of the length data.
However, Renpho - Ref X2 (Tape User Manual) teaches that the control signal comprises setting a numbering of the measured length data, a unit and a transmission mode of the length data [page 6 “Icons” shows that the signal includes the measurement, the unit, whether the measurement is a length of circumference, and if the data is transmitted over Bluetooth].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Renpho - Ref X2 (Tape User Manual)’s measurement system with Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50)’s measurement system because Renpho - Ref X2 (Tape User Manual) teaches the same system as Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Renpho - Ref X2 (Tape User Manual)’s use of transmitting measurement, unit, length/circumference, and Bluetooth data with Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50)’s measurement system in order to better confirm that the data was successfully transmitted to the application, as shown by Renpho - Ref X2 (Tape User Manual) [the image on page 6 shows that the length, units, Bluetooth, and circumference data displayed on the tape measure are confirmed on the application].
12. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) as applied to claims 5, 7-8, and 11 above, and further in view of King (US 20200323193 A1).
In regard to claim 12, Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) teach the measurement system of claim 5.
Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50) does not teach that the upper computer comprises an interface for selecting the variety and/or type of the pet, or a camera for shooting a picture of the pet and an algorithm unit for identifying the variety and/or type of the pet according to a picture of the pet.
However, King teaches a camera for shooting a picture of the pet and an algorithm unit for identifying the variety and/or type of the pet according to a picture of the pet {paras. [0004]-[0008] describes a system that includes a camera for taking a photo of an animal (such as pet as described in para. [0002]), and determining the variety of that animal}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined King’s camera and algorithm that can determine a variety of an animal with Bassez in view of Kim and in view of Renpho - Ref V2 (YouTube, GetFITby50)’s measurement system in order to rapidly determine if the target animal is in the field of view of the camera, and what type of animal is in the field of view, as described by King {para. [0004]} – as Kim describes that the type of pet can adjust the body score calculation [page 3 para. 2], such a rapid determination would be of benefit to the user.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL QUINN whose telephone number is (571)272-2690. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30 PST.
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, JOHN BREENE can be reached at (571)272-4107. 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.
/DANIEL M QUINN/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/JOHN E BREENE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855