DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The action is in response to the application filed on 07/21/2023.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 10-20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 01/20/2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I in the reply filed on 01/20/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the Examiner has not met their burden of demonstrating that the different inventions do not encompass overlapping subject matter. This is not found persuasive because the claims groupings are drawn to different inventions.
Invention I is a method for tracking a menstrual cycle comprising determining that the first probability meets a second criteria and in response to determining that the first probability meets the second criteria, determining a set of probabilities. As such, Invention I determines if the first probability meets a set probability threshold
Invention II is a method for estimating ovulation of a user comprising determining, at an electronic device, a start date of a first menstrual cycle of the user, determining a start date of a second menstrual cycle subsequent to the first menstrual cycle, determining an updated ovulation date of the first menstrual cycle using the start date of the second menstrual cycle; and displaying a second output on the electronic device based on the updated ovulation date. As such, Invention II provides an iterative prediction of the ovulation date may be provided.
Invention III is an electronic device for tracking menstrual cycles of a user comprising a processor and one or more temperature sensors, an artificial neural network that outputs the set of probabilities and the processor being configured in a second mode to determine that a second subset of the set of temperature measurements associated with a second set of days meets a second criteria; and use a second set of operations to determine a second estimated ovulation date using the second subset of the set of temperature measurements, a start date of a menstrual cycle, and an end date of the menstrual cycle. As such, Invention III determines ovulation dates for several menstrual cycles may be estimated using a processor, temperature sensors and a neural network.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 1-9 are pending and examined below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20190357891 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Pardey”).
Regarding claim 1, Pardey teaches A method for tracking a menstrual cycle of a user (paragraph [0150]), the method comprising:
obtaining a first set of temperature data at an electronic device (paragraph [0150]-[0159]);
determining that the first set of temperature data meets a first criteria (paragraph [0150]-[0159]);
in response to determining that the first set of temperature data meets the first criteria, determining a first probability that ovulation occurred during a first set of days using the first set of temperature data (paragraph [0150]-[0159]);
determining that the first probability meets a second criteria (paragraph [0150]-[0159]);
in response to determining that the first probability meets the second criteria, determining a set of probabilities (paragraph [0150]-[0159]);
selecting an estimated ovulation date from the first set of days using the set of probabilities (paragraph [0150]-[0159]); and
displaying an output on the electronic device indicating the estimated ovulation date (paragraph [0270], [0275]), wherein:
the set of probabilities comprises a probability that ovulation occurred for each day in the first set of days (paragraph [0150]-[0159]).
Regarding claim 2, Pardey teaches further comprising:
obtaining a second set of temperature data at the electronic device (paragraphs [0143]-[0149], [0150]-[0159]);
determining that the second set of temperature data meets the first criteria (paragraphs [0143]-[0149], [0150]-[0159]);
in response to determining that the first set of temperature data meets the first criteria, determining a second probability that ovulation occurred during a second set of days using the second set of temperature data (paragraphs [0143]-[0149], [0150]-[0159]); and
determining that the second probability does not meet the second criteria (paragraphs [0143]-[0149], [0150]-[0159]),
wherein:
obtaining the first set of temperature data at the electronic device comprises obtaining the first set of temperature data in response to determining that the second probability does not meet the second criteria (paragraphs [0143]-[0149], [0150]-[0159]).
Regarding claim 3, Pardey teaches further comprising:
determining, after selecting the estimated ovulation date, a duration of the menstrual cycle of the user at the electronic device (paragraphs [0150]-[0159]); and
determining an updated estimated ovulation date using the determined duration of the menstrual cycle (paragraphs [0150]-[0159]).
Regarding claim 4, Pardey teaches wherein determining the updated estimated ovulation date comprises:
identifying a second set of days using the duration of the menstrual cycle (paragraphs [0143]-[0149], [0150]-[0159]);
identifying a third set of days using the duration of the menstrual cycle (paragraphs [0143]-[0149], [0150]-[0159]); and
determining an increase in a temperature of the user from the second set of days to the third set of days (paragraphs [0143]-[0149], [0150]-[0159]).
Regarding claim 7, Pardey teaches further comprising:
determining, prior to obtaining the first set of temperature data, a start date of the menstrual cycle (paragraphs [0143]-[0149], [0150]-[0159]);
estimating a fertile window based on the determined start of the menstrual cycle (paragraphs [0143]-[0149], [0150]-[0159]); and
updating the fertile window using the estimated ovulation date (paragraphs [0143]-[0149], [0150]-[0159]).
Regarding claim 8, Pardey teaches further comprising, in response to updating the fertile window, causing the electronic device to output a notification to the user indicating the updated fertile window (paragraph [0396]).
Regarding claim 9, Pardey teaches further comprising predicting a menstrual cycle end date using the estimated ovulation date (paragraphs [0143]-[0149], [0150]-[0159]).
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.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pardey as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20210407684 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Pho”).
Regarding claim 5, Pardey does not explicitly teach using a classification algorithm and a neural network.
However, Pho teaches determining the first probability comprises inputting the first set of temperature data into a classification algorithm; and determining the set of probabilities comprises inputting the first set of temperature data into an artificial neural network; wherein the classification algorithm comprises a random forest classification model; and the artificial neural network comprises a long short-term memory artificial neural network (paragraph [0161]). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Pardey, to use a classifier and neural network, as taught by Pho, because doing so provides an adaptable determining program.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABID A MUSTANSIR whose telephone number is (408)918-7647. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10 am to 6 pm Pacific Time.
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, Jason Sims can be reached at 571-272-7540. 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.
/ABID A MUSTANSIR/Examiner, Art Unit 3791