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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-8 and 10-12 are currently pending. Claims 1-8 and 10 have been amended. Claim 9 has been cancelled. Claims 11 and 12 have been added. Claim 2 has been amended to overcome the drawing objections, claims 1 and 10 have been amended to overcome the claim objections, and claims 3 and 4 have been amended to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 15 September 2025.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-4, 6, and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“the enclosure” in line 6 of claim 1 should read as “the unified enclosure”
“claim 1 further comprising” in the preamble of claim 2 should read as “claim 1, further comprising:”
“the enclosure” in line 4 of claim 2 should read as “the unified enclosure”
“the enclosure” in line 2 of claim 3 should read as “the unified enclosure”
“the enclosure” in line 2 of claim 4 should read as “the unified enclosure”
“the enclosure” in line 2 of claim 6 should read as “the unified enclosure”
“claim 1” in the preamble of claim 7 should read as “claim 1,”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 1 is 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. Claims 2-8 and 10-12 are further rejected due to their dependency to claim 1.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “unified enclosure” in line 4. The disclosure does not have support for the enclosure to be “unified.” Clarification is requested.
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, 4, and 5 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. Claims 2, 3, 6-8, and 10-12 are further rejected due to their dependency to claim 1.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a unified enclosure” in line 4. It is unclear what it means for the enclosure to be “unified.” The disclosure does not provide a description for a “unified enclosure.” Clarification is requested.
Claim 1 recites “a unified enclosure which stores the sensor and the circuit and has a contact surface which contacts to the auscultation subject, faces to the sensor and is a bottom of the enclosure” in lines 4-6. It is unclear what is facing the sensor and is a bottom of the enclosure. Clarification is requested.
Claim 1 recites “an earth plate which is provided at a position which is except the contact surface of the enclosure” in lines 7-8. It is unclear what position the earth place is positioned at. Clarification is requested.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “a contact surface side” in line 4. It is unclear if this limitation is referring to “a side of the contact surface” as mentioned in lines 2-3 of claim 4. Clarification is requested.
Claim 5 recites “wherein the earth plate is provided at a recessed part of the side wall” in line 2, indicating that part of the side wall is recessed and another part is not recessed. However, claim 4 recites that “the side wall is recessed” in line 4, indicating that the entire side wall is recessed. It is unclear if the entire side wall is recessed or only a part of the side wall is recessed. Clarification is requested.
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.
Claims 1-7 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fukutsuka et al. ‘278 (US Pub No. 2021/0330278 – previously cited).
Regarding claim 1, Fukutsuka et al. ‘278 teaches a stethoscope (Title, Abstract) comprising:
a sensor which collects a sound from an auscultation subject (Fig. 4 sound detector 33 and [0033]);
a circuit ([0032]-[0033]; “integrated control unit”);
a unified enclosure which stores the sensor and the circuit (Fig. 1 biological sound measurement device 1 and [0030]-[0032]) and has a contact surface which contacts to the auscultation subject (Fig. 3 pressure-receiving region 3a and [0035]), faces to the sensor and is a bottom of the enclosure (Fig. 4 shows that pressure-receiving region 3a faces the sound detector 33 and is at the bottom of the device 1.);
an earth plate which is provided at a position which is except the contact surface of the enclosure and exposes to an outside (Fig. 4 region 12c and [0044]).
Regarding claim 2, Fukutsuka et al. ‘278 teaches a substrate on which the circuit is mounted (Fig. 4 tapered surface 3c of sound measurement unit 3 and [0046]; [0032] mentions that the integrated control unit is provided inside the gripping portion 10. [0047] mentions that sound measurement unit 3 and gripping portion 10 partially overlap, indicating integrated control unit, interpreted as the circuit, is mounted on the tapered surface 3c, interpreted as the substrate.),
wherein the enclosure stores the substrate (Tapered surface 3c of sound measurement unit 3 is stored in the biological sound measurement device 1.),
the earth plate is provided at a position which is on a side of the enclosure which surrounds the circuit (Region 12c is on a side of the biological sound measurement device 1, which surrounds the integrated control unit, which is inside the gripping portion 10.).
Regarding claim 3, Fukustuka et al. ‘278 teaches wherein the enclosure has a side wall which is a side of the contact surface (Region 12c is on a side of the biological sound measurement device 1, which contacts index finger F.), and
the earth plate is provided at the side wall (Fig. 4 region 12c and [0044]).
Regarding claim 4, Fukustuka et al. ‘278 teaches wherein the enclosure has a side wall which is a side of the contact surface (Fig. 4 recessed portion 12 and [0036]), and
the side wall is recessed to a contact surface side (Recessed portion 12 is recessed.).
Regarding claim 5, Fukustuka et al. ‘278 teaches wherein the earth plate is provided at a recessed part of the side wall (Recessed portion 12 is provided at the recessed portion 12, as seen in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 6, Fukustuka et al. ‘278 teaches wherein the enclosure has an upper wall which is opposed to the contact surface (Fig. 4 recessed portion 12 and [0036]), and
the earth plate is provided at the upper wall (Recessed portion 12 is provided at the recessed portion 12, as seen in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 7, Fukustuka et al. ‘278 teaches wherein a signal from the sensor is input to the circuit ([0033]; “…the integrated control unit performs a process of analyzing the pulmonary sound detected by a sound detector 33…”).
Regarding claim 12, Fukustuka et al. ‘278 teaches wherein the sensor has a piezoelectric element ([0038]; “…micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) type microphone or a capacitive microphone…” One of ordinary skill would understand that a microphone is a piezoelectric sensor.).
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukustuka et al. ‘278 in view of Shue ‘501 (US Patent No. 4,878,501 – previously cited).
Regarding claim 8, Fukustuka et al. ‘278 teaches all of the elements of the current invention as mentioned above except for wherein the circuit includes an amplifier which amplifies a signal from the sensor.
Shue ‘501 teaches an audio signal amplifying device in the circuitry of a electronic stethoscope in the area of conventional art and also self-explanatory for those skilled in the art (Figs. 5, 6 audio signal amplifying device 140 and Column 4 Line 65 – Column 5 Line 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified circuit of Fukustuka et al. ‘278 to include an amplifier which amplifies a signal from the sensor as Shue ‘501 teaches that this is conventional circuitry for those skilled in the art.
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukustuka et al. ‘278 in view of Smith ‘847 (US Pub No. 2003/0128847 – previously cited).
Regarding claim 10, Fukustuka et al. ‘278 teaches all of the elements of the current invention as mentioned above except for wherein the substrate includes a ground (GND) layer.
Smith '847 teaches a transducer for sensing body sounds (Title, Abstract) which includes a housing 1 (Figs. 1, 2). Diaphragm 2 is placed at ground reference potential 55 in a preferred embodiment, since this provides electromagnetic shielding as well as functioning as a capacitive plate ([0076], [0084]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the substrate of Fukustuka et al. ‘278 to include a GND layer as Smith '847 teaches that this will aid in providing electromagnetic shielding as well as functioning as a capacitive plate.
Regarding claim 11, Fukustuka et al. ‘278 teaches all of the elements of the current invention as mentioned above except for a substrate on which the circuit is mounted and which has a ground (GND) layer,
wherein the earth plate is connected to the ground (GND) layer of the substrate.
Smith '847 teaches a transducer for sensing body sounds (Title, Abstract) which includes a housing 1 (Figs. 1, 2). Diaphragm 2 is placed at ground reference potential 55 in a preferred embodiment, since this provides electromagnetic shielding as well as functioning as a capacitive plate ([0076], [0084]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the substrate on which the circuit is mounted of Fukustuka et al. ‘278 to include a GND layer, wherein the earth plate is connected to the ground (GND) layer of the substrate as Smith '847 teaches that this will aid in providing electromagnetic shielding as well as functioning as a capacitive plate.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Shue ‘501 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1-5 and 7-9 have been withdrawn.
Applicant argues that Fukutsuka et al. ‘278 does not teach the unified enclosure and only discloses a gripping portion and a sound measurement, which is separate from the gripping portion and that the hand of the user does not contact the gripping portion. However, Fig. 4 shows that the region 12c, interpreted as the earth plate, comes in contact with the user’s index finger F. Furthermore, the user’s hand does come into contact with gripping portion 10, as seen in Fig. 2. Applicant also argues that Fukutsuka et al. ‘278 does not teach that the recessed portion is the earth plate. As previously mentioned, region 12c is interpreted at the earth plate, which is in the recessed portion 12. As such, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
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 AURELIE H TU whose telephone number is (571)272-8465. The examiner can normally be reached [M-F] 7:30-3:30.
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 (571) 272-4233. 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.
/AURELIE H TU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791