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 .
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/26/25 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
a. In regards to 35 U.S.C 103 rejection of claim 16, Applicant argues Shemer does not teach a measuring head having sensors located on walls, said walls being immersed in urine, and said walls defining the volume in which
conductivity measurement and optical measurement may be achieved.
a. (Examiner’s response) Applicant’s arguments filed with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 16 under over Shemer WO 2004/036343 in view of Reid WO 02065912 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Shemer WO 2004/036343 in view of Reid WO 02065912 in further view of Erdtmann US 20130286393.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “electric charging module” & “cleaning module” in claims 28 & 29.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Applicant teaches electric charging module may use contact (via a wire) or magnetic induction (pg. 15, line 15).
Applicant implicitly teaches the cleaning module is a container comprising cleaning solution (fig 3).
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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(s) 16, 18, 20-22, & 25-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shemer WO 2004/036343 in view of Reid WO 02065912 in further view of Erdtmann US 20130286393.
With respect to claim 16, Shemer teaches a hand-held urinalysis device comprising a handle (fig 1, 3) and a measuring head (fig 1, 1) wherein the measuring head (fig 3, 1) comprises:
(a) a conductivity probe (fig 3, 12);
(b) a lighting module (fig 3, 16) configured to emit light in said urine sample “collects urine” (pg. 2, line 30-35); and
(c) a multispectral optical sensor (fig 3, 16) “detecting different portions of the electromagnetic spectrum” (pg. 7, line 13) configured to receive “light reflectance” emitted by said urine sample and/or light transmitted “use of light transmission” through said urine sample (pg. 2, line 30-35).
Shemer does not teach be immersed in a urine sample.
Reid, in the same field of endeavor as Shemer of conductivity measurements of urine (abstract, line 4), implicitly teaches a conductivity probe (fig 1, 50) immersed in a urine sample (fig 1, 70). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to immerse Shemer’s measuring head into a urine sample to inspect urine samples of people who are not able to aim urine onto the sample head for health purposes.
The combination does not teach the conductivity probe, lighting module, and the multispectral optical sensor
are each located on a surface of one of the walls facing the other one of the walls.
Edtman, in the field of endeavor of optical detection, teaches a light module (fig 1a, 102) and multispectral optical sensor (fig 1a, 100) are facing an opposing wall (fig 2b) (0051, lines 1-5). Examiner notes one of ordinary skill in the art would understand the light module and multispectral optical sensor should be attached to the upper wall since it is hanging above the opposing lower wall. At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to connect the conductivity probe, lighting module, and the multispectral optical sensor to the upper wall of Shemer housing opposite to the lower wall to keep all three sensors secure in the housing during measurements.
With respect to claim 18 according to claim 16, the combination teaches the hand-held urinalysis device further comprising a connectivity system (fig 3, 22 Shemer) “wireless link” (pg. 9, line 33 Shemer) allowing for data transfer (pg. 21, line 11 Shemer).
With respect to claim 20 according to claim 16, the combination does not specifically teach the lighting module comprises a NIR-Vis light source and emits light over a range from 390 nm to 1100 nm.
Shemer teaches in a second embodiment the wavelengths of the light sources may range from 260 nm to 950 nm covering the UV to NIR regions (pg. 11, lines 25-28). Shemer further teaches the system analyzes constituents
and properties of the excretion by use of light transmission and/or absorbance and/or reflectance (pg. 2, lines 31-33). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to emit light over a range of 390 nm to 1100 nm to detect different types of constituents within a urine sample.
With respect to claim 21 according to claim 16, the combination does not specifically teach lighting module comprises a UV light source and emits UV light over a range from 270 nm to 400 nm.
Shemer teaches in a second embodiment the wavelengths of the light sources may range from 260 nm to 950 nm covering the UV to NIR regions (pg. 11, lines 25-28). Shemer further teaches the system analyzes constituents
and properties of the excretion by use of light transmission and/or absorbance and/or reflectance (pg. 2, lines 31-33). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to emit light over a range of 270 nm to 400 nm to detect different types of constituents within a urine sample.
With respect to claim 22 according to claim 16, the combination does not specifically teach the lighting module comprises an IR light source and emits IR light over a range from 800 nm to 2600 nm.
Shemer teaches in a second embodiment the wavelengths of the light sources may range from 260 nm to 950 nm covering the UV to NIR regions (pg. 11, lines 25-28). Shemer further teaches the system analyzes constituents
and properties of the excretion by use of light transmission and/or absorbance and/or reflectance (pg. 2, lines 31-33). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to emit a range of light over 800 nm to 2600 nm to detect different types of constituents within a urine sample.
With respect to claim 25 according to claim 16, the combination teaches the hand-held urinalysis device further comprising a temperature sensor (fig 3, 14 Shemer).
With respect to claim 26 according to claim 16, the combination teaches the hand-held urinalysis device further comprising a pH sensor (fig 3, 1 Shemer) (pg. 10, line 30-31).
With respect to claim 27, Shemer teaches a method of urine analysis comprising the following steps:
(i) collecting a urine sample “collecting and measuring the characteristics of urine” (abstract, lines 3-4) in a container (fig 1, 11);
(iii) measuring the following physical properties of said sample: conductivity (fig 3, 12).
(ii) immersing in said urine sample the hand-held urinalysis device according to claim 16.
Reid, in the same field of endeavor as Shemer of conductivity measurements of urine (abstract, line 4), implicitly teaches a conductivity probe (fig 1, 50) immersed in a urine sample (fig 1, 70). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to immerse Shemer’s measuring head into a urine sample to inspect urine samples of people who are not able to aim urine onto the sample head for health purposes.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shemer WO 2004/036343 in view of Reid WO 02065912 in further view of Erdtmann US 20130286393 in further view of momandbabyshop,“eneloop - Rechargeable Battery by SANYO”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k88aR28fbI0, July 24, 2010 hereafter momaandbabyshop.
With respect to claim 17 according to claim 16, the combination teaches the hand-held urinalysis device further comprising a battery “batter source” (pg. 9, line 17 Shemer) (fig 3, 26 Shemer).
The combination does not teach a rechargeable battery.
Momaandbabyshop, in the field of endeavor of batteries, teaches rechargeable batteries are advantageous due to their reusability and high capacity. At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to substitute the combination’s batteries for a rechargeable battery as a design choice for a longer lasting battery that can be reused saving time and money.
PNG
media_image1.png
876
1298
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shemer WO 2004/036343 in view of Reid WO 02065912 in further view of Erdtmann US 20130286393 in further view of paper of Thitirat Mantim, “Dual-Purpose Photometric-Conductivity Detector for Simultaneous and Sequential Measurements in Flow Analysis”, 13 May 2020 hereafter Mantim.
With respect to claim 19 according to claim 16, the combination does not teach the conductivity probe is configured to measure conductivity at two different frequencies, said frequencies being included in a range from about 1 Hz to 1 MHz.
Mantim, in the same field of endeavor as Shemer of optical and conductive measurements of urine (fig 1a, Mantim) (pg. 2, ¶ 3, lines 4-6 Mantim), teaches a conductivity probe (fig 1a, C4D) configured to measure a range of 100 Hz to 500Hz (pg. 3, ¶ 3, lines 1-6) in order to measure conductivity of creatine within urine (pg. 3, ¶ 3, lines 1-3). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to try to measure two frequencies within 1Hz to 1 MHz via the combination conductivity probe to determine identify chemicals such as creatinine in urine for medical purposes.
Claim(s) 23 & 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shemer WO 2004/036343 in view of Reid WO 02065912 in further view of Erdtmann US 20130286393 in further view of paper of Hamamatsu, “CCD area image sensor” https://www.hamamatsu.com/content/dam/hamamatsu-photonics/sites/documents/99_SALES_LIBRARY/ssd/s10747-0909_kmpd1117e.pdf, April 2019 hereafter Hamamatsu.
With respect to claim 23 according to claim 16, the combination does not teach the multispectral optical sensor collects light over a range from 400 nm to 1100 nm.
Hamamatsu, in the field of endeavor optical detectors, teaches a multispectral optical sensor configured to collect light over a range from 300 nm to 1100 nm (pg. 3) (spectral response). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Hamamatsu’s multispectral optical sensor with the combination’s light source to detect different types of constituents within a urine sample.
With respect to claim 24 according to claim 16, the combination does not teach the multispectral optical sensor collects light over a range from 800 nm to 2600 nm.
Hamamatsu, in the field of endeavor optical detectors, teaches a multispectral optical sensor configured to collect light over a range from 300 nm to 1100 nm (pg. 3) (spectral response). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Hamamatsu’s multispectral optical sensor with the combination’s light source to detect different types of constituents within a urine sample.
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shemer WO 2004/036343 in view of Reid WO 02065912 in further view of Erdtmann US 20130286393 in further view of Laing US 20190365307.
With respect to claim 28, Shemer teaches a urinalysis system comprising a hand-held urinalysis device (fig 3).
Shemer does not teach a hand-held urinalysis device according to claim 16.
Reid, in the same field of endeavor as Shemer of conductivity measurements of urine (abstract, line 4), implicitly teaches a conductivity probe (fig 1, 50) immersed in a urine sample (fig 1, 70). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to immerse Shemer’s measuring head into a urine sample to inspect urine samples of people who are not able to aim urine onto the sample head for health purposes.
The combination does not teach a docking station comprising an electric charging module.
Laing, in the same field of endeavor as Shemer of handheld urine analysis within a toilet (fig 4a), teaches a docking station (fig 39) comprising an electric charging module configured to charge a handheld device (0181, lines 1-3). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Laing’s docking station with the combination’s hand-held urinalysis device to recharge the device when the battery is about to die.
The combination does not teach the conductivity probe, lighting module, and the multispectral optical sensor
are each located on a surface of one of the walls facing the other one of the walls.
Erdtman, in the field of endeavor of optical detection, teaches a light module (fig 1a, 102) and multispectral optical sensor (fig 1a, 100) are facing an opposing wall (fig 2b) (0051, lines 1-5). Examiner notes one of ordinary skill in the art would understand the light module and multispectral optical sensor should be attached to the upper wall since it is hanging above the opposing lower wall. At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to connect the conductivity probe, lighting module, and the multispectral optical sensor to the upper wall of Shemer housing opposite to the lower wall to keep all three sensors secure in the housing during measurements.
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shemer WO 2004/036343 in view of Reid WO 02065912 in further view of Erdtmann US 20130286393 in view of Laing US 20190365307 in further view of Sunnybrook Hospital, “See how hospitals clean medical devices” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7DYQodd4PU, Apr 30, 2015 hereafter Sunnybrook.
With respect to claim 30, Shemer teaches a method of urine analysis comprising the following steps:
(i) collecting a urine sample in a container “collecting and measuring the characteristics of urine” (abstract, lines 3-4);
(iii) measuring the following physical properties of said sample: conductivity (fig 3, 12);
Shemer does not teach immersing in said urine sample the measuring head of the hand-held urinalysis device of the urinalysis system according to claim 28.
Reid, in the same field of endeavor as Shemer of conductivity measurements of urine (abstract, line 4), implicitly teaches a conductivity probe (fig 1, 50) immersed in a urine sample (fig 1, 70). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to immerse Shemer’s measuring head into a urine sample to inspect urine samples of people who are not able to aim urine onto the sample head for health purposes.
The combination does not teach the conductivity probe, lighting module, and the multispectral optical sensor
are each located on a surface of one of the walls facing the other one of the walls.
Erdtman, in the field of endeavor of optical detection, teaches a light module (fig 1a, 102) and multispectral optical sensor (fig 1a, 100) are facing an opposing wall (fig 2b) (0051, lines 1-5). Examiner notes one of ordinary skill would understand the light module and multispectral optical sensor would be attached to the upper wall since it is hanging above the opposing lower wall. At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to connect the conductivity probe, lighting module, and the multispectral optical sensor to the upper wall of Shemer housing opposite to the lower wall to keep all three sensors secure in the housing during measurements.
The combination does not specifically teach NIR-Vis spectrum and/or IR spectrum.
Shemer teaches in a second embodiment the wavelengths of the light sources may range from 260 nm to 950 nm covering the UV, Vis, and NIR regions (pg. 11, lines 25-28). Shemer further teaches the system analyzes constituents and properties of the excretion by use of light transmission and/or absorbance and/or reflectance (pg. 2, lines 31-33). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to emit range of light over NIR-Vis via the combination’s light source to detect different types of constituents within a urine sample.
The combination does not teach placing the hand-held urinalysis device on the docking station of the urinalysis system allowing for electric charging.
Laing, in the same field of endeavor as Shemer of handheld urine analysis within a toilet (fig 4a), teaches a docking station (fig 39) comprising an electric charging module configured to charge the handheld device (0181, lines 1-3). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Laing’s docking station with the combination’s a hand-held urinalysis device to recharge the device when the battery is about to die.
The combination does not teach cleaning the measuring head with a disinfection solution.
Sunnybrook, in the field of endeavor of disinfecting medical devices, teaches cleaning and disinfecting medical devices with a disinfection solution (fig 1 & 2). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to cleanse the entire hand-held urinalysis device including the measurement head with hot water to avoid spreading diseases when reusing the hand-held device on other toilets.
PNG
media_image2.png
828
1260
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
830
1252
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 29 would be allowable if rewritten to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims or to include the limitation(s) and any intervening claims into the base claim. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to claim 29 the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “wherein the cleaning module comprises a disinfection solution”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 29.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAURICE C SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-2526. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm EST.
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, Kara Geisel can be reached on (571) 272-2416. 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.
/MAURICE C SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 2877