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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Remarks
This Office Action fully acknowledges applicant’s remarks filed 02/25/2026. Claims 1-4 are pending. Claims 1, 3 and 4 have been amended.
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.
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.
1. Claims 1, 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 10,274,430 to Albrecht et al. (corresponds to US2016/0245755, cited by applicant) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0076841 to Meyes, III et al.
Albrecht et al. teaches an analyzer that includes a modulation device (“drive circuit”) that modulates at least one light source so that at least one parameter of light periodically changes, such as selected from the group consisting of amplitude, frequency, and phase of the at least one parameter. Albrecht er al. further teaches that the modulation frequency of the modulation is frequency of periodicity of the at least one parameter is changed. (column 16, lines 7-16)
In Albrecht et al. the light from the at least one light source 127 is directed to a body fluid sample and then to detector 132. (Fig 1) (column 13, line 61 through column 14, line 8). The detector 132 of Albrecht et al. reads on applicant’s claimed light receiver that receives light and generates a detection signal.
Albrecht et al. teaches a demodulation device 134, an error detection device 144 and an evaluation unit 148 (the combination of which reads on applicant’s signal processing circuit) which can demodulate the photodetection signal depending on the frequency of the driving current and output a measured signal based on the demodulation result. (column 14, lines 32-53)
At column 28, lines 12-37 Albrecht et al. teaches varying modulation frequencies continuously.
Albrecht et al. does not teach the first drive current is a pulsating current including a direct current component and an alternating current component.
Applicant teaches the drive circuit is a light source drive circuit. [0027]
Myers, III et al. teaches a power source 840 that can include, for example, one or more batteries, direct current (DC) power supply, alternating current (AC) power supply, linear regulated power supply, and/or switched-mode power supply that supplies power to light emitting elements. [0170]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to modify Albrecht et al. to include one or more batteries, direct current (DC) power supply, alternating current (AC) power supply, linear regulated power supply, and/or switched-mode power supply that supplies power to light source as taught by Myers, III et al. for supplying power to the light source.
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 1, as noted above Albrecht et al. in view or Myers, III et al. renders all the elements of claim 1 obvious.
Therefore, Albrecht et al. in view of Myers, III et al. renders Claim 1 obvious.
II.) Regarding applicant’s claim 2, as noted above Albrecht et al. in view of Myers, III et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 2 depends.
Claim 2 recites a second light source different from the first light source and configured to emit light toward the sample, wherein the drive circuit supplies a second drive current having the same frequency as the first drive current to the second light source. Absent “configured to” language (e.g., the drive circuit configured to), the claimed operation of the drive circuit merely recites an intended use of the claimed drive circuit and thus the prior art device need only be capable of performing the claimed operation.
Albrecht et al. teaches first and second light sources 127 and 130. (col. 13, lines 61-67 through co. 14, lines 1-8; Fig. 1).
Albrecht et al. further teaches that sources 127,130 can include at least one modulation device (“drive circuit”) adapted for modulating at least one light source by using at least two individual modulation frequencies. (col. 13, lines 43-47). Although Albrecht teaches using different frequencies in a “fault detection step”, Albrecht further teaches that each modulation frequency can be manually adjusted to any frequency during measurement (col. 27, lines 28-46). As such, the “drive circuit” of Albrecht et al. is structurally capable of supplying a second drive current having the same frequency as the first drive current to the second light source, and thus Albrecht meets all the limitations of the automatic analyzer of claim 2.
Therefore, Albrecht et al. in view of Myers, III et al. renders claim 2 obvious.
III.) Regarding applicant’s claim 4, claim 4 recites an automatic analysis method, comprising: a process of emitting light to a sample from a first light source by supplying a first drive current whose frequency changes intermittently or continuously to the first light source; a process of outputting a light detection signal based on light transmitted through the sample; and a process of demodulating the light detection signal in accordance with a frequency of the first drive current and outputting a measurement signal based on a demodulation result.
As noted above, Albrecht et al. teaches an analyzer that includes a modulation device (“drive circuit”) that modulates at least one light source so that at least one parameter of light periodically changes, such as selected from the group consisting of amplitude, frequency, and phase of the at least one parameter. Albrecht er al. further teaches that the modulation frequency of the modulation is frequency of periodicity of the at least one parameter is changed. (column 16, lines 7-16)
In Albrecht et al. the light from the at least one light source 127 is directed to a body fluid sample and then to detector 132. (Fig 1) (column 13, line 61 through column 14, line 8)
Albrecht et al. teaches a demodulation device 134, an error detection device 144 and an evaluation unit 148 (the combination of which reads on applicant’s signal processing circuit) which can demodulate the photodetection signal depending on the frequency of the driving current and output a measured signal based on the demodulation result. (column 14, lines 32-53)
At column 28, lines 12-37 Albrecht et al. teaches varying modulation frequencies continuously.
Albrecht et al. does not teach the first drive current is a pulsating current including a direct current component and an alternating current component.
Albrecht et al. does not teach the first drive current is a pulsating current including a direct current component and an alternating current component.
Applicant teaches the drive circuit is a light source drive circuit. [0027]
Myers, III et al. teaches a power source 840 that can include, for example, one or more batteries, direct current (DC) power supply, alternating current (AC) power supply, linear regulated power supply, and/or switched-mode power supply that supplies power to light emitting elements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to modify Albrecht et al. to include one or more batteries, direct current (DC) power supply, alternating current (AC) power supply, linear regulated power supply, and/or switched-mode power supply that supplies power to light source as taught by Myers, III et al. for supplying power to the light source. [0170]
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 4, as noted above Albrecht et al. in view or Myers, III et al. renders all the elements of claim 4 obvious.
Therefore, Albrecht et al. in view of Myers, III et al. renders Claim 4 obvious.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art of record does not teach or suggest that: the first drive current is a pulsating current that includes a direct current component and an alternating current component – in combination with the elements of claim 3 including: the drive circuit that includes a direct current component control unit configured to control the direct current component and an alternating current component control unit configured to control the alternating current component; the signal processing circuit that includes a high-band pass filter configured to attenuate a component, among frequency components of the light detection signal, equal to or lower than a cutoff frequency that is lower than the lowest frequency of the alternating current component; and the direct current component control unit has a function of reducing the direct current component with an elapse of an energization time for the first light source.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-4 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection relies upon Myers. III et al. as teaching a power source 840 that can include, for example, one or more batteries, direct current (DC) power supply, alternating current (AC) power supply, linear regulated power supply, and/or switched-mode power supply that supplies power to light emitting elements.
As noted above, claim 3 is directed to allowable subject matter that includes a first drive current is a pulsating current that includes a direct current component and an alternating current component – in combination with the elements of claim 3 including: the drive circuit that includes a direct current component control unit configured to control the direct current component and an alternating current component control unit configured to control the alternating current component; the signal processing circuit that includes a high-band pass filter configured to attenuate a component, among frequency components of the light detection signal, equal to or lower than a cutoff frequency that is lower than the lowest frequency of the alternating current component; and the direct current component control unit has a function of reducing the direct current component with an elapse of an energization time for the first light source.
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 MICHAEL S. GZYBOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3487. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Charles Capozzi can be reached at 571-270-3638. 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.
/M.S.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1798
/CHARLES CAPOZZI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1798
Prosecution Insights