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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I and Species B in the reply filed on 11/6/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no serious burden to search all the inventions and species. This is not found persuasive because the restriction is based on a lack of unity of the claimed inventions. The examiner acknowledges that claims 32, 33, 39 and 50 have been withdrawn.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “31” has been used to designate both a sounder and apertures. See page 18 of the Specification. The examiner notes that the Specification may be amended instead. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 38 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The examiner respectfully suggests replacing “customizing” with -- customizing --in order to conform with the conventional spelling of the word. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 46 is 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.
Regarding claim 46, the phrase "such as" in line 2 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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.
Claims 31, 34-38, 41, 43, 45-49 and 51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GB 2547436 by James et al. (“James”) as listed in the IDS dated 8/3/2023 in view of U.S. Application Publication 2019/0049322 by James et al. (“James ‘322”) and U.S. Patent 9,668,927 issued to Campbell (“Campbell”).
As for claim 31, James discloses a pressure monitoring device (Fig. 1) in the form of a mat for clinical use in monitoring activity of a person in a seated or reclined position, the pressure monitoring device comprising:
a pressure sensing means (18-24) for sensing pressure exerted by the person, includes at least one first pressure switch (18, 20, 22) configured to operate at a first pressure threshold (page 2, lines 23-24) and at least one second pressure switch (20, 24, 26) configured to operate at a second pressure threshold (page 2, lines 24-25), the pressure sensing means being configured to sense:
ii) pressure above the first pressure threshold and at or below the second pressure threshold (page 11, lines 18-20) for corresponding to the seated or reclined person generating acceptable pressure (page 11, lines 18-20), and
iil) pressure above the second pressure threshold (page 12, lines 4-9) for corresponding to the seated or reclined person generating excessive pressure (page 12, lines 4-9); and
a data logger (34) connected to the pressure sensing means (18-24) and configured to monitor the pressure sensing means (page 9, lines 21-30).
James does not explicitly disclose that the pressure sensing means is configured to sense: i) pressure at or below the first pressure threshold for corresponding to absence of the person, in part, because James does not disclose that the pressure sensors measure capacitance. Instead, James discloses pressure sensors that are switches that measure different pressure bands (page 2, lines 23-25).
However, James ‘322 discloses pressure sensors that measure capacitance (paragraph [0079]). James ‘322 discloses that pressure sensors that measure capacitance can be substituted for pressure sensors that are switches (paragraphs [0079] and [0080]). James ‘322 discloses that the capacitance pressure sensors measure different pressure bands (paragraphs [0064] and [0079]).
Because James and James ‘322 both disclose pressure sensors that measure different pressure bands, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to substitute the capacitance sensors of James ‘322 for the switches of James to achieve the predictable result of providing pressure sensors that measure different pressure bands.
James as modified by James ‘322 discloses a pressure sensing means configured to sense:
i) pressure at or below the first pressure threshold (James: page 11, lines 18-20 and James ‘322: paragraph [0065]) for corresponding to absence of the person,
ii) pressure above the first pressure threshold and at or below the second pressure threshold (James: page 11, lines 18-20) for corresponding to the seated or reclined person generating acceptable pressure (James: page 11, lines 18-20), and
iil) pressure above the second pressure threshold (James: page 12, lines 4-9) for corresponding to the seated or reclined person generating excessive pressure (James: page 12, lines 4-9).
James as modified by James ‘322 does not disclose that the data logger is configured to record pressure data over a continuous period of time.
However, Campbell discloses a data logger that is configured to record pressure data over a continuous period of time (col. 6, lines 19-21 and Fig. 11). Campbell discloses that the pressure data is recorded so that the data can be transmitted wirelessly to another electronic device (col. 6, lines 19-21 and col. 8, lines 5-19).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the pressure monitoring device of James to include the data logger as disclosed by Campbell in order to allow a user to remotely monitor the device (Campbell: col. 8, lines 5-19).
James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses a data logger (Campbell: col. 6, lines 19-21) connected to the pressure sensing means and configured to monitor the pressure sensing means, in which the data logger is configured to record pressure data over a continuous period of time (Campbell: see Fig. 11) which includes recording each time the pressure applied to the pressure sensing means drops below or exceeds the first pressure threshold and each time the pressure applied to the pressure sensing means drops below or exceeds the second pressure threshold (because the data is continuously recorded as suggested by Fig. 11 of Campbell); and
a communication means connected to the data logger for selectively establishing a connection to an external electronic device and transmitting recorded data (Campbell: col. 6, lines 19-21 and col. 8, lines 5-19).
As for claim 34, James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses that the pressure sensing means is disposed in a body in the form of the mat for placement on or under or in a body of the seat, mattress or other structure (James: 12) on which the person sits or reclines during use (James: see Figs. 1-4).
As for claim 35, James as presently modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses the system as claimed in claim 31 (see the rejection of claim 31 above).
James as presently modified by James ‘322 and Campbell does not disclose that the pressure sensing means includes first and second pressure sensor units, and the first and second pressure sensor units are horizontally spaced apart in the pressure monitoring device for occupying different positions underneath a seated or reclined person.
However, Campbell discloses pressure sensing means that includes first and second pressure sensor units (Campbell: col. 8, lines 23-26), and the first and second pressure sensor units are horizontally spaced apart in the pressure monitoring device for occupying different positions underneath a seated or reclined person (Campbell: col. 8, lines 23-26).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the system of James, James ‘322 and Campbell by including the plurality of pressure monitoring devices as disclosed by Campbell in order to monitor additional pressure-prone locations of a user (Campbell: col. 8, lines 23-26).
As for claim 36, James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses that the communication means is at least one of:
a two-way communication means;
a wireless communication means (Campbell: col. 6, lines 19-21); and
a short-range or NFC wireless communication means.
As for claim 37, James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses that an alert means (James: LED 36) is provided for alerting the seated or reclined person to shift their position, and the alert means includes a timer which is in use configured to run for a set time period beginning when pressure data indicates that a person has just sat down or reclined on the seat, mattress or other structure, and the alert means being configured to initiate when the set time period has elapsed (James: page 9, line 32 - page 10, line 1).
As for claim 38, James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses that the set time period is at least one of: wirelessly configurable via the external electronic device for customising the set time period to a specific person; and determined or altered based on pressure sensed by the pressure sensing means (James: page 10, lines 23-31).
As for claim 41, James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses that the pressure monitoring device is configured to identify changes in the pressure data which correspond to a change of position of the seated or reclined person during use (James: page 10, lines 14-21), and to record (Campbell: col. 6, lines 19-21) and/or transmit one or more instances of the change of position for providing information on the person’s change in position on the seat to the external electronic device.
As for claim 43, James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses a system for clinical use in monitoring activity of a person in a seated or reclined position, the system comprising:
at least one pressure monitoring device as claimed in claim 31 (see the rejection of claim 31 above); and
an external electronic device (Campbell: 402) comprising a communication means for receiving pressure data from the pressure monitoring device (Campbell: implied by col. 6, lines 19-21), and a data storage means for storing the pressure data (Campbell: implied by col. 8, lines 5-9),
wherein the external electronic device is configured to during use establish a connection to the pressure monitoring device (Campbell: implied by col. 8, lines 5-9) and data stored in the data logger is transmitted to the external electronic device (Campbell: col. 6, lines 19-21).
As for claim 45, James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses that a graphical output of the pressure data is displayed on the external electronic device (Campbell: see Fig. 11), the graphical output including a graph showing pressure switch states of at least the first and second pressure switches to indicate the use of the seat, mattress or other structure over a period of time (Campbell: Fig. 11).
As for claim 46, James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses that the external electronic device is configured to in use transmit one or more control parameters, such as a timer interval, to the pressure monitoring device (Campbell: col. 8, lines 5-17).
As for claim 47, James as presently modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses the system as claimed in claim 43 (see the rejection of claim 43 above).
James as presently modified by James ‘322 and Campbell does not disclose that a plurality of pressure monitoring devices are provided.
However, Campbell discloses that a plurality of pressure monitoring devices are provided (col. 8, lines 23-26).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the system of James, James ‘322 and Campbell by including the plurality of pressure monitoring devices as disclosed by Campbell in order to monitor additional pressure-prone locations of a user (Campbell: col. 8, lines 23-26).
James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses that in use the external electronic device is configured to establish a connection to at least one of the plurality of pressure monitoring devices (Campbell: col. 6, lines 19-21 and col. 8, liens 23-46).
As for claim 48, James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses that the system is configured to determine a change of position of the person on the pressure monitoring device (James: page 12, lines 4-9 and 31-32; and Campbell: Fig. 11), and the external electronic device is configured to produce a change of position notification (James: page 12, lines 4-9 and 31-32; and Campbell: Fig. 11).
As for claim 49, James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses that the change in position is determined based on the pressure data over a time period (James: page 12, lines 4-9 and 31-32; and Campbell: col. 8, lines 23-46), wherein:
the pressure monitoring device is configured to determine whether there has been a change of position, and to record and/or transmit one or more instances of the change of position for providing information on the person’s change in position on the seat to the external electronic device (James: page 12, lines 4-9 and 31-32; and Campbell: col. 8, lines 23-46); or
the external electronic device or the server is configured to determine whether there has been a change of position.
As for claim 51, James as presently modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses the pressure monitoring device as claimed in claim 31 (see the rejection of claim 31 above).
James as presently modified by James ‘322 and Campbell does not disclose that the pressure sensing means includes at least four pressure sensors for monitoring pressure in four respective quadrants underneath the user.
However, Campbell discloses that a plurality of pressure monitoring devices are provided (col. 8, lines 23-26).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the pressure sensing means of James, James ‘322 and Campbell by to include four pressure sensors in order to monitor at least four pressure-prone locations of a user (Campbell: col. 8, lines 23-26).
Claim 40 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GB 2547436 by James et al. (“James”) as listed in the IDS dated 8/3/2023 in view of U.S. Application Publication 2019/0049322 by James et al. (“James ‘322”) and U.S. Patent 9,668,927 issued to Campbell (“Campbell”) as applied to claim 31, further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2022/0142834 by Hamilton et al. (“Hamilton”).
As for claim 40, James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses the pressure monitoring device as claimed in claim 31 (see the rejection of claim 31 above).
James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell does not disclose at least one of: an indicator or user-specific surface indicia for providing a way of identifying the pressure monitoring device from a plurality of substantially similar pressure monitoring devices; and a sounder controllable by the external electronic device through the communication means.
However, Hamilton discloses at least one of: an indicator or user-specific surface indicia for providing a way of identifying the pressure monitoring device from a plurality of substantially similar pressure monitoring devices (serial number; paragraph [0116]); and a sounder controllable by the external electronic device through the communication means.
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the pressure monitoring device of James, James ‘322 and Campbell by including the indicator as disclosed by Hamilton in order to allow a user to identify a particular pressure monitoring device.
Claim 42 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GB 2547436 by James et al. (“James”) as listed in the IDS dated 8/3/2023 in view of U.S. Application Publication 2019/0049322 by James et al. (“James ‘322”) and U.S. Patent 9,668,927 issued to Campbell (“Campbell”) as applied to claim 31, further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication2016/0342763 by Wada et al. (“Wada”).
As for claim 42, James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses the pressure monitoring device as claimed in claim 31 (see the rejection of claim 31 above).
James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell does not disclose that the pressure monitoring device is configured to differentiate pressure data recorded in respect of a designated device user and pressure data recorded in respect of another device user.
However, Wada discloses a monitoring device (Fig. 1) that is configured to differentiate data in respect of a designated device user and data recorded in respect of another device user (paragraph [0096]).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the pressure monitoring device of James, James ‘322 and Campbell to differentiate data as disclosed by Wada in order to allow the device to be used by a plurality of users
Claim 44 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GB 2547436 by James et al. (“James”) as listed in the IDS dated 8/3/2023 in view of U.S. Application Publication 2019/0049322 by James et al. (“James ‘322”) and U.S. Patent 9,668,927 issued to Campbell (“Campbell”) as applied to claim 31, further in view of GB 2570280 by Saggers (“Saggers”).
As for claim 44, James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell discloses the pressure monitoring device as claimed in claim 31 (see the rejection of claim 31 above).
James as modified by James ‘322 and Campbell does not disclose a server as recited. Instead, Campbell discloses that the wireless communication can be between the pressure monitoring device and a mobile device (Campbell: col. 8, lines 5-9).
However, Saggers discloses a server (page 4, lines 16-20). Saggers discloses that wireless communication can be between a pressure monitoring device and a server instead of a mobile device (page 4, lines 16-20).
Because Saggers and Campbell both disclose structures that can communicate wirelessly with a pressure monitoring device, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to substitute the server of Saggers for the mobile device of Campbell to achieve the predictable result of providing a structure that can wirelessly communicate with the pressure monitoring device.
James as modified by James ‘322, Campbell and Saggers discloses during use at least one of the following:
the external electronic device establishes a connection to the server and transmits the pressure data to the server through the communication means for storage (Campbell: col. 6, lines 19-21 and Saggers: page 4, lines 16-20);
the server processes the received pressure data to produce pressure information; and
the server transmits the pressure information to the external electronic device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent 9,778,131 issued to Everett et al. (“Everett”) is cited for all that it discloses including a mat that monitors a pressure applied by a user’s body.
U.S. Patent Application Publication 2006/0065060 by Ito et al. (“Ito”) is cited for all that it discloses including a mat that monitors a pressure applied by a user’s body.
U.S. Patent 11,266,353 issued to Massak et al. (“Massak”) is cited for all that it discloses including a mat that monitors a pressure applied by a user’s body.
U.S. Patent 10,357,197 issued to Smith et al. (“Smith”) is cited for all that it discloses including a mat that monitors a pressure applied by a user’s body.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN N OLAMIT whose telephone number is (571)270-1969. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am - 5 pm (Pacific).
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at (571) 272-2149. 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.
/JUSTIN N OLAMIT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853