DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-14 and 16-17 are hereby under examination.
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/25/2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
“the thermal detector comprising: a detector substrate, a thermoelectric transducer comprising an n-type thermoelectric element and a p-type thermoelectric element, an optically absorbing membrane arranged over a cavity formed between said membrane and the detector substrate, the membrane having a thickness of less than 800 nanometres, and the membrane being configured to form a contacting element between the n-type and p-type thermoelectric elements of the thermoelectric transducer” (claim 1);
“wherein the radiation source is a layered infrared emitter device comprising a layered structure having at least one metal layer stacked between two or more dielectric layers, and an electric heating means arranged in or between any of the dielectric layers to heat the at least one metal layer to a required infrared emission temperature, and wherein each metal layer in the layered structure is a semi-transparent metal layer” (claim 2);
“the attachment of the optically absorbing membrane over the cavity is via legs, which consist of thermoelectric material” (claim 4);
“the thermal detector further comprises a back reflector attached in an inside edge of the cavity, arranged to reflect an optical signal not absorbed by the optically absorbing membrane back toward the optically absorbing membrane” (claim 5); and
“wherein the Fabry-Perot interferometer comprises - an interferometer substrate; - a first mirror arranged on the interferometer substrate; - a second, movable mirror having a movable optical area and a movable area surrounding the optical area, the surrounding area and the optical area of the second mirror having a gap between two layers of the mirror, and mirror layers at the opposite sides of the gap being connected with anchoring through the gap; - a Fabry-Perot cavity between the first and second mirrors; - the first and second mirror having control electrodes for electrical control of the distance between the mirrors, the electrodes of the first and second mirrors extending to the optical area; wherein the implementation of the mirror anchoring is such that the stiffness of the surrounding area is lower than the stiffness of the optical area, wherein the movable mirror is arranged to bend more at the surrounding area than at the optical area on activation of the electrodes with a control voltage, and wherein the difference in mirror stiffness between the optical area and the surrounding area is based on the density of anchors in the gap of the second, movable mirror being higher at the optical area than at the surrounding area” (claim 7).
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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
Claims 1, 4, 7, 14, and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, lines 11-12 recite “800 nanometres”, however it appears it should read --800 nanometres (nm)-- (emphasis added).
Regarding claim 4, line 2 recites “the attachment”, however it appears it should read --an attachment-- (emphasis added).
Regarding claim 7, line 12 recites “the stiffness”, however it appears it should read --a stiffness-- (emphasis added).
Regarding claim 7, line 13 recites “the stiffness”, however it appears it should read --a stiffness-- (emphasis added).
Regarding claim 14, line 1 recites “A system comprising”, however it appears it should read --A system comprising:-- (emphasis added).
Regarding claim 16, line 2 recites “the concentration”, however it appears it should read --a concentration-- (emphasis added).
Claim Interpretation - 35 USC § 112(f)
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.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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:
Claim 1: The claim limitation “a processing unit configured to determine an amount of the at least one compound in blood …” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses a generic placeholder “unit” coupled with functional language “configured to determine an amount of the at least one compound in blood …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier that has a known structural meaning before the phrase “unit”.
Claim 2: The claim limitation “electric heating means … to heat the at least one metal layer …” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses a generic placeholder “means” coupled with functional language “to heat the at least one metal layer …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier that has a known structural meaning before the phrase “means”.
Claim 13: The claim limitation “means for comparing the detected reflected infrared irradiation …” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses a generic placeholder “means” coupled with functional language “for comparing the detected reflected infrared irradiation …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier that has a known structural meaning before the phrase “means”.
Claim 14: The claim limitation “a processing unit configured to determine an amount of a compound in blood …” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses a generic placeholder “unit” coupled with functional language “configured to determine an amount of a compound in blood …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier that has a known structural meaning before the phrase “unit”.
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.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation:
“electric heating means … electric heating wiring …”, or equivalents thereof, as described on pg. 14 of the disclosure filed on 02/02/2024.
Regarding a, c, and d, the specification does not provide adequate structure, material or acts to support the claimed functions. For the purposes of examination, any element configured to perform the claimed function is being interpreted as the structure.
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 § 112(a)
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.
Claims 1-14 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, because the claim purports to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, but fails to provide the structure, material or acts to support the claimed function. As such, the claim recites a function that has no limits and covers every conceivable means for achieving the stated function, while the specification discloses at most only those means known to the inventor. Accordingly, the disclosure is not commensurate with the scope of the claim.
As discussed above, the claim limitations below are interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
Claim 1: “a processing unit configured to determine an amount of the at least one compound in blood …”;
Claim 13: “means for comparing the detected reflected infrared irradiation …”; and
Claim 14: “a processing unit configured to determine an amount of a compound in blood …”.
The specification merely discloses the functions performed by these limitations. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would not understand the specification, the drawings, and the original claims to disclose any particular structure that achieves the disclosed functionality.
Specifically, the specification generically discloses “the device typically comprises also a processor … the memory may comprise computer instructions that the processor is configured to execute” on pg. 24-25 of the disclosure filed on 02/02/2024. However, the specification does not disclose the claimed functions of the processing units and the means for comparing are performed by a processor and/or memory. Further, the specification does not disclose the differences between the processing units.
The limitations fail to comply with the written description requirement as the limitations are unbound functional limitations which cover all ways of performing the respective functions and the inventor has not provided sufficient disclosure to show possession of such invention. The limitations therefore fail to comply with the written description requirement. See MPEP 2181.II.A.
The dependent claims of the above rejected claims are rejected due to their dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 1-14 and 16-17 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.
Regarding claims 1, 13, and 14, the claim limitations as recited above invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function.
Specifically, the specification generically discloses “the device typically comprises also a processor … the memory may comprise computer instructions that the processor is configured to execute” on pg. 24-25 of the disclosure filed on 02/02/2024. However, the specification does not disclose the claimed functions of the processing units and the means for comparing are performed by a processor and/or memory.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
The dependent claims of the above rejected claim are rejected due to their dependency.
Regarding claim 14, the claim recites “a processing unit configured to determine an amount of a compound in blood based on the received information on the detected infrared irradiation and/or photoacoustic emission” in lines 7-8. However, claim 1 recites “a processing unit configured to determine an amount of the at least one compound in blood based on the detected infrared irradiation and/or photoacoustic emission”, in lines 16-17. In light of the specification it is currently unclear if “a processing unit” recited in claim 14 is the same as, related to, or different from “a processing unit” recited in claim 1. For the purposes of examination, the processing units are being interpreted as being related. It is recommended to the Applicant to amend the claims to either clearly link the two processing units, or clearly differentiate between the two processing units.
Regarding claim 17, the claim recites limitation "the detected infrared irradiation" in lines 8-9 and line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In light of the specification, it is currently unclear if “the detected infrared irradiation” is the same as, related to, or different from “detecting reflected infrared radiation” recited in claim 17, line 5. For the purposes of examination, the “the detected infrared irradiation” is being interpreted as the same as “reflected infrared radiation”. It is recommended to the Applicant to amend the claims to recite consistent claim language.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 4-6, 11-14, and 16-17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Workman et al. (US 20230263436 A1), hereinafter referred to as Workman, in view of Ying Hsu (US 20100031992 A1), hereinafter referred to as Hsu, in view of Gable et al. (US 20060189925 A1), hereinafter referred to as Gable.
The claims are generally directed towards a device for non-invasive monitoring of at least one compound in blood, comprising: - a radiation source configured to emit infrared radiation towards a body part;- a Fabry-Perot interferometer configured to modulate the infrared radiation; - a thermal detector configured to detect reflected infrared irradiation, the thermal detector comprising: - a detector substrate,- a thermoelectric transducer comprising an n-type thermoelectric element and a p-type thermoelectric element, - an optically absorbing membrane arranged over a cavity formed between said membrane and the detector substrate, the membrane having a thickness of less than 800 nanometres, and the membrane configured to form a contacting element between the n-type and p-type thermoelectric elements of the thermoelectric transducer; - a microphone configured to detect photoacoustic emission; wherein the device further comprises: - a processing unit configured to determine an amount of the at least one compound in blood based on the detected infrared irradiation and/or photoacoustic emission; and/or - a transmitter configured to transmit information on the detected infrared irradiation and/or photoacoustic emission to an external device for processing.
Regarding claim 1, Workman discloses a device for non-invasive monitoring of at least one compound in blood (Abstract, Fig. 1, Fig. 3, Fig. 5, para. [0006]), comprising:
- a radiation source configured to emit infrared radiation towards a body part (Fig. 2, Fig. 3, element 202, Fig. 5, element 504, para. [0032], “light source … emit light toward a subject … infrared (IR) light …”, para. [0051]);
- a Fabry-Perot interferometer configured to modulate the infrared radiation (Fig. 2, element 206, Fig. 3, Fig. 5, element 508, para. [0033], “Fabry-Perot interferometer … receives a beam of light (e.g., from a light source) … uses mirrors to split the beam … directs the recombined light toward the subject …”, para. [0037-0038], para. [0052], “light source emits light toward the interferometer …”);
- a detector configured to detect reflected infrared irradiation (Fig. 2, Fig. 3, element 208, Fig. 5, element 510, para. [0032], para. [0039], “sense EM radiation … convert EM radiation into an electric signal …”, para. [0051-0053], “photodetector receives the reflected and transmitted light and outputs detector data …”);
wherein the device further comprises:
- a processing unit configured to determine an amount of the at least one compound in blood based on the detected infrared irradiation and/or photoacoustic emission (Fig. 2, element 214, element 216, para. [0040-0047], “spectroscopy module … process the detector data output by the photodetector … calculate … a concentration of a solute in the person’s blood …”, para. [0053]); and/or
- a transmitter configured to transmit information on the detected infrared irradiation and/or photoacoustic emission to an external device for processing (Fig. 1, element 106, Fig. 2, element 212, para. [0026], “detector data is communicable from the mobile device to other entities …”, para. [0040-0041], para. [0083-0087]).
However, Workman does not explicitly disclose the detector is a thermal detector, the thermal detector comprising: - a detector substrate, - a thermoelectric transducer comprising an n-type thermoelectric element and a p-type thermoelectric element, - an optically absorbing membrane arranged over a cavity formed between said membrane and the detector substrate, the membrane having a thickness of less than 800 nanometres, and the membrane configured to form a contacting element between the n-type and p-type thermoelectric elements of the thermoelectric transducer.
Hsu teaches of an analogous detector for measuring infrared radiation (Abstract, para. [0004]). Hsu further teaches the detector includes a thermal detector (Abstract, para. [0052-0054]), the thermal detector comprising: - a detector substrate (Fig. 7, element 30, para. [0043]), - a thermoelectric transducer comprising an n-type thermoelectric element and a p-type thermoelectric element (Fig. 7, element 20, element 25, para. [0042], para. [0087], claim 29), - an optically absorbing membrane arranged over a cavity formed between said membrane and the detector substrate, the membrane having a thickness of less than 800 nanometres, and the membrane configured to form a contacting element between the n-type and p-type thermoelectric elements of the thermoelectric transducer (Fig. 1, Fig. 7, elements 5, 20, 25, 60, para. [0083], para. [0089], claim 29). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the detector disclosed by Workman to explicitly include a thermal detector, as taught by Hsu. This is because Hsu teaches detection of infrared signals can be achieved through photon detectors or thermal detectors (para. [0006]). Therefore using a thermal detector is a simple substitution of using known methods/elements to obtain detect infrared irradiation.
However, modified Workman does not explicitly disclose the detector comprises a microphone configured to detect photoacoustic emission.
Gable teaches an analogous device for monitoring a compound in blood (Abstract). Gable teaches a detector configured to detect reflected infrared irradiation (para. [0173-0174], para. [0202]). Gable further teaches the detector comprises a microphone configured to detect photoacoustic emission (para. [0242]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the detector taught by modified Workman to additionally include a microphone configured to detect photoacoustic emission, as taught by Gable. This is because Gable teaches incorporating a microphone allows for the detection system to operate additionally in a photoacoustic mode (para. [0242]), allowing for additional measurements to be performed.
Regarding claim 4, modified Workman discloses the device according to claim 1.
However, modified Workman does not explicitly disclose wherein, in the thermal detector, the attachment of the optically absorbing membrane over the cavity is via legs, which consist of thermoelectric material.
Hsu further teaches the attachment of the optically absorbing membrane over the cavity is via legs, which consist of thermoelectric material (Fig. 7, element 20, element 25, para. [0087-0089]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the thermal detector taught by modified Workman to additionally have the attachment of the optically absorbing membrane over the cavity is via legs, which consist of thermoelectric material, as taught by Hsu. This is because Hsu teaches detection of infrared signals can be achieved through photon detectors or thermal detectors (para. [0006]), and the thermal detector includes a membrane attached via legs. Therefore using a thermal detector is a simple substitution of using known methods/elements to obtain detect infrared irradiation.
Regarding claim 5, modified Workman discloses the device according to claim 1.
However, modified Workman does not explicitly disclose where the thermal detector further comprises a back reflector attached in an inside edge of the cavity, arranged to reflect an optical signal not absorbed by the optically absorbing membrane back toward the optically absorbing membrane.
Hsu further teaches the thermal detector further comprises a back reflector attached in an inside edge of the cavity, arranged to reflect an optical signal not absorbed by the optically absorbing membrane back toward the optically absorbing membrane (Fig. 1a, element 34, para. [0043], para. [0055]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the thermal detector taught by modified Workman to additionally include a back reflector, as taught by Hsu. This is because Hsu teaches a back reflector allows for the sensitivity of the detector to be optimized (para. [0043]).
Regarding claim 6, modified Workman discloses the device according to claim 1.
However, modified Workman does not explicitly disclose wherein the thermal detector is only passively cooled.
Hsu further teaches the thermal detector is only passively cooled (para. [0011-0014]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the thermal detector taught by modified Workman to additionally only be passively cooled, as taught by Hsu. This is because Hsu teaches active cooling requires significant size and power consumption, and passive cooling allows for the size and power consumption to be reduced, which is beneficial for medical diagnostics (para. [0011-0014]).
Regarding claim 11, modified Workman discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein the device is integrated to a wearable device (Fig. 2, Fig. 5, para. [0031], “mobile device … smartwatch, computing eyewear, a computing range, and smartphone …”).
Regarding claim 12, modified Workman discloses the device according to claim 11, wherein the wearable device is a watch, a ring, a hearing aid, eyeglasses, a bracelet, face jewellery or a wearable heart rate monitoring device (Fig. 2, Fig. 5, para. [0031], “mobile device … smartwatch, computing eyewear, a computing range, and smartphone …”).
Regarding claim 13, modified Workman discloses the device according to claim 1, further comprising or connected to a database comprising reflected infrared irradiation spectrum and/or photoacoustic spectrum for at least one type of compound present in blood and means for comparing the detected reflected infrared irradiation and/or photoacoustic emission to the database (para. [0040-0047], “spectroscopy module … process the detector data output by the photodetector … calculate … a concentration of a solute in the person’s blood … spectrum data is apportioned between training data and testing data …”, para. [0053]).
Regarding claim 14, modified Workman discloses a system (Abstract) comprising
- the device according to claim 1 comprising the transmitter (Fig. 1, element 106, Fig. 2, element 212, para. [0026], “detector data is communicable from the mobile device to other entities …”, para. [0040-0041], para. [0083-0087] - further, see the rejection of claim 1);
- a receiver configured to receive information on the detected infrared irradiation and/or photoacoustic emission from the device (Fig. 1, element 106, Fig. 2, element 212, para. [0026], “detector data is communicable from the mobile device to other entities …”, para. [0040-0041], para. [0083-0087]);
- a database comprising reflected infrared irradiation spectrum and/or photoacoustic spectrum for at least one type of compound present in blood (para. [0026], “determination of the concentration of solutes can be performed by the mobile device or one of the other entities …”, para. [0040-0047], “spectroscopy module … process the detector data output by the photodetector … calculate … a concentration of a solute in the person’s blood … spectrum data is apportioned between training data and testing data …”, para. [0053]); and
- a processing unit configured to determine an amount of a compound in blood based on the received information on the detected infrared irradiation and/or photoacoustic emission (Fig. 2, element 214, element 216, para. [0040-0047], “spectroscopy module … process the detector data output by the photodetector … calculate … a concentration of a solute in the person’s blood …”, para. [0053]).
Regarding claim 16, modified Workman discloses a method for non-invasive monitoring of at least one compound in blood, comprising continuously or intermittently monitoring the concentration of blood glucose, ketones or lactic acid in a subject with the device of claim 1 (Abstract, para. [0009], para. [0026], “concentration of solutes determined … glucose … lactate, or ethyl alcohol …” -further, see the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 17, modified Workman discloses a method for non-invasive monitoring of at least one compound in blood (Abstract, para. [0009]), comprising:
- emitting infrared radiation towards a body part from the device of claim 1 (Fig. 2, Fig. 3, element 202, Fig. 5, element 504, para. [0032], “light source … emit light toward a subject … infrared (IR) light …”, para. [0051] - further, see the rejection of claim 1);
- modulating the infrared radiation with the Fabry-Perot interferometer (Fig. 2, element 206, Fig. 3, Fig. 5, element 508, para. [0033], “Fabry-Perot interferometer … receives a beam of light (e.g., from a light source) … uses mirrors to split the beam … directs the recombined light toward the subject …”, para. [0037-0038], para. [0052], “light source emits light toward the interferometer …”); and
- detecting reflected infrared radiation with the thermal detector and/or detecting photoacoustic emission with the microphone (Fig. 2, Fig. 3, element 208, Fig. 5, element 510, para. [0032], para. [0039], “sense EM radiation … convert EM radiation into an electric signal …”, para. [0051-0053], “photodetector receives the reflected and transmitted light and outputs detector data …” - further, see the rejection of claim 1 regarding the thermal detector);
wherein the method further comprises:
- determining an amount of the at least one compound in blood based on the detected infrared irradiation and/or the photoacoustic emission via the processing unit (Fig. 2, element 214, element 216, para. [0040-0047], “spectroscopy module … process the detector data output by the photodetector … calculate … a concentration of a solute in the person’s blood …”, para. [0053]); and/or
- transmitting information on the detected infrared irradiation and/or the photoacoustic emission to the external device for processing (Fig. 1, element 106, Fig. 2, element 212, para. [0026], “detector data is communicable from the mobile device to other entities …”, para. [0040-0041], para. [0083-0087]).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Workman et al. (US 20230263436 A1), hereinafter referred to as Workman, in view of Ying Hsu (US 20100031992 A1), hereinafter referred to as Hsu, in view of Gable et al. (US 20060189925 A1), hereinafter referred to as Gable as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Blomberg et al. (US 20180120158 A1), hereinafter referred to as Blomberg.
Regarding claim 2, modified Workman discloses the device according to claim 1.
However, modified Workman does not explicitly disclose wherein the radiation source is a layered infrared emitter device comprising a layered structure having at least one metal layer stacked between two or more dielectric layers, and an electric heating means arranged in or between any of the dielectric layers to heat the at least one metal layer to a required infrared emission temperature, and wherein each metal layer in the layered structure is a semi-transparent metal layer.
Blomberg teaches of an analogous radiation source configured to emit infrared radiation for medicine applications (Abstract, Fig. 1A, para. [0002]). Blomberg further teaches the radiation source is a layered infrared emitter device (Abstract, Fig. 1A, para. [0001]), comprising a layered structure having at least one metal layer stacked between two or more dielectric layers (para. [0015], para. [0050]), and an electric heating means arrange din or between any of the dielectric layers to heat the at least one metal layer to a required infrared emission temperature (para. [0050]), and wherein each metal layer in the layered structure is a semi-transparent metal layer (para. [0050]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radiation source disclose by Workman to explicitly be a layered infrared emitter device comprising a layered structure having at least one metal layer stacked between two or more dielectric layers, and an electric heating means arranged in or between any of the dielectric layers to heat the at least one metal layer to a required infrared emission temperature, and wherein each metal layer in the layered structure is a semi-transparent metal layer, as taught by Blomberg. This is because Blomberg teaches the layered structure allows for stable infrared sources for medical application (para. [0002], para. [0011]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Workman discloses the device according to claim 2.
However, modified Workman does not explicitly disclose wherein the thickness of each semi-transparent metal layer is selected from a range of 2 nm to 50 nm.
Blomberg further teaches the thickness of each semi-transparent metal layer is selected from a range of 2 nm to 50 nm (para. [0018], para. [0062]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the thickness of each semi-transparent metal layer to be in a range of 2 nm to 50 nm, as taught by Blomberg. This is because Blomberg teaches a thickness in the range of 2 nm to 50 nm allows for the desired emissivity to be achieved (para. [0059]).
Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Workman et al. (US 20230263436 A1), hereinafter referred to as Workman, in view of Ying Hsu (US 20100031992 A1), hereinafter referred to as Hsu, in view of Gable et al. (US 20060189925 A1), hereinafter referred to as Gable as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mikko Tuohiniemi (US 20140111811 A1), hereinafter referred Tuohiniemi.
Regarding claim 7, modified Workman discloses the device according to claim 1.
However, modified Workman does not explicitly disclose wherein the Fabry-Perot interferometer comprises: - an interferometer substrate; - a first mirror arranged on the interferometer substrate; - a second, movable mirror having a movable optical area and a movable area surrounding the optical area, the surrounding area and the optical area of the second mirror having a gap between two layers of the mirror, and mirror layers at the opposite sides of the gap being connected with anchoring through the gap; - a Fabry-Perot cavity between the first and second mirrors; - the first and second mirror having control electrodes for electrical control of the distance between the mirrors, the electrodes of the first and second mirrors extending to the optical area; wherein the implementation of the mirror anchoring is such that the stiffness of the surrounding area is lower than the stiffness of the optical area, wherein the movable mirror is arranged to bend more at the surrounding area than at the optical area on activation of the electrodes with a control voltage, and wherein the difference in mirror stiffness between the optical area and the surrounding area is based on the density of anchors in the gap of the second, movable mirror being higher at the optical area than at the surrounding area.
Tuohiniemi teaches of an analogous Fabry-Perot interferometer (Abstract, para. [0001]). Tuohiniemi further teaches the Fabry-Perot interferometer comprises: - an interferometer substrate (para. [0022], para. [0060]); - a first mirror arranged on the interferometer substrate (para. [0023], para. [0061]); - a second, movable mirror having a movable optical area and a movable area surrounding the optical area, the surrounding area and the optical area of the second mirror having a gap between two layers of the mirror, and mirror layers at the opposite sides of the gap being connected with anchoring through the gap (para. [0061-0062], para. para. [0024-0029], [0064]); - a Fabry-Perot cavity between the first and second mirrors (para. [0025]); - the first and second mirror having control electrodes for electrical control of the distance between the mirrors, the electrodes of the first and second mirrors extending to the optical area (para. [0026], para. [0063]); wherein the implementation of the mirror anchoring is such that the stiffness of the surrounding area is lower than the stiffness of the optical area (para. [0020], para. [0069]), wherein the movable mirror is arranged to bend more at the surrounding area than at the optical area on activation of the electrodes with a control voltage (para. [0020]), and wherein the difference in mirror stiffness between the optical area and the surrounding area is based on the density of anchors in the gap of the second, movable mirror being higher at the optical area than at the surrounding area (para. [0065]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Fabry-Perot interferometer as taught by Tuohiniemi. This is because Tuohiniemi teaches the Fabry-Perot interferometer with the specific structure allows for a Fabry-Perot interferometer with good finesse and use a lower control voltage (para. [0030-0033]).
Regarding claim 8, modified Workman discloses the device according to claim 7.
However, modified Workman does not explicitly disclose wherein the control electrodes extend to the whole optical area of the first mirror and the second mirror.
Tuohiniemi further teaches wherein the control electrodes extend to the whole optical area of the first mirror and the second mirror (para. [0031]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the control electrodes taught by modified Workman to explicitly extend to the whole optical area of the first mirror and the second mirror, as taught by Tuohiniemi. This is because Tuohiniemi teaches control electrodes extending the whole area allows for separate conductive areas in the mirrors to be avoided, resulting in a simple production process (para. [0031]).
Regarding claim 9, modified Workman discloses the device according to claim 7.
However, modified Workman does not explicitly disclose wherein the first and second mirror include a gap between layers at the optical area.
Tuohiniemi further teaches wherein the first and second mirror include a gap between layers at the optical area (para. [0018]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first and second mirror to explicitly include a gap between layers at the optical area, as taught by Tuohiniemi. This is because Tuohiniemi teaches the specific structure allows for a Fabry-Perot interferometer with good finesse and use a lower control voltage (para. [0030-0033]).
Regarding claim 10, modified Workman discloses the device according to claim 9.
However, modified Workman does not explicitly disclose wherein the width of the gap is λ/4 wherein λ is a centre wavelength of a pass band of the interferometer.
Tuohiniemi further teaches wherein the width of the gap is λ/4 wherein λ is a centre wavelength of a pass band of the interferometer (para. [0066]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the width of the gap to explicitly be λ/4 wherein λ is a centre wavelength of a pass band of the interferometer, as taught by Tuohiniemi. This is because Tuohiniemi teaches the specific structure allows for a Fabry-Perot interferometer with good finesse and use a lower control voltage (para. [0030-0033]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE W KRETZER whose telephone number is (571)272-1907. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:30 AM to 5:30 PM.
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 M 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.
/K.W.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/JASON M SIMS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791