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 .
Claims Accounting
Applicant' s arguments, filed 03/03/2026, have been fully considered.
The following rejections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application.
Applicants have amended their claims, filed 03/03/2026, and therefore rejections newly made in the instant office action have been necessitated by amendment.
Claims 5-7 and 13 are withdrawn based on the reply filed on 11/14/2025.
Claims 1, 3, 8-9, and 12 have been amended.
Claims 10 and 11 have been canceled.
Claim 14 has been newly presented.
Claims 1-4, 8-9, 12, and 14 are hereby under examination.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 10,709,339 by Lusted – previously cited, hereinafter, “Lusted” in view of US Patent Publication 2018/218356 by Aimone et al. – previously cited, hereinafter “Aimone” , in view of US Patent Publication 2015/0359452 by Giovangrandi et al. – previously cited, hereinafter “Giovangrandi” in view of US Patent Publication 2023/0081794 by Mäkinen et al. – previously cited, hereinafter “Mäkinen”.
Regarding claim 1, Fig. 2 of Lusted teaches a wearable device (continuous wearable biometric sensing device 10) comprising: an attachment structure (ring-shaped housing 12); and a two single electrodes (first and second sensor electrodes 18a and 18b) and structured to contact a skin surface of a user (Col. 4, lines 23-26), a processor(s); and a memory communicably coupled to the processor(s) (Lusted, Figs. 3-5 display various components disposed on flexible circuit board 20 within the ring. The integrated processor comprises a CPU 64, algorithm memory 66, and data memory 68.).
Lusted does not teach first and second independently rotatable turntables mounted to the attachment structure; and wherein a single electrode is affixed to each turntable.
Figs 35-36 and 40 of Aimone teaches a wearable device (Fig. 40, apparatus 4000) comprising a pair of bio-signal sensors 3500 attached to an attachment structure (Fig. 40, support portion 4002)). Each bio-signal sensor 3500 comprises an electrode 3530 and a turntable (Figs. 35-36, [00224]; contact adjuster 3550 is mounted to the attachment structure and is configured to rotate the electrode). Hair on the skin of a user can may form a barrier (or "mat") that acts as an insulation layer between the contact end and the user's skin. The insulation layer impedes or prevents the receiving of the electrical signal. The rotational movement of the electrode, via the turntable (i.e., contact adjuster) may move the hair disposed under the sensor 3500, reducing noise in the electrical bio-signal caused by impedance of the user's hair ([00217-00218, 00224]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to have modified the wearable device of Lusted to include at least one turntable mounted to the attachment structure and the pair of electrodes being affixed to the at least one turntable, as Aimone teaches that the turntables can improve electrode contact with the skin, reducing noise in the electrical bio-signal caused by impedance of the user's hair ([00217-00218, 00224]). It is noted that in this combination each electrode is affixed to a turntable mounted to the attachment structure.
Lusted in view of Aimone does not teach the memory storing a sensor control module including computer-readable instructions that when executed by the processor(s) cause the processor(s) to: using an EDA signal generated while the first and second turntables are in respective first and second current rotational orientations, determine an S/N ratio associated with a combination of the of first and second current rotational orientations; determine if a need exists to rotate one or more of the turntables an amount from the current rotational orientation of the turntable(s).
Giovangrandi teaches a method of determining the configuration to attain the best signal to noise (S/N) ratio of a set of electrodes. An optimization algorithm for attaining the best S/N ratio may include iteratively switching configurations and measuring the resulting impedance, then selecting the best suited configuration to optimize the S/N ratio ([0107]). The first configuration used in the optimization algorithm can be considered the baseline or current configuration. If any other configuration has a better S/N ratio, than there would be a need to change from the current configuration to the optimal configuration.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to have modified the device of Lusted in view of Aimone such that the memory stored a sensor control module including computer-readable instructions that when executed by the processor(s) cause the processor(s) to: using an EDA signal generated while the first and second turntables are in respective first and second current rotational orientations, determine an S/N ratio associated with a combination of the of first and second current rotational orientations; determine if a need exists to rotate one or more of the turntables an amount from the current rotational orientation of the turntable(s), as taught by Giovangrandi. It is noted that Lusted teaches that the electrodes are used to generate an EDA signal (Col. 5, lines 23-26)), therefore any S/N ratio would be based on using an EDA signal. The configurations taught by Lusted in view of Aimone are the rotations of the turntables of which the electrodes are affixed to, therefore the configurations in the combination of Lusted, Aimone, and Giovangrandi, comprise the rotational orientations of the each turntable.
The combination of Lusted, Aimone, and Giovangrandi does not teach the sensor control modules including computer-readable instructions that when executed by the processor(s) cause the processor(s) to: and if a need exists to rotate one or more turntable(s) an amount from the current rotational orientation of the turntable(s), generate an instruction(s) to rotate the one or more turntable(s) the amount.
Fig. 6 of Mäkinen teaches a wearable device that may detect a non-optimal configuration (i.e., placement/position) of the device with respect to the skin (i.e., determine a need to adjust the configuration). The device may then provide an indication to the user to adjust the configuration on the display of a graphical user interface (GUI) of a display device, as the adjustment will improve the data measurement ([0134-0137]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to have modified the device taught by Lusted, Aimone, and Giovangrandi such that the sensor control module includes computer-readable instructions that when executed by the processor(s) cause the processor(s) to: and if a need exists to rotate one or more turntable(s) an amount from the current rotational orientation of the turntable(s), generate an instruction(s) to rotate the one or more turntable(s) the amount, in order to improve the data measurement, as taught by Mäkinen ([0134-0137]).
This combination of Lusted, Aimone, Giovangrandi, and Mäkinen does not teach the amount being a predetermined amount.
Figs. 41 and 42 of Aimone teaches a rotational limiter for limiting the rotational movement of the electrode. The rotational limiter may limit the rotational movement to about 0.25 radians (i.e., a predetermined amount). This limiting of the rotational movement in a direction prevents hair from becoming wrapped or tangled ([00233]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to have modified the device taught by the combination of Lusted, Aimone, Giovangrandi, and Mäkinen, such that the amount is a predetermined amount, to prevent excessive rotational movement in one direction and preventing hair from becoming wrapped or tangled, as taught by Aimone ([00233]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Lusted, Aimone, Giovangrandi, and Mäkinen teaches the wearable device of claim 1, wherein the attachment structure is a finger ring (Lusted, Fig. 2, ring-shaped housing 12).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Lusted, Aimone, Giovangrandi, and Mäkinen teaches the wearable device of claim 1, wherein a surface of a first electrode affixed to the first turntable is structured to be coplanar with a surface of a second electrode affixed to the second turntable (Lusted, Fig. 2; The top surfaces of electrodes E1 and E2 (18a and 18b) are coplanar)).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Lusted, Aimone, Giovangrandi, and Mäkinen teaches the wearable device of claim 3, wherein a plane defined by a surface of an insulator separating the first electrode from the second electrode is spaced apart from a plane including the surface of the first electrode and the surface of the second electrode (Lusted, Fig. 2; Element 22 is between the electrodes and can be considered an insulator. The bottom surface of element 22 (the surface contacting element 24) defines a plane of a surface of an insulator, which is spaced apart from the plane including the top surface of the electrodes by the thickness of element 22).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Lusted, Aimone, Giovangrandi, and Mäkinen teaches the wearable device of claim 1, wherein the memory includes computer-readable instructions that when executed by the processor(s) cause the processor(s) to: determine a plurality of values of S/N ratio, each value of S/N ratio being associated with a different combination of rotational orientations of the first and second turntables (Giovangrandi, [0107]; the optimization algorithm iteratively determines S/N ratio for each of the configurations, defining a plurality); compare each value of the plurality of values of S/N with all of the other values of the plurality of S/N ratio to determine a highest S/N ratio of the plurality of values of S/N ratio (Giovangrandi, [0107]; the optimization algorithm compares the impedances of all the configurations to determine the optimal configuration (i.e., highest S/R ratio)); generate an instruction to rotate at least one of the first and second turntables so as to orient the first and second turntables in a combination of rotational orientations associated with the highest S/N ratio of the plurality of values of S/N ratio (Mäkinen, [0134-0137]; Teaches a method to generate an instruction adjust the configuration of the device to get the best signal quality).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Lusted, Aimone, Giovangrandi, and Mäkinen teaches the wearable device of claim 1, wherein the memory includes computer-readable instructions that when executed by the processor(s) cause the processor(s) to control (or prompt operation of) a display device so as to display instructions regarding how to use a turntable rotation tool to rotate the turntables on a display device (Mäkinen, [0134]; The GUI (i.e. display device) may display an indication of the orientation of a ring with respect to a finger. This comprises how to change the configuration to be in the target configuration. In the combination of Lusted, Aimone, Giovangrandi, and Mäkinen, the target configuration can be achieved by turning the turntables to the rotations with the highest S/N ratio, therefore in the combination the display would show an indication of the turntables with respect to a target orientation.).
Claims 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lusted in view of Aimone in view of Giovangrandi in view of Mäkinen in view of US Patent 6,196,046 by Braig et al., hereinafter “Braig”.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Lusted, Aimone, Giovangrandi, and Mäkinen, as applied to claim 1, teaches an electrodermal activity (EDA) sensor (wearable device as applied to claim 1; Lusted teaches that the electrodes are used to generate an EDA signal (Col. 5, lines 23-26)), comprising: first and second independently rotatable turntables (Aimone, the turntables as taught by Aimone are not coupled, and are therefore independently rotatable); a single electrode affixed to each turntable and structured to contact a skin surface of a user (See the rejection of claim 1); a memory communicably coupled to the processor(s) and storing a sensor control module including computer-readable instructions that when executed by the processor(s) cause the processor(s) to: generate an instruction to rotate a turntable a predetermined amount (See the rejection of claim 1); determine when the turntable has been rotated the predetermined amount (Mäkinen, [0137]; The wearable device may instruct the user to adjust the orientation of the device according to a measurement indicative of the quality of the orientation (i.e., amount of escaped light being indicative of the quality of the surface contact based on the orientation) Therefore, the device is configured to determine when device is in the target configuration (i.e., the turntable has been rotated the predetermined amount)).
The combination of Lusted, Aimone, Giovangrandi, and Mäkinen does not teach the memory including computer-readable instructions that when executed by the processor(s) cause the processor(s) to: responsive to a determination that the turntable has been rotated the predetermined amount, generate an instruction to stop rotating the turntable.
Braig teaches a method for calibrating a device remotely, wherein the device is capable of determining whether the calibration is in-spec (i.e., sufficient) or not. The device may display a message “complete” if successful adjustments were made during the calibration (Col. 4, lines 40-55). Upon completion of the calibration, any further adjustments could make the calibration unsuccessful, therefore the display of “complete” is akin to an instruction to stop adjusting the configuration, as no more adjustments are necessary for the optimal configuration.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to have modified the device wherein the memory includes computer-readable instructions that when executed by the processor(s) cause the processor(s) to: responsive to a determination that the turntable has been rotated the predetermined amount, generate an instruction to stop rotating the turntable, as taught by Braig. This combination would signal to the user that the adjustment is complete, and would indicate no further adjustments need to be made to achieve an optimal configuration. This combination comprises the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way. See MPEP 2143-I-C. In the combination of Lusted, Aimone, Giovangrandi, Mäkinen, and Braig, the configuration that is indicated as complete and to stop adjusting is the rotation of the turntable.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Lusted, Aimone, Giovangrandi, Mäkinen, and Braig teaches the electrodermal activity sensor of claim 12, wherein the memory includes computer-readable instructions that when executed by the processor(s) cause the processor(s) to: determine a plurality of values of S/N ratio, each value of S/N ratio being associated with a different combination of rotational orientations of the first and second turntables; compare each value of the plurality of values of S/N ratio with all of the other values of the plurality of values of S/N ratio to determine a highest S/N ratio of the plurality of values of S/N ratio; and generate an instruction to rotate at least one of the first and second turntables so as to orient the first and second turntables in a combination of rotational orientations associated with the highest S/N ratio of the plurality of values of S/N ratio (See the rejection of claim 8).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 03/03/2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 are acknowledged.
Regarding amended claim 1 (previous claim 11), Applicant argues that the embodiment of Aimone comprising rotational limiters do not teach “…an instruction(s) to rotate the one or more turntable(s) the predetermined amount”. The rejection of this limitation, in this Office action and the previous Office action, is taught by the combination of Lusted, Aimone, Giovangrandi, and Mäkinen. Specifically, Mäkinen is relied upon to teach the limitations of providing instructions to the user.
Regarding amended claims 9 and 12, Applicant’s assertions are moot as they are based on amendments to the claims not entered at the time of the previous Office action. The newly presented limitations are rejected on new grounds above.
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 NELSON A GLOVER whose telephone number is (571)270-0971. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 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, Jason 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.
/NELSON ALEXANDER GLOVER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/ADAM J EISEMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights