DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment filed 2/5/26 is sufficient to resolve the previous 112 rejection. To expedite prosecution toward allowance, Examiner notes claims 16-17 (currently withdrawn and amended) should refer to the first/second subgroups of the “second group” of electrical contacts, since these are supposed to be the contacts on the battery pack.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 2/5/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of based on Gill alone have been fully considered and are persuasive. However, in light of the amendment (i.e. ridge on which the gasket is not located), a new ground(s) of rejection is made further in view of Nishikawa (US 2015/0214520). Claim 12 is allowable.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7-10, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gill (US 2021/0251572) in view of Nishikawa (US 2015/0214520).
PNG
media_image1.png
554
417
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 1, 14, Gill discloses substantially the same invention as claimed (Figure 5 shown above for example), including a patient-monitoring device (abstract) comprising: a main device (Paragraph 37: electronics/sensor module) that includes a recess (Figure 5: sensor module 100 on left and battery pack 200 with recess on right can be reversed with recess on sensor module; Paragraph 45: mechanical interconnection can be reversed) and a first group of electrical contacts provided in the recess (Figure 5: 113); a battery pack that engages the recess and that includes a second group of electrical contacts (Figure 5: 200); and a first gasket that is located on either the main device or the battery pack and that surrounds the first group of electrical contacts and the second group of electrical contacts when the battery pack engages the recess (Paragraphs 40, 42).
Further regarding claim 1, Gill does not disclose a ridge as recited. However, Nishikawa teaches a sealing gasket and ridge combination where a ridge is located opposite to the first gasket of a battery pack or main device and on which the first gasket is not located and that engages with and compresses the first gasket when the battery pack engages with the main device (e.g. Figures 5-6: rib 21 and seal 22; see also Figs 17-20), in order to improve the sealing function of the gasket. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gill as taught by Nishikawa to include a ridge as recited, in order to improve the sealing function of the gasket.
Regarding claims 7-8, Gill discloses a movable pin that is perpendicular to the recess as recited (Figure 5; Paragraph 42).
Regarding claim 9, Gill discloses a protrusion (Figure 5: 202).
Regarding claim 10, Gill discloses the battery pack is releasably connected as recited (Paragraph 43).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gill (US 2021/0251572) and Nishikawa (US 2015/0214520) in view of Shah (US 2019/0336055).
Regarding claim 3, Gill or Nishikawa do not disclose the electrical contact spacing as recited. However, Shah teaches electrical contacts spaced by at least 2 mm as recited (Paragraph 293), in order to reduce signal interference. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gill and Nishikawa as taught by Shah to include an electrode spacing as recited, in order to reduce signal interference.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gill (US 2021/0251572) and Nishikawa (US 2015/0214520) in view of Kulach (US 2014/0336493).
Regarding claim 4, Gill or Nishikawa do not disclose stainless steel. However, Kulach teaches contacts made of stainless steel as recited (Paragraphs 70, 82), in order to select a suitable material for the electrical contacts. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gill and Nishikawa as taught by Kulach to include stainless steel as recited, in order to select a suitable material for the electrical contacts.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gill (US 2021/0251572) and Nishikawa (US 2015/0214520) in view of Weinstein (US 2023/0137521).
Regarding claim 11, Gill or Nishikawa not disclose a latch configuration as recited. However, Weinstein teaches a loop structure for receiving a latch (Figure 5: 302), a latch (Figure 8: at 302), and a button (Figure 8: 202), in order to easily attach and detach a module. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gill and Nishikawa as taught by Weinstein to include a latch configuration as recited, in order to easily attach and detach a module.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 is allowable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gumiero (US 20200221968), Vartiovaara (US 2017/0325684) shows a removable battery pack.
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 Eugene T Wu whose telephone number is (571)270-5053. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Carl Layno can be reached at 571-272-4949. 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.
/Eugene T Wu/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights