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 .
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. Claim 4 recites: “a pulley.” Claim 5 further describes the pulley and its structural interaction with the housing without clear depiction in Applicant’s figures. The specification possesses only verbatim repetition of claim language.
The identified features above must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The specification recites “Activating the pulley powers by rotating the pulley away from the blood pressure measurement device places the device into a ready configuration.” It is unclear what Applicant intends to mean by “activating the pulley powers.” Examiner interprets this as a grammatical issue.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 12, and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 2, “start- stop should read as “start-stop.”
In claim 12, “if the blood” should read as “of the blood.”
In claim 15, “wirelessly a second device” should read as “wirelessly to a second device.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 3. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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 13 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.
Re. Claim 13: Claim 13 recites the limitation "the step.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over:
Fitzsimmons et al. (US 20140371607 A1) (disclosed by Applicant) (hereinafter – Fitzsimmons) in view of
Pike et al. (US 20220233128 A1) (hereinafter – Pike)
Re. Claim 1: Fitzsimmons teaches a blood pressure measurement device (Abstract; Title)
comprising:
a cuff for wrapping around a limb of a subject (Fig. 1H),
the cuff further having an inflatable bladder formed integrally therein (Abstract: “The blood pressure monitoring device includes a cuff for wrapping around the limb of a subject the cuff further having a an inflatable bladder formed integrally therein…”),
wherein the cuff is substantially rectangular in shape having a first surface, a second surface, a first end, a second end, and two sides (Abstract: “wherein the cuff is substantially rectangular in shape having a first surface, a second surface, a first end, a second end, and two sides…”),
one or more tubes positioned within the cuff in communication with the inflatable bladder (Abstract: “…one or more tubes positioned within the cuff in communication with the inflatable bladder…”),
an exhaust valve (Abstract: “an exhaust valve”),
a cuff securement mechanism (Abstract: “a cuff securement mechanism”),
and one or more of a controller, a memory, a pump, a power supply, and a motor (Paragraph 0010: “… the housing includes one or more of a controller, a memory, a pump, a power supply, and a motor…”).
Fitzsimmons does not teach the invention further comprising
a housing mating base secured to a surface of the cuff with a vertical base surface extending from a planar base surface;
a housing for the blood pressure measurement device wherein the housing is removably securable to the housing mating base of the cuff and further
wherein the housing includes
a dock and
a button and
wherein the vertical base surface of the housing mating base interfaces with the dock and button of the housing to identify a presence and size of the cuff.
Pike teaches analogous art in the technology of wearable sensor devices (Abstract). Pike further teaches the invention further comprising:
a housing mating base secured to a surface of the cuff with a vertical base surface extending from a planar base surface (Figs. 6S-6X: prong 674 of cradle 604 attached to blood pressure cuff as shown in Figs. 5L-5M);
a housing for the blood pressure measurement device wherein the housing is removably securable to the housing mating base of the cuff and further (see device 602 mounted and removed in Figs. 6A-6R; device 602 is a blood pressure monitoring device)
wherein the housing includes
a dock (Fig. 6D-6F, 6P-6Z: in light of an absence of a definition for the term “dock” in Applicant’s specification, Examiner is interpreting “dock” as any opening or depression which receives another structure to aid in connection, e.g., of the device 602 to cradle 604, including latch arm protrusions 618, depression 622, and opening 670 configured to receive port 672b) and
a button (Paragraph 0389: “electrical contacts on a bottom surface of blood pressure monitor 602;” Examiner is interpreting “button” as defined by Collins Dictionary: “A button is a small object on a machine or electrical device that you press in order to operate it;” in Pike, electrical contacts are pressed by a prong 674 to transfer/collect data); and
wherein the vertical base surface of the housing mating base interfaces with the dock and button of the housing to identify a presence and size of the cuff (Paragraph 0389: “For example, as shown in at least FIGS. 6U-6V, cradle 604 can include a prong 674 comprising an NFC tag that can communicate with a NFC reader of the blood pressure monitor 602. Such NFC can be, for example RFID, and the prong 674 can include an RFID tag configured to communicate with an RFID reader of the blood pressure monitor 602. As another example, the prong 674 can include a memory, such as an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM) that can contact electrical contacts on a bottom surface of blood pressure monitor 602 when blood pressure monitor 602 is secured to cradle 604. In such cases where the cradle 604 includes an NFC communication mechanism, blood pressure monitor 602 can transfer and/or collect data from the cradle 604. For example, such NFC communication can enable the blood pressure monitor 602 and/or cradle 604 to…determine the size of a cuff to which the cradle 604 is attached;” Figs. 5L-5M: pressure cuff 121 to which dock 604 is attached; 6A-6E: vertical surfaces of cradle 604 interface with at least latch arm protrusions 618, depression 622, and opening 670 configured to receive port 672b, whereby such interconnection enables prong 674 to press electrical contacts located on the underside of blood pressure monitor 602 to perform identification of a cuff size).
It would have been obvious to one having skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Fitzsimmons to include the removable blood pressure monitor and cradle including cuff size identification features of Pike, the motivation being that doing so enables the blood pressure monitor of Fitzsimmons to utilize cuffs appropriate for differently sized patients and adjust an inflation profile thereof unique to that particular cuff (Paragraph 0332).
Re. Claim 2: Fitzsimmons as modified by Pike teaches the invention according to claim 1. Fitzsimmons further teaches the invention further comprising one or more of an on-off button and a start-stop button (Fig. 2A: on/off button 222 and/or start/stop button 224).
Re. Claim 3: Fitzsimmons as modified by Pike teaches the invention according to claim 1. Fitzsimmons further teaches the invention wherein the blood pressure measurement device is in wireless communication with one or more displays (Paragraph 0010; Claims 9 and 10).
Re. Claim 4: Fitzsimmons as modified by Pike teaches the invention according to claim 1. Fitzsimmons further teaches the invention further comprising a pulley (Paragraphs 0010, 0011: “pulley;” Claim 3).
Re. Claim 5: Fitzsimmons as modified by Pike teaches the invention according to claim 4. Fitzsimmons further teaches the invention wherein the pulley engages the housing along an end and wherein movement of the pulley away from the housing activates the blood pressure cuff from an off condition to an on condition (Paragraph 0010: “The pulley can be configured to engage the housing along an end and further wherein movement of the pulley away from the housing activates the monitoring device from an off condition to an on condition;” Claim 4).
Re. Claim 6: Fitzsimmons as modified by Pike teaches the invention according to claim 1. Fitzsimmons further teaches the invention further comprising one or more of a pressure detector, a pulse detector and one or more wireless sensors (Paragraph 0010: “In some configurations, the blood pressure monitoring device can comprise one or more of each of a pressure detector, a pulse detector and wireless sensors;” Claim 6).
Re. Claim 7: Fitzsimmons as modified by Pike teaches the invention according to claim 1. Fitzsimmons further teaches the invention wherein the cuff securement mechanism is at least one of magnets and a hook and loop fastener (Paragraphs 0010, 0032, 0033; Claim 8).
Re. Claim 8: Fitzsimmons as modified by Pike teaches the invention according to claim 1. Fitzsimmons further teaches the invention wherein the blood pressure measurement device is in wireless communication with one or more displays (Paragraph 0010; Claims 9 and 10).
Re. Claim 9: Fitzsimmons as modified by Pike teaches the invention according to claim 1. Pike, in teaching further detail regarding the incorporated modification, further teaches the invention wherein an operation of the blood pressure measurement device changes in response to an identified size of the cuff (Paragraph 0332: “…the blood pressure monitor 120 determines a particular inflation rate and/or profile that is unique to that particular cuff 121”)
Re. Claim 10: Fitzsimmons as modified by Pike teaches the invention according to claim 1. Pike, in teaching further detail regarding the incorporated modification, further teaches the invention wherein a surface of the housing mating base has a raised structure sized to receive a recess on an exterior surface of the housing (Fig. 6W: wall 646 having lip 646a receiving a depression 622 of blood pressure monitor 602 as shown in Figs. 6A-6C).
Re. Claim 11: Fitzsimmons as modified by Pike teaches the invention according to claim 1. Fitzsimmons further teaches the invention further comprising a transmitter for wireless transmitting blood pressure data to a second device (Abstract: “…a transmitter for wirelessly transmitting blood pressure data to a second device;” Paragraphs 0010, 0011; Claims 1, 11, 16).
Re. Claim 12: Fitzsimmons teaches a method for measuring blood pressure using a blood pressure measurement device (Abstract; Title)
comprising:
wrapping the cuff around a limb of a subject the cuff having an inflatable bladder formed integrally therein (Abstract: “The blood pressure monitoring device includes a cuff for wrapping around the limb of a subject the cuff further having a an inflatable bladder formed integrally therein…”),
wherein the cuff is substantially rectangular in shape having a first surface, a second surface, a first end, a second end, and two sides (Abstract: “wherein the cuff is substantially rectangular in shape having a first surface, a second surface, a first end, a second end, and two sides…”), and
a securement mechanism (Abstract: “a cuff securement mechanism”),
one or more tubes positioned within the cuff in communication with the inflatable bladder
(Abstract: “…one or more tubes positioned within the cuff in communication with the inflatable bladder…”),
an exhaust valve (Abstract: “an exhaust valve”);
and one or more of a controller, a memory, a pump, a power supply, and a motor (Paragraph 0010: “… the housing includes one or more of a controller, a memory, a pump, a power supply, and a motor…”); and
delivering an output of a measured blood pressure (Paragraph 0011: “wirelessly delivering an output of the blood pressure”).
Fitzsimmons does not teach the invention further comprising:
selecting a cuff;
securing the cuff to a housing if the blood pressure measurement device;
selecting an algorithm for operating the blood pressure measurement device based on a size of the selected cuff;
the housing includes a dock and a button.
Pike teaches the invention further comprising:
selecting a cuff (see citations of rejection of Pike of claim 1 – implicit in identification of cuff size);
securing the cuff to a housing if the blood pressure measurement device (Figs. 5L-5M, 6A-6C);
selecting an algorithm for operating the blood pressure measurement device based on a size of the selected cuff (Paragraph 0332; see rejection of claim 1);
the housing includes a dock and a button (see rejection of claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one having skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Fitzsimmons to include the steps of selecting a cuff, securing the cuff, and selecting an appropriate algorithm based on a size of the cuff as taught by Pike, the motivation being that doing so enables the blood pressure monitor of Fitzsimmons to utilize cuffs appropriate for differently sized patients and adjust an inflation profile thereof unique to that particular cuff (Paragraph 0332).
Re. Claim 13: Fitzsimmons as modified by Pike teaches the invention according to claim 12. Fitzsimmons further teaches the invention further comprising the step of turning the blood pressure measurement device on (Paragraph 0011; Claims 12, 13).
Re. Claim 14: Fitzsimmons as modified by Pike teaches the invention according to claim 12. Fitzsimmons further teaches the invention further comprising measuring one or more of
a blood pressure (Paragraph 0011; Claim 14) and
a pulse (Paragraph 0011; Claim 15).
Re. Claim 15: Fitzsimmons as modified by Pike teaches the invention according to claim 12. Fitzsimmons further teaches the invention further comprising delivering the output of the blood pressure measurement device wirelessly a second device (Abstract: “…a transmitter for wirelessly transmitting blood pressure data to a second device;” Paragraphs 0010, 0011; Claims 1, 11, 16).
Re. Claim 16: Fitzsimmons as modified by Pike teaches the invention according to claim 15. Fitzsimmons further teaches the invention further comprising providing an acquired blood pressure measurement to a third party device that is different that the second device (Paragraph 0011: “An acquired blood pressure measurement and/or pulse measurement can be provided to a third party device that is different than the second device (e.g. a device associated with a healthcare provider)”).
Re. Claim 17: Fitzsimmons as modified by Pike teaches the invention according to claim 16. Fitzsimmons further teaches the invention wherein the step of providing an acquired blood pressure measurement to a third party occurs one or more of automatically and wirelessly (Paragraph 0011: “The step of providing an acquired blood pressure measurement and/or pulse measurement to a third party can occur automatically, semi-automatically or manually. Additionally, the step of providing an acquired blood pressure measurement and/or pulse measurement to a third party can occur wirelessly”).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-11 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,399,739 B2 (hereinafter – the ‘739 patent) in view of Pike et al. (US 20220233128 A1) (hereinafter – Pike).
Re. Claim 1: Claim 1 of the ‘739 patent teaches
a blood pressure measurement device (line 3) comprising:
a cuff for wrapping around a limb of a subject, the cuff further having an inflatable bladder formed integrally therein, wherein the cuff is substantially rectangular in shape having a first surface, a second surface, a first end, a second end, and two sides, one or more tubes positioned within the cuff in communication with the inflatable bladder, an exhaust valve, a cuff securement mechanism (lines 4-16),
wherein the housing includes a dock and a button, and one or more of a controller, a memory, a pump, a power supply, and a motor (lines 17-20); Claim 1 of the ’739 patent does not teach the invention comprising:
a housing mating base secured to a surface of the cuff with a vertical base surface extending from a planar base surface; a housing for the blood pressure measurement device wherein the housing is removably securable to the housing mating base of the cuff
wherein the vertical base surface of the housing mating base interfaces with the dock and button of the housing to identify a presence and size of the cuff.
Such aspects are taught as obvious by Pike (see citations in rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103). The motivation to combine Pike with claim 1 of the ’739 patent is identical to the motivation used in the rejection of claim 1 in the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Thus, claim 1 of the ’739 patent as modified by Pike teaches each aspect of claim 1 of the present invention.
Claims 2-11 are rejected as being dependent on rejected independent claim 1. Additionally or alternatively, see claims of the ‘739 patent which recite verbatim claim limitations in light of modification of Pike.
Claims 12-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,399,739 B2 (hereinafter – the ‘739 patent) in view of Pike et al. (US 20220233128 A1) (hereinafter – Pike).
Re. Claim 12: Claim 10 of the ‘739 patent recites a method for measuring blood pressure (line 3)
using a blood pressure measurement device (line 3)
comprising:
wrapping the cuff around a limb of a subject (line 3: “deploying”)
the cuff having an inflatable bladder formed integrally therein, wherein the cuff is substantially rectangular in shape having a first surface, a second surface, a first end, a second end, and two sides, and a securement mechanism, one or more tubes positioned within the cuff in communication with the inflatable bladder, an exhaust valve; the housing includes a dock and a button, and one or more of a controller, a memory, a pump, a power supply, and a motor (lines 4-25); and
delivering an output of a measured blood pressure (“collecting biometric data from the blood pressure monitor”).
Claim 10 of the ‘739 patent does not teach the invention comprising:
selecting a cuff; securing the cuff to a housing of the blood pressure measurement device;
selecting an algorithm for operating the blood pressure measurement device based on a size of the selected cuff.
Such aspects are taught as obvious by Pike (see citations in rejection of claim 12 under 35 U.S.C. 103). The motivation to combine Pike with claim 12 of the ’739 patent is identical to the motivation used in the rejection of claim 12 in the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Thus, claim 10 of the ’739 patent as modified by Pike teaches each aspect of claim 12 of the present invention.
Claims 12-17 are rejected as being dependent on rejected independent claim 1. Additionally or alternatively, see claims of the ‘739 patent which recite verbatim claim limitations in light of modification of Pike.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN XU whose telephone number is (571)272-6617. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alexander Valvis can be reached at (571) 272-4233. 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 XU/Examiner, Art Unit 3791