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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
A1) The argument by the applicants states “Klamath and Weinrib, whether considered alone or in proper combination, fail to disclose the subject matter of amended claim 1”.
Response by the examiner: This statement only states independent claim 1 without any substantial argument towards the Weinrib and Klamath references. Therefore, this statement is conclusionary, since it does not have an argument within it. Applicant must also discuss the references applied against the claims, explaining how the claims avoid the references or distinguish from them. Applicant's argument fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because it amounts to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
The applicants have not submitted any arguments towards independent claim 14 within the remarks section of the reply. The missing argument does not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because the remarks do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
The previous 103 rejections has been updated based on the amendments adding a claim limitations into independent claims 1 and 14.
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.
Claims 14-19 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. Independent claim 14 contains a newly added limitation of “configuration parameter for the communication session”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 14 discloses communication parameter configuration” but does not disclose “configuration parameter”. The dependent claims 15-19 do not resolve this issue. Therefore, claims 14-19 are rejected under 112(b).
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 1-6 and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weinrib et al. ("Weinrib") [PGPUB 2023/0209482] in view of Kamath et al. ("Kamath") [PGPUB 2019/0132801].
Regarding claim 1, the Weinrib reference discloses a data receiving device comprising: one or more processors, a communication module, and one or more memories communicatively coupled to the one or more processors and the communication module, and comprising instructions executable by the one or more processors to configure the one or more processors to perform operations comprising [ie. scanner device ("data receiving device"); Weinrib; figures 1 and 8; paragraphs 0027 and 0079]:
setting a duration of a scan window for receiving connection data packets from a advertiser device to a current length [ie. duration ("length"); Weinrib; para 0030 and 0034];
initiating the scan window based on the duration of the scan window at the current length [ie. duration ("length"); Weinrib; para 0030 and 0034]; and
in response to determining that a connection between the data receiving device and advertiser device has not been established based on connection data packets received during the scan window [ie. not receiving the synchronized event, during a scan window, then increase duration of reception window ("scan window"); Weinrib; fig 4; para 0041 and 0050],
performing one or more iterations of a process to adjust the scan window, the process including operations comprising: increasing a duration of the scan window to a new length, the new length being greater than the current length [Weinrib; fig 4; para 0041 , 0050, and 0052]; and
initiating the scan window based on the duration of the scan window at the new length [Weinrib; fig 4 and 5; para 0041, 0050, and 0052],
wherein an amount by which the duration of the scan window is increased is based on an available battery power of the data receiving device [“based on an available battery power” is very broad terminology for basing the duration of the scan window. The instant specification only further states “the scan window is increased by a formulaic amount”; ie. increase reception interval based on available power consumption of the scanner device; Weinrib; para 0018 and 0050-0052].
The Weinrib reference discloses data receiving device but does not specifically disclose the device is for the intended use of an analyte monitoring system and detecting a disconnect between the data receiving device and a sensor control device of the analyte monitoring system, the sensor control device comprising a communication module and an analyte sensor configured to be transcutaneously positioned in contact with a bodily fluid of a subject wearing the sensor control device.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kamath discloses the device is for the intended use of an analyte monitoring system and detecting a disconnect between the data receiving device ("display device") and a sensor control device ("analyte sensor system") of the analyte monitoring system, the sensor control device comprising a communication module and an analyte sensor configured to be transcutaneously positioned in contact with a bodily fluid of a subject wearing the sensor control device [ie. analyte sensor ("transcutaneously positioned in contact with a bodily fluid") disconnected from display device; Kamath; figure 3; para0196-0197, 0212, 0294-0295, and 0316-0317]. The Weinrib and Kamath references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to setup connections in Bluetooth. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of detecting a disconnect of a sensor device, taught by Kamath, into the system, taught by Weinrib. The motivation for doing so would have been to be able to reconnect a connection between devices.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Weinrib-Kamath further discloses subsequent to initiating the scan window based on the duration of the scan window at the current length: establishing a connection with the sensor control device; and in response to establishing the connection, synchronizing a clock maintained by the data receiving device with a clock maintained by the sensor control device [Weinrib; para 0018, 0021, and 0030] [Kamath; para 0282].
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Weinrib-Kamath further discloses the process to adjust the scan window comprises operations further comprising: comparing the duration of the scan window at the new scan window length to a scan window duration threshold [Weinrib; para 0034 and 0041].
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Weinrib-Kamath further discloses the process to adjust the scan window comprises operations further comprising: in response to determining that the duration of the scan window exceeds the scan window duration threshold, resetting the duration of the scan window to a length that is less than the scan window duration threshold [Weinrib; para 0040-0041 and 0052] [ie. reset after disconnect with a predetermined time interval; Kamath; para 0294-0295].
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Weinrib-Kamath further discloses the length that is less than the scan window duration threshold is equal to the duration of the scan window used after the disconnection was detected [Weinrib; para 0040-0041] [Kamath; para 0294-0295].
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Weinrib-Kamath further discloses an amount by which the duration of the scan window is increased is a fixed amount [ie. increased on difference of times; Weinrib; para 0040-0041 and 0050].
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Weinrib-Kamath further discloses the process to adjust the scan window comprises operations further comprising: modifying a start time of the scan window [ie. begins; Weinrib; para 0039-0040] [Kamath; para 0030-0031 and 0179-0180].
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Weinrib-Kamath further discloses subsequent to initiating the scan window based on the duration of the scan window at the current length: establishing a connection with the sensor control device; and in response to establishing the connection, receiving, from the sensor control device, analyte data originating from the analyte sensor [ie. medical data; Weinrib; para 0016 and 0039-0040] [Kamath; abstract; para 0010-0012 and 0176-0177].
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Weinrib-Kamath further discloses outputting a value based on the analyte data for display [ie. medical data; Weinrib; para 0016 and 0039-0040] [Kamath; abstract; para 0010-0012 and 0176-0177].
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Weinrib-Kamath further discloses using the analyte data to modify a therapy administered by the data receiving device [ie. medical data; Weinrib; para 0016 and 0039-0040] [Kamath; para 0030, 0191, and 0196].
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Weinrib-Kamath further discloses the analyte sensor is configured to generate data signals measuring a level of an analyte in the bodily fluid, and wherein the analyte comprises glucose, ketones, lactate, oxygen, hemoglobin A1C, albumin, alcohol, alkaline phosphatase, alanine transaminase, aspartate aminotransferase, bilirubin, blood urea nitrogen, calcium, carbon dioxide, chloride, creatinine, hematocrit, lactate, magnesium, oxygen, pH, phosphorus, potassium, sodium, total protein, or uric acid [ie. medical data; Weinrib; para 0016 and 0039-0040] [Kamath; para 0196 and 0212-0214].
Claims 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamath et al. ("Kamath") [PGPUB 2019/0132801] in view of Zhang et al. (“Zhang”) [PGPUB 2022/0394794].
Regarding claim 14, the Kamath reference discloses a sensor control device of an analyte monitoring system, the sensor control device comprising: one or more processors, an analyte sensor, wherein at least a portion of the analyte sensor is transcutaneously positioned in contact with a bodily flu id of a subject, a communication module, and one or more memories communicatively coupled to the one or more processors, the analyte sensor, and the communication module, and comprising instructions executable by the one or more processors to configure the one or more processors to perform operations comprising [Kamath; figures 1 and 3A-3C; para 0220-0224]:
receiving, via the communication module, a request to initiate a communication session with a data receiving device of the analyte monitoring system, wherein the request to initiate the communication session comprises identity information for the data receiving device [Kamath; para 0227 and 0309];
initiating a communication parameter negotiation procedure with the data receiving device, wherein the negotiation procedure comprises providing the preferred communication parameter configuration to the data receiving device [ie. based on whitelist parameters; Kamath; fig 7B; para 0313-0314, 0378-0380 and 0384]; and
modifying one or more communication parameters for the communication session based on the negotiation procedure [ie. updating a connection parameter; Kamath; para 0313-0316 and 0352].
The Kamath reference discloses the sensor control device requests a setting of the configuration parameter for the communication session from the data receiving device [Kamath; para 0313-0316] but does not specifically disclose a maximum and a minimum setting of the configuration parameter.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Zhang discloses a maximum and a minimum setting of the configuration parameter for the communication session [Zhang; figure 9; para 0270-0271 and 0278]. The Kamath-Zhang references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage Bluetooth connection settings. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of maximum and minimum settings, taught by Zhang, into the system, taught by Kamath. The motivation for doing so would have been to be able to increase throughput speed by knowing max/min of session parameters [Zhang; para 0006].
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Kamath-Zhang reference further discloses initiating the communication session with the data receiving device using the modified communication parameters [Kamath; para 0313-0316 and 0352].
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Kamath-Zhang reference further discloses determining a level of an analyte of the subject based on the analyte sensor; and transmitting the level of the analyte to the data receiving device in the communication session [Kamath; para 0228 and 0314-0316].
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Kamath-Zhang reference further discloses dynamically determining a further modification to the preferred communication parameter configuration for the communication session; conducting a second communication parameter negotiation procedure with the data receiving device, wherein the second negotiation procedure comprises providing the further modification to the preferred communication parameter configuration to the data receiving device; and modifying one or more communication parameters for the communication session based on the second negotiation procedure [ie. requirements; Kamath; fig 9C; para 0264, 0330-0331, and 0413].
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Kamath-Zhang reference further discloses dynamically determining a further modification to the preferred communication parameter configuration for the communication session comprises conducting a communication link quality test based on a plurality of communication parameter configurations [Kamath; para 0257, 0264, 328, and 0413].
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Kamath-Zhang reference further discloses dynamically determining a further modification to the preferred communication parameter configuration for the communication session comprises modifying the preferred communication parameter configuration based on an available battery level of the sensor control device or data receiving device [Kamath; para 0358 and 0379-0380].
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 JASON D CARDONE whose telephone number is (571)272-3933. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8am-4pmEST.
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, Umar Cheema can be reached at 571-270-3037. 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.
/JASON D CARDONE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458