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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, drawn to a body temperature monitoring smartwatch, in the reply filed on 2/3/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 6-8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/3/26.
Information Disclosure Statement
The accompanying information disclosure statement (IDS) submission(s) is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Interpretation
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:
“a baseline measuring unit” in claim 1;
“a personal variable input unit” in claim 1;
“a body temperature measurement variable adjusting unit” in claim 2;
“a disease type analysis unit” in claim 3;
“a notification unit” in claim 4;
“the body temperature measurement variable adjusting unit” in claim 5.
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.
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 Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: the positive recitation of “a disease type” in line 2 should apparently read “the disease type” for antecedent clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: the positive recitation of “the time of deviation” in line 3 should apparently read “the timing of deviation” for antecedent clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: the positive recitation of “a disease type” in line 2 should apparently read “the disease type” for antecedent clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 positively recites (a) “a baseline measuring unit”, (b) “a personal variable input unit”, and (c) “a controller”. Claim 2 positively recites “(d) “a body temperature measurement variable adjusting unit”. Claim 3 positively recites (e) “a disease type analysis unit”. Claim 4 positively recites (f) “a notification unit”. Claim 5 positively recites (g) “the body temperature measurement variable adjusting unit”.
For claims 1-5, the instant Specification, while providing merely verbatim written support for limitations (a)-(g) in the claims and in pages 6-18, fails to particularly and sufficiently describe, correlate, and/or disclose any specific corresponding structure(s) relating to limitations (a)-(g). As disclosed it is a black-box what structure(s) and/or software(s) may constitute the claimed limitations (a)-(g). Given the lack of sufficiently corresponding structural detail(s) for the limitations (a)-(g), demonstration of possession of the claimed invention has not been established, rendering a lack of written description.
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 1-5 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.
Claim 1 positively recites (a) “a baseline measuring unit”, (b) “a personal variable input unit”, and (c) “a controller”. Claim 2 positively recites “(d) “a body temperature measurement variable adjusting unit”. Claim 3 positively recites (e) “a disease type analysis unit”. Claim 4 positively recites (f) “a notification unit”. Claim 5 positively recites (g) “the body temperature measurement variable adjusting unit”.
For claims 1-5, the instant Specification, while providing verbatim written support for limitations (a)-(g) in the claims and in pages 6-18, fails to particularly and sufficiently describe, correlate, and/or disclose any specific corresponding structure(s) relating to limitations (a)-(g). As disclosed it is a black-box what structure(s) and/or software(s) may constitute the claimed limitations (a)-(g). Given the lack of sufficiently corresponding structural detail(s) for the limitations (a)-(g), the scope of the claims is indeterminate with respect to what may be explicitly, implicitly, inherently, and/or inferentially required or necessarily excluded. One of ordinary skill in light of the Specification would not be apprised of the metes and bounds of the scope of the claimed invention, claiming black-box type limitations (a)-(g) in the absence of corresponding disclosed structure(s). Thus, the claims are indefinite.
Claim 5 positively recites the limitation "the body temperature measurement variable adjusting unit" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more, wherein the abstract idea is a mental process of identifying disease based on temperature determination. Although the claimed system requires unit(s) and a controller, these are unsupported with description such that they may purely be potentially transitory software instead of physical structure.
For independent claim 1, the claim(s) recite(s) system with a controller comparing and analyzing body temperature to determine if the temperature is within a normal range and identifying as a disease type based on the temperature parameters. As broadly as claimed, and particularly in light of the lack of written description and indefiniteness hereinabove, the controller may be reasonably considered as the judicial exception of a mental process performable within the human mind, including by observation, evaluation, judgement and opinion forming, or by a human using pen and paper (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) subsection III). For example, at least, these limitations are nothing more than a medical professional capturing data , printing it out, and using the data to mentally extract, classify or learn from data features to determine a disease based on temperature.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the executed functionality, as broadly as claimed, are not tied to nor required to be performed, executed, or programmed on a special purpose computer. Further, the judicial exception is not even required to be performed on or tied to a mere generic processor.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the preliminary structure/steps of measuring temperature with a smartwatch and inputting age and gender of a user are well-known, routine and conventional amounting to insignificant data gathering as pre-solution activity.
Depending claims 2-5 inherit and do not remedy the non-statutory deficiency noted above, despite further specifying functionality related to determination, disease notification or alert, or measurement status, these could merely be provided verbally and/or by intangible software. Thus, claims 2-5 do not integrate into a practical application nor add significantly more, such that the claims remain merely an abstract idea.
In the event claims 1-5 may potentially be directed towards software, the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because as broadly as claimed the claims read on a transitory signal per se. See MPEP 2106.03(I).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yin et al. (US 2022/0240864 A1, hereinafter Yin).
For claim 1, Yin discloses a body temperature monitoring system (Fig 2) ([0030-0094]) based on a smart watch (Fig 7), the system comprising inter alia:
a baseline measuring unit (22) (Fig 2) ([0030-0049]) configured to convert information on body temperature of a user, measured at predetermined intervals (Fig 2) ([0030-0049]), into data;
a personal variable input unit (24) (Fig 2) configured to store information on age and gender of the user (Fig 2) ([0030-0049]); and
a controller (36,38) (Fig 2) ([0030-0094]) configured to compare and analyze a body temperature value converted by the baseline measuring unit and a normal body temperature range derived by the personal variable input unit (Fig 2) ([0030-0049]),
wherein the controller is further configured to:
determine whether the user's current body temperature falls within the normal body temperature range based on information produced from the baseline measuring unit and the personal variable input unit (Fig 2) ([0030-0049]); and
identify a disease type (42) (Fig 2) (Fig 2) ([0030-0049]) by analyzing a duration, a value, and a timing of deviation of the user's body temperature from the normal body temperature range (Fig 2) ([0030-0049]).
For claim 2, Yin discloses the body temperature monitoring system of claim 1, wherein in the determining of whether the user's current body temperature falls within the normal body temperature range, the controller communicates with a body temperature measurement variable adjusting unit (34) (Fig 2) ([0030-0049]), which takes into account, judgement variables, information on a body location for temperature measurement, information on physical activity, stress-related information, temperature measurement data taking into account an oxygen dissociation curve, information on a decreasing trend in human body temperature, and information on environment temperature (Fig 2) ([0030-0049]).
For claim 3, Yin discloses the body temperature monitoring system of claim 1, wherein the controller communicates with a disease type analysis unit (32) (Fig 2) ([0030-0049]) where information on a disease type based on the duration, value, and time of deviation of the user's body temperature from the normal body temperature range are stored in advance (Fig 2) ([0030-0049]).
For claim 4, Yin discloses the body temperature monitoring system of claim 3, wherein when the disease type analysis unit determines a disease type of the user, the controller communicates with a notification unit (smartwatch and/or smartphone Fig 7), which sends an alert signal to the user, to guide the user with the disease type and countermeasures for the disease (Fig 2) ([0030-0049]).
For claim 5, Yin discloses the body temperature monitoring system of claim 1, wherein when the body temperature measurement variable adjusting unit sends a signal indicating that adjustment of the user's body temperature measurement variables has been completed (Fig 2) ([0030-0049]), the controller compares and analyzes the body temperature value converted by the baseline measuring unit and the normal body temperature range derived by the personal variable input unit (Fig 2) ([0030-0049]).
Conclusion
The cited prior art made of record on the accompanying PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, relating to means for disease indication based on temperature evaluation in conjunction with an individual’s physiological parameters.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeffrey G. Hoekstra whose telephone number is (571)272-7232. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday from 5am-3pm 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, Charles A. Marmor II can be reached at (571)272-4730. 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.
Jeffrey G. Hoekstra
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3791
/JEFFREY G. HOEKSTRA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791