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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 4/22/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
In communications filed on 4/22/2026, claims 1-4 and 15-18 are presented for examination. Claims 1 and 15 are independent.
Amended claim(s): 1-4, 15-18.
Applicants’ arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks filed 4/22/2026, with respect to claim(s) rejected under prior art have been considered but are moot in view of new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by Applicants’ amendment to the claim(s). Newly cited art Slaby (US 20140279528 A1) teaches charging and activating a fingerprint sensor of a wearable device when the wearable device is placed on the base of a charging station (Slaby: Fig. 3, ¶19-¶20)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-4, 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230148716 A1 (hereinafter ‘Zhou’) in view of US 20130029640 A1 (hereinafter ‘Wong’) in view of US 20140279528 A1 (hereinafter ‘Slaby’) in view of US 20170286661 A1 (hereinafter ‘Seza’).
As regards claim 1, Zhou (US 20230148716 A1) discloses: A charging device, comprising: a base configured to receive a wearable device, the wearable device configured to acquire physiological data from a user; (Zhou: Figs. 2, 7-8, ¶5-¶10, ¶81-¶83)
a charging component configured to transfer power through the base to the wearable device to charge a rechargeable battery of the wearable device; (Zhou: Figs. 2, 7-8, ¶5-¶10, ¶81-¶83)
However, Zhou does not but in analogous art, Wong (US 20130029640 A1) a fingerprint reader device; and (Wong: Fig. 1, ¶18, i.e., the charging system with a fingerprint sensor)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Zhou to include a charging system with a fingerprint sensor to authenticate a user of the mobile device that can be accessed and charged as taught by Wong with the motivation to prevent unauthorized access to the mobile device (Wong: Fig. 1, ¶4, ¶18-¶32)
Zhou et al in combination with an analogous art, Slaby (US 20140279528 A1) teaches: one or more processors communicatively coupled with the charging component, the fingerprint reader device, or both, the one or more processors configured to: activate the fingerprint reader device based at least in part on determining that the wearable device is positioned on the base of the charging device; (Slaby: Fig. 3, ¶19-¶20, i.e., the wearable device including the fingerprint sensor that gets powered when the wearable device placed on the charging base)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Zhou et al to include a charging system to charge and activate a wearable device and associated fingerprint sensor when the device is placed on the charging base as taught by Slaby with the motivation to perform user authentication (Slaby: Fig. 3, ¶19-¶20)
Zhou et al combination further teaches: receive a fingerprint scan from the fingerprint reader device based at least in part on activating the fingerprint reader device; (Wong: Fig. 1, ¶4, ¶18-¶30, i.e., the charging system with a fingerprint sensor wherein the fingerprint sensor performs authentication. See also, Slaby: Fig. 3, ¶19-¶20)
authenticate the user based at least in part on matching the fingerprint scan to a reference fingerprint scan associated with the user; and (Wong: Fig. 1, ¶4, ¶18-¶30, i.e., the charging system with a fingerprint sensor wherein the fingerprint sensor performs authentication based on registered fingerprint of the user)
Zhou et al in combination with Seza (US 20170286661 A1) further teaches: transmit one or more signals to the wearable device based at least in part on authenticating the user, the one or more signals comprising an authorization for the wearable device to transfer the physiological data of the user from the wearable device to a user device. (Seza: ¶5-¶12, ¶22-¶23, i.e., signaling an authorization signal, based on successful authentication of a user, to the wearable device to collect physiological data from the wearable device)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Zhou to an authorization indicator to a wearable device to collect data from the device as taught by Seza with the motivation to only collect data after user authentication (Seza: 5-¶12, ¶22-¶23)
Claim 15 recites substantially the same features recited in claim 1 above and is rejected based on the rationale discussed in the rejection.
As regards claim 2, Zhou et al in combination further teaches the charging device of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: determine that the wearable device is positioned on the base of the charging device based at least in part on an initiation of a charging procedure to transfer power from the charging component to the wearable device. (Zhou: Figs. 2, 7-8, ¶5-¶10, ¶81-¶83. See also Wong: Fig. 1, ¶4, ¶18-¶32. See also Slaby: Fig. 3, ¶19-¶20)
Claim 16 recites substantially the same features recited in claim 2 above and is rejected based on the rationale discussed in the rejection.
As regards claim 3, Zhou et al in combination further teaches the charging device of claim 1, further comprising: a user input device, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive one or more user inputs via the user input device, wherein activating the fingerprint reader device is further based at least in part on the one or more user inputs (Zhou: Figs. 2, 7-8, ¶5-¶10, ¶81-¶83. See also Wong: Fig. 1, ¶4, ¶18-¶32. Seza: ¶5-¶12, ¶22-¶23, ¶42, ¶51. Slaby: Fig. 3, ¶19-¶20)
Claim 17 recites substantially the same features recited in claim 3 above and is rejected based on the rationale discussed in the rejection.
As regards claim 4, Zhou et al in combination further teaches the charging device of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: identify a contact on a surface of the fingerprint reader device, wherein activating the fingerprint reader device is further based at least in part on identifying the contact. (Zhou: Figs. 2, 7-8, ¶5-¶10, ¶81-¶83. See also Wong: Fig. 1, ¶4, ¶18-¶32. Seza: ¶5-¶12, ¶22-¶23, ¶42, ¶51. Slaby: Fig. 3, ¶19-¶20)
Claim 18 recites substantially the same features recited in claim 4 above and is rejected based on the rationale discussed in the rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED A ZAIDI whose telephone number is (571)270-5995. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday: 5:30AM-5:30PM.
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, Jeffrey Nickerson can be reached at (469) 295-9235. 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.
/SYED A ZAIDI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2432
Prosecution Insights