Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/391,248

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TAG-BASED DIAGNOSTIC CHAIN OF CUSTODY MANAGEMENT

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 20, 2023
Examiner
CASILLASHERNANDEZ, OMAR
Art Unit
2689
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Resmed Sensor Technologies Limited
OA Round
3 (Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
484 granted / 631 resolved
+14.7% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
654
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
51.8%
+11.8% vs TC avg
§102
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
§112
14.4%
-25.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 631 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Claim status This action is in response to applicant filed on 03/30/2026. Claims 1, 127, 130 and 131 have been amended. Claims 2-112 and 126 have been cancelled. Claims 1, 113-125 & 127-131 are pending for examination. 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. 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) 130 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagy et al. (US 2020/0273312) in view of Porte et al. (US 2022/0101992) Regarding claim 130: Nagy disclose a method comprising: providing a tag applied to an intended test subject (Fig.1 , item 100, Fig. 10-11, ¶0072), the tag having an anti-tamper authentication feature, wherein the anti-tamper authentication feature is altered when the tag is removed from the test subject, and wherein the anti-tamper authentication feature, when altered, is rendered unsuitable for authentication (¶0083); providing a diagnostic wearable device applied to a test subject, (Fig. 11, item 530, ¶0083); authenticating the tag with the diagnostic wearable device based at least in part on the diagnostic wearable device's interaction with the anti-tamper authentication feature, wherein successful authentication is indicative that the test subject is the intended test subject, and wherein unsuccessful authentication occurs when the anti-tamper authentication feature is altered (¶0083: when wristband applied to the subject, it relays information about the subject such as patient identification (hence authenticating it) as long as the wearable device is not removed, alerted or destroyed). storing sensor data collected from the test subject via the diagnostic wearable device (¶0083); and associating the collected sensor data with the intended test subject based at least in part on the authentication of the tag with the diagnostic wearable device (¶23, ¶0117). Nagy does not explicitly disclose wherein receiving, by a user device, first data from the anti-tamper authentication feature; receiving, by the user device, second data from the diagnostic wearable device, the second data including data collected from the test subject via the diagnostic wearable device. In analogous art regarding wearable devices, Porter disclose wherein receiving, by a user device, first data from the anti-tamper authentication feature; receiving, by the user device, second data from the diagnostic wearable device (¶0250: Next, at a step 2408, in response to receiving the NFC source signal from the smartphone 440, the sensor patch 1200 sends, to the smart phone, a “ready” or other acknowledgement signal (e.g., a handshake signal) to indicate that the sensor patch is powered and is ready to receive configuration data and one or more commands from the smart phone.), the second data including data collected from the test subject via the diagnostic wearable device (¶0253: the sensor patch 1200 executes any commands that the smartphone 440 transmitted and that the demodulator circuit 120 recovered. For example, a recovered command instructs the controller circuit 114 to execute a temperature-sensing routine.) Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include the feature of wherein receiving, by a user device, first data from the anti-tamper authentication feature; receiving, by the user device, second data from the diagnostic wearable device, the second data including data collected from the test subject via the diagnostic wearable device, as disclose by Porter, the further information being the sensor data collected in Nagy. The motivation is ensuring we are dealing with an authorized user before gathering the data. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 113-125 & 127-129 & 131 are allowed. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 03/30/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 113-125 & 127-129 & 131 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1, 113-125 & 127-129 & 131 has been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 130 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR CASILLASHERNANDEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5432. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30AM-4:30PM. 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, Davetta Goins can be reached at (571) 272-2957. 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. /OMAR CASILLASHERNANDEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 20, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 12, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 22, 2026
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 30, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12587003
ON-BOARD DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12568934
CLIP FOR SECURING A LOCATING DEVICE TO A STRAP
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12555466
Remote Controlled Meter for Depicting a Desired Outcome and Methods of Making and Using Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12552546
GAZE-ASSISTED VERIFICATION OF PILOT ACTIVITIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12542345
WIRELESS PASSIVE ELECTRONIC COMPONENT AND ASSOCIATED READING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+18.2%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 631 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month