Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/391,838

BIO-SIGNAL MEASUREMENT DEVICE ATTACHABLE TO AND DETACHABLE FROM VARIOUS BODY-WEARABLE/BODY-ATTACHABLE PRODUCTS AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Dec 21, 2023
Examiner
WU, TONG E
Art Unit
3796
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Wellysis Corp.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
447 granted / 640 resolved
At TC average
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
676
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
§103
36.5%
-3.5% vs TC avg
§102
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
§112
24.1%
-15.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 640 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. 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 6 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 6, line 4: “the light emitting unit” lacks proper antecedent basis. A light emitting unit was recited in claim 5, from which claim 6 does not depend. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-11, 13-16, 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Penders (US 2018/0000405). PNG media_image1.png 309 403 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 430 381 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claims 1, 13, 20, Penders discloses the same invention as claimed (Figures 5A and 10A shown above for example), including a bio-signal measurement device (abstract) comprising a sensor that collects a user’s bio-signal (Figure 5A: 18; Paragraph 73), and a dock that is installed on a body-wearable and/or body-attachable product and has a space for mounting the sensor (e.g. Figure 5A: near 50; Paragraph 95), wherein the sensor and the dock are detachable and attachable to each other using magnetism (Paragraph 95, middle: permanent magnet, ferromagnet). Regarding claim 2, Penders discloses a guide member as recited (Paragraph 97). Regarding claims 4, 19, Penders discloses detecting docking state and controlling sensor on/off states as recited (Paragraph 88). Regarding claim 5, Penders discloses a light emitting unit as recited (Paragraph 86). Regarding claims 6, 16, Penders discloses a power supply unit (Paragraph 75) and user input as recited (Paragraph 108). Regarding claims 7, 14, Penders discloses at least two sensor types as recited (Paragraphs 58-62). Regarding claims 8, 18, Penders discloses at least one type of wearable product as recited (Paragraphs 55, 62). Regarding claims 9-10, 13, 20, Penders discloses determining a product type information as recited (Paragraph 87). Regarding claims 11, 15, Penders discloses at least two modes as recited (Paragraphs 16-18, 21). 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Penders (US 2018/0000405) in view of Oleson (US 2015/0342269). Regarding claim 3, Penders does not disclose a detachment groove. However, Oleson teaches including a detachment groove as recited (Figure 6A: at 97), in order to more easily undock the device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Penders as taught by Oleson to include a detachment groove as recited, in order to more easily undock the device. Claim(s) 12, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Penders (US 2018/0000405) in view of Jariwala (US 2022/0265214). Regarding claims 12, 17, Penders discloses the device may be rechargeable (Paragraph 75), but does not disclose the charger and communication circuit as recited. However, Jariwala teaches a wearable sensor system that includes a charger and communication unit as recited (Paragraph 27), in order to recharge the wearable sensor and extract sensor data from the sensor. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Penders as taught by Jariwala to include a charger and communication circuit as recited, in order to recharge the wearable sensor and extract sensor data from the sensor. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Stone (US 2014/0296651) shows a magnetically docking wearable sensor. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eugene T Wu whose telephone number is (571)270-5053. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm. 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, Carl Layno can be reached at 571-272-4949. 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. /Eugene T Wu/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 21, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589243
OCULAR DEVICES AND CONTROLLER INTERFACES FOR OCULAR THERAPY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12558535
ADAPTIVE DEEP BRAIN STIMULATION USING MOVEMENT DESYNCHRONIZATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12558035
SYSTEMS FOR DETECTING FIT OF A WEARABLE DEVICE ON A USER BY MEASURING THE CURRENT DRAW TO AMPLIFY A BIOPOTENTIAL SIGNAL SENSOR AND METHOD OF USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12551106
AUTOMATED DEVICE PAIRING USING BIOMETRIC IDENTIFIER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12551167
TECHNIQUES FOR ADAPTIVE SENSORS OF A WEARABLE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+16.5%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 640 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month