DETAILED ACTION
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 Amendment
The action is in response to amendments filed on 04/14/2026. Claims 1 and 8 have been amended. Claims 2, 4, and 5-7 have been cancelled. Claims 9-10 have been newly added. Claims 1, 3, 8-10 are pending and examined below.
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 8, and claims dependent thereof, 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.
Regarding claim 8, the claim recites “a muscle oxygen saturation recovery system” and then further recites “the muscle oxygen saturation recovery method comprising”. Thus the claim is claiming both an apparatus claim and a method claim. As such it is unclear as to whether the claim is an apparatus or method claim. As such the claim is indefinite.
Regarding claim 8, the claim recites “the muscle oxygen saturation detection device is configured to perform the muscle oxygen saturation detection method according to claim 1” but does not recite any of the physical elements to perform the method such as a memory, processor, etc. As such the claim is indefinite as it is unclear as to how the method would be performed on this detection system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 is allowed.
Regarding claim 1, the prior art fails to teach or suggest “after notifying the recovery device of turning-on, continue to determine a muscle oxygen saturation of the tissue to be measured, judging whether an early warning condition is satisfied based on the continuously determined muscle oxygen saturation within a preset time period, and a preset rising amplitude, and issuing an early warning prompt when the early warning condition is satisfied, wherein the early warning prompt comprises information for indicating that a rising amplitude of the muscle oxygen saturation is too slow” in combination with the other limitations of the claim. As such claim 1 is allowable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 04/14/2026, with respect to the claim objections and prior art rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim objections and prior art rejections have been withdrawn.
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 ABID A MUSTANSIR whose telephone number is (408)918-7647. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10 am to 6 pm Pacific Time.
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, Jason Sims can be reached at 571-272-7540. 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.
/ABID A MUSTANSIR/ Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights