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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments merit new grounds for rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Bhagat et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0177353) hereinafter referred to as Bhagat; in view of Lam et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0329639) hereinafter referred to as Lam.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 2-7 and 9-22 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.
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) 2-7, 9-10, 15-16, and 18-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bhagat et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0177353) hereinafter referred to as Bhagat; in view of Lam et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0329639) hereinafter referred to as Lam.
Regarding claim 2, Bhagat teaches a wearable ring device (Abstract “vital signs monitoring ring”), comprising:
a flexible housing (¶[0056], Fig. 8A-D, elements 8100 and 8300 outer and inner layers including element 1200 “ring shell” also disclosed as flexible in ¶[0052]), wherein the flexible housing comprises:
an outer housing defining an outer curved surface of the wearable ring device (¶[0056], Fig. 8A-D, element 8100 “outer layer” which curves as it is annular);
an inner housing defining an inner curved surface of the wearable ring device (¶[0056], Fig. 8A-D, element 8300 “inner layer” which curves as it is annular), wherein a perimeter, a shape, or both, of at least portions of the outer curved surface and the inner curved surface are configured to change in response to the elastic deformation (¶[0056] each of these are flexible and therefore will bend in response to elastic deformation);
one or more apertures disposed within the inner curved surface of the flexible housing (¶[0052] elements 1240 “windows”, ¶[0079] ring housing comprises at least two windows); and
a printed circuit board disposed at least partially within the flexible housing (¶[0056], Fig. 8A-D, element 8200 “PCBA layer”) wherein the printed circuit board comprises:
one or more sensors configured to acquire physiological data from a user through the one or more apertures (¶[0052] windows for operation of sensors on the PCBA layer, for example, allowing the PPG sensor to transmit and detect light therethrough, ¶[0080]).
Bhagat does not teach, specifically, elastic expansion of the flexible housing in response to application of a force in a radial direction, wherein the elastic deformation of the flexible housing is based at least in part on one or more material properties of one or more materials of the flexible housing.
Attention is brought to the Lam reference, which teaches elastic expansion of a flexible housing in response to application of a force in a radial direction, wherein the elastic deformation of the flexible housing is based at least in part on one or more material properties of one or more materials of the flexible housing (¶[0052]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the flexible ring of Bhagat to use elastic material, as taught by Lam, because Lam teaches that an elastic structure can be adapted to most fingers for elastic/soft stretch self-adaptive adjustments to provide a tighter fit between the finger and the elastic bands through the elastic material properties of the stretchable material, improving wearing stability, comfort, and accuracy of measurement (Lam, ¶[0052]).
Regarding claim 3, Bhagat as modified teaches the wearable ring device of claim 2.
Lam further teaches wherein the flexible housing is configured to expand to fit multiple finger sizes (¶[0052]).
Regarding claim 4, Bhagat as modified teaches the wearable ring device of claim 2.
Lam further teaches wherein the flexible housing is configured to return to an original shape based on removal of the force (¶[0052], it is further noted that “elastic deformation” is a term of art for deformation which is specifically reversed when force is removed, as opposed to plastic deformation).
Regarding claim 5, Bhagat as modified teaches the wearable ring device of claim 4.
Lam further teaches wherein the original shape is associated with a first finger size of a plurality of finger sizes (¶[0052])
Regarding claim 6, Bhagat as modified teaches the wearable ring device of claim 2.
Lam further teaches wherein the application of the force is based at least in part on the user inserting their finger into the wearable ring device (¶[0052]).
Regarding claim 7, Bhagat as modified teaches the wearable ring device of claim 2.
Bhagat further teaches wherein the flexible housing comprises a flexible ring-shaped housing (¶[0056], Fig. 8A-D, element 8100 “outer layer” which curves as it is annular, including element 1200 “ring shell” also disclosed as flexible in ¶[0052]).
Regarding claim 9, Bhagat as modified teaches the wearable ring device of claim 2.
Bhagat further teaches wherein the physiological data comprises heart rate data (¶[0042]), heart rate variability data (¶[0042]), temperature data (¶[0042]), motion data (¶[0044]), sleep data (¶[0051]), respiration data (¶[0042]), or any combination thereof.
Regarding claim 10, Bhagat as modified teaches the wearable ring device of claim 2.
Bhagat teaches further comprising one or more components disposed at least partially within the flexible housing of the wearable ring device that are configured to interact with one or more external devices (¶[0080] wireless component configured to transmit at least sensor data to a monitoring device).
Regarding claim 15, Bhagat as modified teaches the wearable ring device of claim 2.
Bhagat further teaches wherein the printed circuit board further comprises: one or more flexible regions that are elastically deformable (Fig. 8A-D, element 8200 “PCBA layer” circuit board flexed into a circle), wherein a surface of the printed circuit board is coupled with an interior surface of the inner housing to maintain alignment between the one or more sensors and the one or more apertures during the elastic deformation of the flexible housing (¶[0052] windows for operation of sensors on the PCBA layer, for example, allowing the PPG sensor to transmit and detect light therethrough, ¶[0080]).
Regarding claim 16, Bhagat as modified teaches the wearable ring device of claim 2.
Bhagat further teaches wherein the one or more sensors are configured to acquire the physiological data from the user based at least in part on light transmitted and received through the one or more apertures (¶[0052] windows for operation of sensors on the PCBA layer, for example, allowing the PPG sensor to transmit and detect light therethrough, ¶[0080]).
Regarding claim 18, Bhagat as modified teaches the wearable ring device of claim 2.
Bhagat further teaches wherein the outer housing comprising a first set of material properties including at least a first stiffness, and wherein the inner housing comprises a second set of material properties including at least a second stiffness, wherein the elastic deformation of the flexible housing is based at least in part on the first set of material properties and the second set of material properties (¶[0056], Fig. 8A-D, elements 8100 and 8300 outer and inner layers including element 1200 “ring shell” also disclosed as flexible in ¶[0052] and the deformation/flexibility of these elements are dependent on their material properties as being semi-flexible or flexible).
Regarding claim 19, Bhagat as modified teaches the wearable ring device of claim 2.
Bhagat further teaches wherein the flexible housing comprises a first radial portion and a second radial portion, wherein the elastic deformation of the flexible housing comprises an elastic deformation of the first radial portion, and wherein the second radial portion remains rigid during the elastic deformation of the first radial portion (¶[0056], Fig. 8A-D, elements 8100 and 8300 outer and inner layers including element 1200 “ring shell” also disclosed as flexible in ¶[0052] and the deformation/flexibility of these elements are dependent on their material properties as being semi-flexible or flexible).
Regarding claims 20-22, the claims are directed to a device comprising substantially the same subject matter as claims 2 and 18-19 and are rejected under substantially the same sections of Bhagat and Lam.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bhagat and Lam as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Houwelingen et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0397828) hereinafter referred to as Houwelingen.
Regarding claim 11, Lusted as modified teaches the wearable ring device of claim 2.
Bhagat as modified does not explicitly teach wherein the flexible housing further comprises: a transparent material disposed within the one or more apertures, wherein the transparent material is configured to enable transmission and reception of light through the one or more apertures to and from the one or more sensors.
Attention is brought to the Houwelingen reference, which teaches a flexible housing comprising: a transparent material disposed within the one or more apertures, wherein the transparent material is configured to enable transmission and reception of light through the one or more apertures to and from the one or more sensors (¶[0070]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the sensing ring of Bhagat as modified to include transparent housing material, as taught by Houwelingen, to “allow the sensing components visual contact to the body part (Houwelingen ¶[0070]).
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bhagat and Lam as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Allen et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0284754) hereinafter referred to as Allen.
Regarding claim 12, Bhagat as modified teaches the wearable ring device of claim 2.
Bhagat as modified does not teach wherein the wearable ring device is configured to elastically deform from a first shape to at least a second shape in response to the force applied to the wearable ring device in the radial direction, and wherein the flexible housing is configured to exert a resistive force against the force applied to wearable ring device, wherein a magnitude of the resistive force increases as the wearable ring device is elastically deformed from the first shape to the second shape.
Attention is drawn to the Allen reference, which teaches a wearable ring device configured to elastically deform from a first shape to at least a second shape in response to the force applied to the wearable ring device in the radial direction (¶[0025]), and wherein the flexible housing is configured to exert a resistive force against the force applied to wearable ring device (¶[0043], non-Hookean deformation, Fig. 4, ¶[0060]), wherein a magnitude of the resistive force increases as the wearable ring device is elastically deformed from the first shape to the second shape (¶[0043], non-Hookean deformation, Fig. 4, ¶[0060]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the deformation of the ring of Bhagat as modified to use non-Hookean deformation curves, as taught by Allen, because the fit of the ring on a finger is improved (Allen ¶[0029])
Regarding claim 13, Bhagat as modifed teaches the wearable ring device of claim 2.
Bhagat does not state wherein the flexible housing is elastically deformable in response to both a compressive force and a stretching force.
It is the Examiner’s position that a flexible housing is flexible to any of compressive or stretching force, however, in the interest of compact prosecution, attention is drawn to the Allen reference, which teaches wherein the flexible housing is elastically deformable in response to both a compressive force and a stretching force (¶[0060]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the deformation of the ring of Bhagat as modified to have elastic deformation in both stretching and compression, as taught by Allen, because the fit of the ring on a finger is improved (Allen ¶[0029]).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bhagat and Lam as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Sanchez et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 11,909,238) hereinafter referred to as Sanchez.
Regarding claim 14, Bhagat as modified teaches the wearable ring device of claim 2.
Bhagat does not teach wherein the printed circuit board further comprises: one or more radio frequency components configured to perform wireless communications, the one or more radio frequency components electrically coupled with the one or more sensors.
Attention is brought to the Sanchez reference, which teaches wherein the printed circuit board further comprises: one or more radio frequency components configured to perform wireless communications, the one or more radio frequency components electrically coupled with the one or more sensors (col. 14, lines 6-15, col. 15, lines 52-57).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the wireless transmission of Bhagat to include radio frequency components, as taught by Sanchez, to provide advantages such as additional power management and smart charging (Sanchez, col. 15, lines 52-63) which improves efficiency (Sanchez, col. 16, lines 20-25).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0155385 to Lim et al. teaches a semi-rigid wearable ring with elastic material portions.
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 AMANDA L STEINBERG whose telephone number is (303)297-4783. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-4.
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, Unsu Jung can be reached at (571) 272-8506. 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.
/AMANDA L STEINBERG/ Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Prosecution Insights