Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/422,914

TECHNIQUES FOR NOISE REDUCTION

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 25, 2024
Examiner
MUSTANSIR, ABID A
Art Unit
3791
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Oura Health OY
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
342 granted / 441 resolved
+7.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
61 currently pending
Career history
502
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.7%
-29.3% vs TC avg
§103
35.9%
-4.1% vs TC avg
§102
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
§112
25.6%
-14.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 441 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . The action is in response to the application filed on 01/25/2024. Claims 1-20 are pending and examined below. 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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by US 20160113529 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Aoyagi”) in view of US 20170119266 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Wong”). Regarding claims 1, 8, 15, Aoyagi teaches a method/an apparatus/non-transitory computer readable medium storing code for noise filtering for a wearable device (abstract; paragraph [0035]), comprising: one or more memories storing processor-executable code (32; paragraph [0036]; Figure 1); and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories (31; paragraph [0036]; Figure 1) and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the apparatus to cause: emitting light from a first set of light emitting elements of the wearable device, wherein the first set of light emitting elements comprises at least a first light emitting element associated with a first wavelength and a second light emitting element associated with a second wavelength different than the first wavelength (paragraph [0031], [0067]-[0069]); emitting light from a second set of light emitting elements of the wearable device, wherein the second set of light emitting elements comprises at least the first light emitting element and a third light emitting element associated with a third wavelength (paragraph [0031], [0067]-[0069]); measuring a first signal comprising a first representation of one or more physiological phenomenon, a first noise component, and a second noise component from the first set of light emitting elements, wherein the first noise component is a common noise component based at least in part on a first penetration depth associated with the first wavelength and the second noise component is based at least in part on a second penetration depth associated with the second wavelength (paragraph [0031], [0067]-[0069]); measuring a second signal comprising a second representation of one or more physiological phenomenon, the first noise component, and a third noise component from the second set of light emitting elements, wherein the third noise component is based at least in part on a third penetration depth association with the third wavelength (paragraph [0031], [0067]-[0069]); removing the first noise component from the first signal and the second signal based at least in part on comparing the first signal and the second signal (paragraph [0035], [0055], [0058]-[0059]); and calculating a third signal based at least in part on removing the first noise component from the first signal and the second signal (paragraph [0035], [0055], [0058]-[0059]); but does not explicitly teach the wearable device is a ring. However, Wong an optical physiological sensor device, teaches the wearable device is a ring that is configured to emit light at depths within a user’s finger (102; paragraph [0071]; Figure 1). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Aoyagi, to have a wearable ring device, as taught by Wong, because the finger provides an effective part of the body to measure a user’s heart rate. Regarding claims 2, 9, 16, Aoyagi, in view of Wong, teaches wherein the first penetration depth is substantially limited to a dermis skin layer of a finger and the second penetration depth substantially reaches an artery within a hypodermis skin layer of the finger (paragraphs [0202]-[2024]; as taught by Wong). Regarding claims 3, 10, 17, Aoyagi, in view of Wong, teaches wherein the first penetration depth is substantially limited to an epidermis skin layer of a finger and the second penetration depth substantially reaches a dermis skin layer of the finger (paragraphs [0202]-[2024]; as taught by Wong). Regarding claims 4, 11, 18, Aoyagi, in view of Wong, teaches wherein the first penetration depth is substantially limited to an epidermis skin layer of a finger and the second penetration depth substantially reaches a dermis skin layer of the finger (paragraph [0031], [0067]-[0069]; as taught by Aoyagi). Regarding claims 5, 12, 19, Aoyagi, in view of Wong, teaches wherein the first penetration depth is substantially limited to an epidermis skin layer of a finger and the second penetration depth substantially reaches a dermis skin layer of the finger (paragraph [0031], [0067]-[0069]; as taught by Aoyagi). Regarding claims 6, 13, 20, Aoyagi, in view of Wong, teaches wherein the one or more physiological phenomenon comprises blood oxygen levels, heart rate measurements, or both. (paragraph [0062]; as taught by Aoyagi). Regarding claims 7 and 14, Aoyagi, in view of Wong, teaches wherein the first noise component corresponds with motion artifacts associated with motion of the wearable ring device (paragraph [0033]). Conclusion 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 25, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594039
ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND METHOD FOR CORRECTING BIOMETRIC DATA ON BASIS OF DISTANCE BETWEEN ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND USER, MEASURED USING AT LEAST ONE SENSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594033
PHOTOELECTRIC DETECTOR, PPG SENSOR, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588815
PHYSIOLOGICAL SIGNAL MONITORING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588875
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SENSING PHYSIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588840
BLOOD OXYGEN CONCENTRATION MEASUREMENT DEVICE AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
78%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+13.5%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 441 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