DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-13, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tahara et al. (US 2019/0076064) in view of Toriyama et al. (US 2009/0322484).
As to claims 1 and 18, Tahara teaches a biometric data measurement system ([0001]) comprising: an annular biometric sensor (2200) that includes: a main body having an annular shape (Fig. 22 - 2200) so as to be mountable on a finger or a wrist of a user ([0252-0253]), a sensor unit in the main body and configured to measure biometric data including blood pressure ([0253]), and a sensor-side short-range wireless communication unit (2230); and a portable control unit ([0252] - smartphone 2100) configured to communicate with the biometric sensor and including ([0256] - communication unit 2160): an image capturing unit configured to capture an image (2120), a display unit (2150) configured to prompt the user ([0260]) gripping the portable control unit with a hand on which the annular biometric sensor is mounted to capture an image of a face of the user ([0260]), and to display an image captured by the image capturing unit (Fig. 23), an inclination sensor (2140) configured to detect an inclination of the portable control unit from a vertical direction ([0259]), a unit-side short-range wireless communication unit (2160) configured to communicate with the annular biometric sensor when the annular biometric sensor is located within a predetermined range (inherent as any wireless communication has a finite range), and a controller (2510) configured to: determine whether or not the portable control unit is gripped by the hand on which the annular biometric sensor is mounted ([0102-0103]), determine whether or not a measurement posture of the user is sufficient ([0303] - determines when the cuff and the heart of the user is at the same height) from a position of the face of the user in the image ([0100], [0293]), and the inclination of the portable control unit from the vertical direction ([0304] - determining the angle of inclination of the display unit as to the gravitational direction), control the biometric data measurement system based on a determination result as to whether or not the portable control unit is gripped by the hand on which the annular biometric sensor is mounted ([0103], [0293]), and a determination result as to whether or not the measurement posture of the user is sufficient, and acquire the biometric data including the blood pressure ([0102-0103]).
Tahara fails to teach that the determination of the sufficiency of the posture of the user based on a wireless communication state with the annular biometric sensor, as well as the two units having an NFC module, and a controller being configured to determine whether or not that portable unit is gripped by the hand on which the annular biometric sensor is mounted on based on whether or not NFC communication with the annular biometric sensor is possible. Instead, Tahara teaches the use of a microphone (2130) that is built into the portable control unit itself (Fig. 20) to ensure that the portable control unit and the cuff is used on the same hand ([0103], [0275]). However, Tahara explicitly recognizes the importance of ensuring that both the biometric sensor and the portable control unit is on the same arm ([0103]). Toriyama teaches a system for communicating between a portable control unit ([0023] - mobile phone) and a secondary device ([0023] - noncontact reader/writer device) using NFC technology ([0023]). Toriyama teaches that NFC has a communication distance of about 10 cm ([0008]). As such, it would have been obvious to modify Tahara with Toriyama to utilize NFC communications to take advantage of a limited distance which, when distances between devices exceed the limit, would serve as an indication that the sensor and the portable control unit is not located on the same arm, as an obvious substitution yielding similar results or as a layer of redundancy in addition to the use of the audio determining unit that can be better utilized in different environments, such as a noisy room.
As to claims 2 and 19, the above combination inherently results in the sensor-side short-range wireless communication unit being configured to communicate with the portable control unit when the portable control unit is located within a predetermined range, as it is noted above that NFC communications have a range of 10 cm (Toriyama - [0008]).
As to claim 5, the examiner gives official notice that it would be obvious to place the wireless communication unit within the main body of the sensor to ensure that it remains protected from various environmental elements.
As to claim 6, Tahara teaches the controller of the portable control unit is configured to acquire prestored physical information of the user, and to determine whether or not the measurement posture of the user is sufficient based on the acquired prestored physical information ([0257]; [0274]).
As to claim 7, Tahara teaches the controller of the portable control unit is configured to determine that the measurement posture of the user is not sufficient when a difference in a height between the annular biometric sensor and a heart of the user is out of a predetermined range ([0269], [0303]), and when an inclination of a trunk of the user from the vertical direction is out of a predetermined range ([0262], [0280]).
As to claim 8, Tahara teaches the display unit is configured to graphically display recommended ranges of a display position of the face and a display size of the face (Fig. 23; [0340]) and wherein: the controller is configured to recognize the face of the user in the image ([0260] - 2152), and the display unit is configured to perform a notification as to whether or not the display position of the face and the display size of the face are within the recommended ranges ([0260])
As to claim 9, Tahara teaches the display unit is configured to present whether or not each of the inclination of the portable control unit ([0129]) and the inclination of the trunk of the user is within a predetermined range ([0099]; [0291]).
As to claim 10, the above combination teaches the annular biometric sensor further includes: a determination unit (Tahara - 2510) configured to determine whether or not the annular biometric sensor is mounted on the finger or the wrist of the user (Since the NFC taught by Toriyama has an effective range, any receipt of data would be a determination that it’s being mounted on the user), and a sensor-side communication unit (Tahara - 2230) configured to transmit and receive data to and from the portable control unit (Tahara - [0253]).
As to claim 11, the above combination teaches the sensor-side communication unit (Tahara - 2230) is configured to transmit a determination result as to whether or not the annular biometric sensor is mounted on the finger or the wrist of the user user (Since the NFC taught by Toriyama has an effective range, any receipt of data would be a determination that it’s being mounted on the user), and the controller is configured to prevent a determination of the measurement posture of the user when the annular biometric sensor is not mounted on the finger or the wrist of the user according to the determination result (Tahara - [0103]).
As to claim 12, Tahara teaches the biometric data further includes at least one of a blood glucose level, a pulse, respiration, a pulse wave, an oxygen saturation level, a body surface temperature, and an amount of activity of the user ([0332]).
As to claim 13, Tahara teaches controller is further configured to calculate a reliability of the acquired biometric data based on the determination result of the measurement posture of the user ([0274]).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tahara et al. (US 2019/0076064) in view of Toriyama et al. (US 2009/0322484), and further in view of Park et al. (US 2015/0082406).
As to claim 4, the above combination fails to teach that each of the sensor-side short-range wireless communication unit and the unit-side short-range wireless communication unit includes a Bluetooth module, and the controller of the portable control unit is configured to determine whether or not the portable control unit is gripped by the hand on which the annular biometric sensor is mounted based on whether or not a received signal strength indicator of radio waves transmitted from the annular biometric sensor is equal to or greater than a predetermined value. However, Park teaches a system in which Bluetooth is incorporated into various separate devices such as a smartphone (120) and a smart watch (100) and in which the smart watch may determine its distance to the smartphone based on a power level of a received signal such as a received signal strength indicator ([0027], [0061]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to further modify the above combination with Park to utilize a Bluetooth communication setup which would also allow for the determination of a distance between various communicating devices as an obvious substitution yielding similar results or yet another layer of redundancy to ensure that the devices are being properly used.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tahara et al. (US 2019/0076064) in view of Toriyama et al. (US 2009/0322484), and further in view of Zemel (US 2020/0196881).
As to claim 14, the above combination fails to teach the controller is configured to correct the biometric data based on the determination result of the measurement posture of the user. Zemel teaches a device for measuring blood pressure (Abstract). Zemel teaches that when the measurement site is not at heart level, the measured blood pressure is different due to hydrostatic bias, and that if the measurement occurs at a distance above or below the heart, the resulting measurement values can be corrected based on the determined distance ([0020]). It would have been obvious to modify the above combination with Zemel to allow for data correction based on the measurement posture of the user, such that the device does not require the user to be in a narrow range of height difference to utilize the device, which may not always be feasible for every user.
Claim(s) 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tahara et al. (US 2019/0076064) in view of Toriyama et al. (US 2009/0322484), and further in view of Persidsky et al. (US 2018/0256074).
As to claim 15, the above combination fails to teach the inclination sensor is configured to detect the inclination of the portable control unit from the vertical direction when the portable control unit is in close contact with the trunk of the user. Persidsky teaches a device in which the posture of the body trunk can be detected using a sensor incorporating an angle sensor for measuring user posture and worn directly on the trunk ([0026]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to utilize the angle sensor taught by Tahara to enable measurement of the vertical direction by making contact with the trunk of the user, and utilize an already existing device that is capable of directly measuring the inclination of the device.
As to claim 16, the combination results in the controller being configured to determine whether or not the inclination of the trunk of the user is within a predetermined range based on the detected inclination of the portable control unit from the vertical direction ([0262], [0280]).
As to claim 17, Tahara teaches the display unit is configured to display a determination result by the controller ([0101], [0260]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/3/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
In the combination of Tahara and Toriyama, Tahara explicitly teaches the determination of the separate devices being situated near each other. Toriyama is brought in for its teaching of NFC for it’s short range wireless communications. While applicant notes Tahara utilizes a microphone to confirm proximity, the use of NFC inherently allows for confirmation of proximity simply by determining whether communications is possible.
For further proof, see: “Near Field Communication in the real world” (June 15, 2006) – Note that while the publication date is not explicitly listed, it refers to the year 2004 as a past date (p5) and 2010 as a future date (p4), with Google listing the publication date as June 15th, 2006. The paper states that NFC functions by performing a “handshake” between two devices that are brought close together, within a few centimeters. As such, communication is established on the very basis of a determination that the two devices are in close enough proximity such that communication is possible.
While applicant has argued that there’s no “logic” within Toriyama to determine same-hand grip of the two devices, the effective range of NFC being 10 cm or less, and the fact that it functions by establishing a handshake, something that can only occur within the limited range, means that when applied to the devices of Tahara, they are inherently indicative of being on the same hand. As such, the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CHRISTIAN JANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3820. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (7-3:30 EST).
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, Robert Chen can be reached at 571-272-3672. 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.
CHRISTIAN JANG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3791
/CHRISTIAN JANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791 2/20/26