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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 20 recites “step of detecting detect a human connection” which seems to be grammatically incorrect; a suggested edit is “step of detecting .
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-4, 6-8, 11-14, 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Anderson (US 20180296143 A1; 10/18/2018).
Regarding claim 1, Anderson teaches a wearable device ([0041]), comprising:
a case ([0041]; inherent in wearable device);
at least one sensor at least partially disposed in the case and configured to detect health data of a user ([0012]; [0041]; [0036]); and
at least one processor in communication with the at least one sensor (Fig. 2), the at least one processor configured to receive the health data and transmit a communication to initiate a response from at least one predetermined contact based upon the health data (Fig. 2-3B; [0029] “intervention steps”; [00890] “predetermined contacts…provide a prompt for them to respond”).
Regarding claim 2, Anderson teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to utilize at least one algorithm parameter to determine an occurrence of an abnormal health event (Fig. 3A; Fig. 3C; Fig. 4; [0013]-[0015]; [0029] “Trend analysis”).
Regarding claim 3, Anderson teaches wherein the at least one algorithm parameter is based upon a predisposition of a user (Fig. 3A; Fig. 3C; Fig. 4; [0071]-[0072]; [0075]-[0076]; [0084]).
Regarding claim 4, Anderson teaches wherein the at least one processor is in communication with at least one storage device configured to store at least one of the health data, the at least one algorithm parameter, and personal information of the at least one predetermined contact (Fig. 2; Fig. 4; Fig. 5E; [0043]; [0111]).
Regarding claim 6, Anderson teaches wherein the at least one sensor is configured to detect the health data at one or more of a predetermined frequency ([0077]), a customizable frequency ([0077]), and on demand ([0084]; [0061]; inherent for wearable device such as activity tracker, blood pressure monitor, or hear rate monitor).
Regarding claim 7, Anderson teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to generate at least one alert communication via an input and output system of the wearable device during an occurrence of an abnormal health (Fig. 2; Fig. 6A-6B; [0037] “display”; [0040]; [0041]; [0079]).
Regarding claim 8, Anderson teaches a graphical user interface in communication with the at least one processor and an input and output system of the wearable device (Fig. 2; Fig. 6A-6B; [0037] “display”; [0040]; [0041]; [0079]).
Regarding claim 11, Anderson teaches a method of initiating a response, comprising steps of:
providing a wearable device including at least one sensor and at least one processor (Fig. 2-3B; [0041]);
detecting health data of a user via the at least one sensor (Fig. 2-3B; [0041]); and
transmitting a communication to initiate a response from at least one predetermined contact based upon the health data (Fig. 2-3B; [0029] “intervention steps”; [00890] “predetermined contacts…provide a prompt for them to respond”).
Regarding claim 12, Anderson teaches the step of determining, via the at least one processor, an occurrence of an abnormal health event using at least one algorithm parameter (Fig. 3A; Fig. 3C; Fig. 4; [0013]-[0015]; [0029] “Trend analysis”).
Regarding claim 13, Anderson teaches wherein the at least one algorithm parameter is based upon a predisposition of a user (Fig. 3A; Fig. 3C; Fig. 4; [0071]-[0072]; [0075]-[0076]; [0084]).
Regarding claim 14, Anderson teaches the step of storing at least one of the health data, at least one algorithm parameter, and personal information of the at least one predetermined contact (Fig. 2; Fig. 4; Fig. 5E; [0043]; [0111]).
Regarding claim 16, Anderson teaches wherein the at least one sensor is configured to detect the health data at one or more of a predetermined frequency ([0077]), a customizable frequency ([0077]), and on demand ([0084]; [0061]; inherent for wearable device such as activity tracker, blood pressure monitor, or hear rate monitor).
Regarding claim 17, Anderson teaches the step of outputting at least one alert communication via an input and output system of the wearable device during an occurrence of an abnormal health event (Fig. 2; Fig. 6A-6B; [0037] “display”; [0040]; [0041]; [0079]).
Regarding claim 18, Anderson teaches wherein the wearable device further includes a graphical user interface in communication with the at least one processor and an input and output system of the wearable device (Fig. 2; Fig. 6A-6B; [0037] “display”; [0040]; [0041]; [0079]).
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) 5, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson as applied to claim(s) 2, 11 above, in view of Fernando (US 20200390402 A1; 12/17/2020).
Regarding claim 5, Anderson does not teach wherein the wearable device is configured to use machine learning to at least one of generate and adjust the at least one algorithm parameter. However, Fernando teaches in the same field of endeavor ([0018]) wherein the wearable device is configured to use machine learning to at least one of generate and adjust the at least one algorithm parameter ([0030]; [0047]). Thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Anderson to include this feature as taught by Fernando because this enables identifying and detecting patterns based on previous history ([0047]).
Regarding claim 15, Anderson does not teach the step of using machine learning to at least one of generate and adjust at least one algorithm parameter. However, Fernando teaches in the same field of endeavor ([0018]) the step of using machine learning to at least one of generate and adjust at least one algorithm parameter ([0030]; [0047]). Thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Anderson to include this feature as taught by Fernando because this enables identifying and detecting patterns based on previous history ([0047]).
Claim(s) 9, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson as applied to claim(s) 1, 11 above, in view of Kamath (US 20190132801 A1; 5/2/2019).
Regarding claim 9, Anderson does not teach wherein the communication transmitted by the at least one processor is configured to bypass at least one setting of an electronic device of the at least one predetermined contact. However, Kamath teaches in the same field of endeavor (Abstract; Fig. 1-2A; [0506]-[0508]) wherein the communication transmitted by the at least one processor is configured to bypass at least one setting of an electronic device of the at least one predetermined contact ([0508]). Thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Anderson to include this feature as taught by Kamath because this enables emergency alert as needed ([0508]).
Regarding claim 19, Anderson does not teach wherein the communication transmitted by the at least one processor is configured to bypass at least one setting of an electronic device of the at least one predetermined contact. However, Kamath teaches in the same field of endeavor (Abstract; Fig. 1-2A; [0506]-[0508]) wherein the communication transmitted by the at least one processor is configured to bypass at least one setting of an electronic device of the at least one predetermined contact ([0508]). Thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Anderson to include this feature as taught by Kamath because this enables emergency alert as needed ([0508]).
Claim(s) 10, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson as applied to claim(s) 1, 11 above, in view of Rajasekhar (US 20200135334 A1; 4/30/2020).
Regarding claim 10, Anderson does not teach wherein the at least one sensor is configured to detect a human connection. Note that Anderson teaches using touch for control ([0056]). However, Rajasekhar teaches in the same field of endeavor (Abstract; Fig. 1A; Fig. 10) wherein the at least one sensor is configured to detect a human connection ([0106]). Thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Anderson to include this feature as taught by Rajasekhar because this enables patient control of the sensing (Fig. 3A-3B; [0106]).
Regarding claim 20, Anderson does not teach the step of detecting detect a human connection using the at least one sensor. However, Rajasekhar teaches in the same field of endeavor (Abstract; Fig. 1A; Fig. 10) the step of detecting detect a human connection using the at least one sensor ([0106]). Thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Anderson to include this feature as taught by Rajasekhar because this enables patient control of the sensing (Fig. 3A-3B; [0106]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jonathan T Kuo whose telephone number is (408)918-7534. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10 a.m. - 6 p.m. PT.
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, Niketa Patel can be reached at 571-272-4156. 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.
/JONATHAN T KUO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792