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 .
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 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.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-14 are pending and under consideration for patentability.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted on 16 October 2023 has been acknowledged and considered by the Examiner.
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.
Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou (US 2014/0031662 A1) in view of Higashimura et al. (US 2019/0374115 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Chou describes a biological information measurement device used by being attached to a wrist of a human body ([0009], figure 4A), the biological information measurement device comprising:
a main body including at least a power source unit (figure 2, housing 18 containing controlling circuitry 10)
a first electrode (figure 6A, electrodes 14)
a second electrode (figure 6A, electrodes 14)
an electrocardiographic waveform measurement unit configured to measure an electrocardiographic waveform of the human body based on a potential difference when the first electrode and the second electrode are in contact with the human body ([0035]: “controlling circuitry 10 is implemented to perform the blood pressure measurement and the electrocardiogram measurement via the connected cuff 12 and the electrodes 14”)
a first cuff configured to apply a force compressing an artery present in the wrist in a state of being attached to the wrist (figure 6A, cuff portion 12 acts as the “first cuff” as recited)
a second cuff located on a side closer to the wrist than the first cuff in the state of being attached to the wrist and configured to detect a pressure change caused by pulsation of the artery (figure 6A, inner elastic clamp 60 acts as the “second cuff” as recited; [0039])
a blood pressure measurement unit configured to measure a blood pressure of the human body based on an internal pressure of the second cuff ([0009]), wherein the second electrode is provided on the pressing unit so as to be capable of coming into contact with the wrist when the force compressing the artery is applied by the first cuff in the state of being attached to the wrist ([0009], [0014])
Regarding claim 1, Chou does not explicitly disclose a pressing unit disposed between the first cuff and the second cuff and configured to press the second cuff when the force compressing the artery is applied by the first cuff in the state of being attached to the wrist. However, Higashimura also describes a biological information measurement device ([0040]), including a pressing unit disposed within a cuff and configured to press a portion of the cuff when force compressing an artery is applied to the cuff in the state of being attached to the wrist ([0048], back plate 22). As Higashimura is also directed towards a biological information measurement device and is in a similar field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate a pressing unit similar to that described by Higashimura when using the device described by Chou, as doing so advantageously provides a reinforcing element to the resulting device.
Regarding claim 5, Higashimura describes wherein the pressing unit is formed on a surface of the first cuff facing the second cuff (figure 2).
Claims 2, 3, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou in view of Higashimura, further in view of Cho et al. (US 2008/0228089 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Chou in view of Higashimura suggests the biological information measurement device according to claim 1, but neither Chou nor Higashimura explicitly disclose a third electrode configured to remove noise from the electrocardiographic waveform. However, Cho also describes a biological information measurement device ([0030]), including the use of three electrodes for detecting an electrocardiographic waveform and removing noise from the waveform ([0052]). As Cho is also directed towards a biological information measurement device and is in a similar field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate a noise removal step similar to that described by Cho when using the device described by Chou and Higashimura, as doing so advantageously results in a more accurate electrocardiographic waveform.
Regarding claim 3, although Chou, Higashimura, and Cho do not explicitly disclose wherein the third electrode is provided on the pressing unit so as to be capable of coming into contact with the wrist when the force compressing the artery is applied by the first cuff in the state of being attached to the wrist, Chou does disclose configuring electrodes such that they are capable of coming into contact with the wrist when the force compressing the artery is applied by the first cuff in the state of being attached to the wrist ([0014]). Therefore, the Examiner respectfully submits that it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to position the third electrode on the pressing unit, such that it could also come into contact with the wrist when the cuff is compressed, as doing so would be a matter of rearranging the position of the third electrode without modifying the operation of the device (please see MPEP 2144.04). One advantageous result of such a configuration would be to ensure that the third electrode could also acquire the necessary biological information for further analysis.
Regarding claims 11 and 12, Higashimura describes wherein the pressing unit is formed on a surface of the first cuff facing the second cuff (figure 2).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou in view of Higashimura, further in view of Allgeyer (US 2011/0275915 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Chou in view of Higashimura suggests the biological information measurement device according to claim 1, but neither Chou nor Higashimura explicitly disclose wherein the pressing unit is made of a conductive material and serves as the second electrode. However, Allgeyer also describes a biological information measurement device ([0025]), including the use of a pressing unit made of a conductive material which serves as an electrode ([0022], figure 2, wristband 10 containing conductive rivets 30 on conductive electrodes 20). As Allgeyer is also directed towards a biological information measurement device and is in a similar field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to manufacture the pressing unit out of a conductive material which may serve as an electrode, similar to that described by Allgeyer, when using the device described by Chou and Higashimura, as doing so advantageously allows the resulting device to both apply the compressive force on the wrist as well as gather the biological information from the artery present in the wrist.
Claims 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou in view of Higashimura, further in view of Soundarapandian et al. (US 2014/0257049 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Chou in view of Higashimura suggests the biological information measurement device according to claim 1, including wherein the biological information measurement device has a configuration in which the second electrode is disposed on an inside of the first cuff and the main body is disposed on an outside of the first cuff with a side close to the wrist as the inside (Chou, figure 6A, one of the electrodes 14 is on the inside of the cuff and the housing 18 is on the outside of the cuff). Although Chou also describes the use of a cable for connecting the housing to the cuff ([0035]), neither Chou nor Higashimura explicitly disclose wherein the first cuff includes a wiring connecting portion configured to route wiring electrically connecting at least the second electrode and the main body to each other between the inside and the outside of the first cuff. However, Soundarapandian also describes a biological information measurement device ([0010]), including the use of a wiring connecting portion configured to route wiring electrically connecting at least one electrode with a main body of a cuff ([0014], [0016]). As Soundarapandian is also directed towards a biological information measurement device and is in a similar field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use a wired connection similar to that described by Soundarapandian when using the device described by Chou and Higashimura, as doing so advantageously allows for a reliable connection between the electrodes and the controlling circuitry.
Regarding claim 7, Soundarapandian describes wherein the wiring is provided on a flexible substrate ([0014], the wiring is mounted on a strap configured to wrap around a user’s wrist, thereby being flexible).
Regarding claim 8, although Chou, Higashimura, and Soundarapandian do not explicitly disclose wherein the flexible substrate serves as the pressing unit, the Examiner respectfully submits that, as Soundarapandian describes the substrate as pressing against the user’s wrist ([0014]), it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the flexible substrate as the pressing unit, as doing so advantageously allows the electrode mounted on the substrate to contact the user’s wrist and obtain the relevant physiological data from the user.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou in view of Higashimura and Cho, further in view of Allgeyer.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Chou in view of Higashimura and Cho suggests the biological information measurement device according to claim 2 and claim 3, but Chou, Higashimura, and Cho do not explicitly disclose wherein the pressing unit is made of a conductive material and serves as the second electrode. However, Allgeyer also describes a biological information measurement device ([0025]), including the use of a pressing unit made of a conductive material which serves as an electrode ([0022], figure 2, wristband 10 containing conductive rivets 30 on conductive electrodes 20). As Allgeyer is also directed towards a biological information measurement device and is in a similar field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to manufacture the pressing unit out of a conductive material which may serve as an electrode, similar to that described by Allgeyer, when using the device described by Chou, Higashimura, and Cho, as doing so advantageously allows the resulting device to both apply the compressive force on the wrist as well as gather the biological information from the artery present in the wrist.
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou in view of Higashimura and Cho, further in view of Soundarapandian.
Regarding claims 13 and 14, Chou in view of Higashimura and Cho suggests the biological information measurement device according to claim 2 and claim 3, including wherein the biological information measurement device has a configuration in which the second electrode is disposed on an inside of the first cuff and the main body is disposed on an outside of the first cuff with a side close to the wrist as the inside (Chou, figure 6A, one of the electrodes 14 is on the inside of the cuff and the housing 18 is on the outside of the cuff). Although Chou also describes the use of a cable for connecting the housing to the cuff ([0035]), Chou, Higashimura, and Cho do not explicitly disclose wherein the first cuff includes a wiring connecting portion configured to route wiring electrically connecting at least the second electrode and the main body to each other between the inside and the outside of the first cuff. However, Soundarapandian also describes a biological information measurement device ([0010]), including the use of a wiring connecting portion configured to route wiring electrically connecting at least one electrode with a main body of a cuff ([0014], [0016]). As Soundarapandian is also directed towards a biological information measurement device and is in a similar field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use a wired connection similar to that described by Soundarapandian when using the device described by Chou, Higashimura, and Cho, as doing so advantageously allows for a reliable connection between the electrodes and the controlling circuitry.
Statement on Communication via Internet
Communications via Internet e-mail are at the discretion of the applicant. Without a written authorization by applicant in place, the USPTO will not respond via Internet e-mail to any Internet correspondence which contains information subject to the confidentiality requirement as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 122. Where a written authorization is given by the applicant, communications via Internet e-mail, other than those under 35 U.S.C. 132 or which otherwise require a signature, may be used. USPTO employees are NOT permitted to initiate communications with applicants via Internet e-mail unless there is a written authorization of record in the patent application by the applicant. The following is a sample authorization form which may be used by applicant:
“Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with the undersigned and practitioners in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 and 37 CFR 1.34 concerning any subject matter of this application by video conferencing, instant messaging, or electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.”
Please refer to MPEP 502.03 for guidance on Communications via Internet.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Ankit D. Tejani, whose telephone number is 571-272-5140. The Examiner may normally be reached on Monday through Friday, 8:30AM through 5:00PM 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, Carl Layno, can be reached by telephone at 571-272-4949. 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 at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (in USA or Canada) or 571-272-1000.
/Ankit D Tejani/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796