DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 Amendment
As to the amended claims filed on 6/25/26, the previous 112(f) interpretation is withdrawn.
Regarding the claim amendments and remarks filed on 6/25/26, the previous 101 rejection has been modified to address the claim amendments.
As to the claim amendments and remarks, the previous prior art rejection is withdrawn and a new prior art rejection has been set forth to address the claim amendments.
Claim Status
Claims 1, 3-10 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 3-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1 is rejected based on the following analysis:
Step 2A, Prong One: Identify the law of nature/natural phenomenon/abstract ideas.
Claim 1 recites the abstract ideas of a computer/controller/processor which determines a combination of light quantities, determines the value based on correspondence relationship, determine the rate of change of the measurement value based on the calibration curve, and determining a corrected measurement based on the rate of change (see the last four clauses of the claim). Each of these determination steps are mental processes and/or mathematical algorithms that involve evaluation of values in a lookup table (see table 1) and then comparing values to data along a curve and then applying a mathematical correction based on the determinations.
MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)III is clear that using a computer/controller/processor to perform the abstract idea does not preclude the steps from being considered an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong Two: Has the abstract idea been integrated into a particular practical application?
No. Once the device determines the corrected measurement value, then no action is taken. Therefore, there is no particular practical application.
The claim does recite a housing, a sensor, light source(s), and camera. However, these are just being used to gather data that is then used in the abstract idea. However, data gathering to be used in the abstract idea does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because data gathering is insignificant extra-solution activity, and not a particular practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Additionally, this is recited at such a high level of generality that it amounts to just generally linking the abstract idea to a field of use per MPEP 2106.05(h), which are not particular practical applications.
Additionally, the claim recites a memory which stores a calibration curve and relationship information. However, storing data in a memory that is then used in the abstract idea is just generally linking the abstract idea to the field of endeavor per MPEP 2106.05(h) and also insignificant pre-solution activity, similar to the alarm in Parker v. Flook. See MPEP 2106.04(d) and 2106.05(g).
The abstract ideas are performed by a computer/controller/processor, but performing the abstract idea on a general-purpose computer is not enough to integrate the exception into a practical application (MPEP 2106.05(b)I.).
Step 2B: Does the claim recite any elements which are significantly more than the abstract idea?
The claim recites the additional elements of a housing, a sensor, light source, and camera. These additional elements do not amount to significantly more as they are well-understood, routine, and conventional (WURC) in the art as evidenced by Jena et al (US 20140072189; hereinafter “Jena”; already of record). Jena teaches a housing 30; Fig. 1, [69]. Jena teaches sensor 140/141 which acquires temperature and then generates light at light source 143 where the light correlates to information sensed by the sensor; Fig. 8, [82-88]. Jena also teaches a sensor 135 that acquires information and then displays correlated information to the light source 137/138; [79-88]. Jena teaches that the sensors sense out of range conditions and then correlate and convey the sensed conditions via light; [82-88, 147]. Jena teaches a measurement device as a mobile phone 32 with a camera and with a controller, where the mobile device determines and identifies the light and correlates the imaged light to out range conditions; [7, 9-11, 13, 20-23, 26, 71, 86-87, 89, 96, 147], Fig. 1. See also the prior art rejection below.
The dependent claims 3-10 undergo a similar analysis and do not appear to resolve any of the above issues, and are therefore similarly rejected. Claims 4, 5, 6, 7, 10 all describe features of the abstract ideas under step 2A prong one, where there is no further particular practical application. Claims 3, 8, 9 all further describe features of the light or housing, where these are still all used to gather data under step 2A prong two and do not amount to a particular practical application, and are also WURC under step 2B and therefore do not amount to significantly more (see citations to Jena in art rejection below).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 7 have been amended to recite a memory storing a calibration curve that indicates a relationship between a value of the related information and “a rate of change of a measurement value of the measurement target due to the value of the related information” (lines 17-20) and determining a corrected measurement value “based on the rate of change of the measurement target due to the value of the related information” (lines 32-34). Support for the newly added limitation of the instant claims was not found by the examiner in the original disclosure, as no mention of a calibration curve or determination of correction of measurement are recited as being related to “a rate of change of a measurement value due to the value of the related information” exists in the disclosure. The examiner notes that [56] does provide support for “a change rate of the measurement value due to the environmental temperature”, which is narrower than the recitations of the instant claims. Thus, the limitations related to “a rate of change of a measurement value due to the value of the related information” are considered new matter because applicants do not have broad support for rates of change due to all related information.
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.
Claims 1, 3-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jena et al (US 20140072189; hereinafter “Jena”; already of record) alone, or alternatively in view of Klein et al (US 20180180552; hereinafter “Klein’) or alternatively in view of Naito et al (US 20230086075; hereinafter “Naito”) or alternatively in view of Watanabe et al (US 20130078738; hereinafter “Watanabe”) or alternatively in view of Konig, M (US 20230349877; herefinater “Konig”).
As to claim 1, Jena teaches the measurement system (Jena; Fig. 1, abstract), comprising:
a housing that includes: a related information acquisition sensor configured to acquire related information, which is information related to measurement of a measurement target, a display light source including a first light emitter configured to emit a first quantity of first light and a second light emitter configured to emit a second quantity of second light, the display light source configured to generate display light as a combination of the first quantity of the first light and the second quantity of the second light, corresponding to the related information; and a light source controller configured to control the first light emitter to emit the first quantity of the first light in combination with the second light emitter to emit the second quantity of the second light, to emit the display light corresponding to the related information (Jena teaches a housing 30; Fig. 1, [69]. Jena teaches sensor 140/141 which acquires temperature and then generates light at light source 143 where the light correlates to information sensed by the sensor; Fig. 8, [82-88]. Jena further teaches that multiple light sources can emit light which is useful to detect different parameters or different thresholds of the same parameter; [84, 88]. Jena teaches that the light sources 143, 137/138, 124 include controller circuits; [75, 79-88], Fig. 8. Jena also teaches a sensor 135 that acquires information and then displays correlated information to the light source 137/138, and also calibrating the device; [79-88]. Jena teaches that the sensors sense out of range conditions and then correlate and convey the sensed conditions via light; [82-88, 147]. Jena also teaches LEDs 124 in combination with the calibration target 102; [75, 86, 88]); and
a measurement device that includes: a memory configured to store correspondence relationship between the related information and the display light, and calibration curve information indicating a relationship between a value of the related information and a rate of change of a measurement value of the measurement target due to the value of the related information, a camera configured to image the display light to acquire an image, and a processor configured to: determine the combination of the first quantity of light and the second quantity of light of the display light based on the image, determine the value of the related information corresponding to the combination of the display light based on the correspondence relationship, determine the change of the measurement value of the measurement target due to the value of the related information based on the calibration curve information, and determine a corrected measurement value of the measurement target based on the change of the measurement value of the measurement target due to the value of the related information (Jena teaches a measurement device as a mobile phone 32 with a camera and with a controller, where the mobile device determines and identifies the light and correlates the imaged light to out range conditions; [7, 9-11, 13, 20-23, 26, 71, 86-87, 89, 96, 147], Fig. 1, 15. The mobile device of Jena would have memory; [128]. Jena teaches that the device can be calibrated, where colors are known and determined via calibration which would correlate a curve of color intensities with values that indicate temperature/low battery or other parameters; [86-88, 128]. Jena teaches that the camera uses the calibration info and then the detected light values and also reads the test strip in accordance with the calibrated info; [77, 97-99], Fig. 1. Jena also teaches correcting measurement values; [82, 86, 88, 127-128, 153], claim 11, see also [128-138]).
Note: The instant Claims contain a large amount of functional language (ex: “configured to…”). However, functional language does not add any further structure to an apparatus beyond a capability. Apparatus claims must distinguish over the prior art in terms of structure rather than function (see MPEP 2114 and 2173.05(g)). Therefore, if the prior art structure is capable of performing the function, then the prior art meets the limitation in the claims.
Although Jena teaches determining the change of measurement values and the determination of corrected measurement values, Jena does not specifically teach that these are based on the rate of change of the measurement values. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the determination of change of values and measurement correction based on pre-calibrated data on temperature or other parameters of Jena to have accounted for the rate of change of measurement values since Jena teaches that temperature and other parameters can indicate out of threshold problems (see above) and this would ensure measurement accuracy. Alternatively, Klein teaches the analogous art of a measurement system (Klein; [22]) where the rate of change of the measurement values is accounted for in the analysis routine (Klein; [33, 53, 209]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the determination of change of values and measurement correction based on pre-calibrated data on temperature or other parameters of Jena to have accounted for the rate of change of measurement values as in Klein because Klein teaches that the rate of change helps predict the test results (Klein; [33, 53]). Alternatively, Naito teaches the analogous art of a measurement system and optical measurement of data and that rate of change of measurement data can be used to correct the data thereby ensuring that temperature does not affect the measurement and providing better accuracy; [123]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the determination of change of values and measurement correction based on pre-calibrated data on temperature or other parameters of Jena to have accounted for the rate of change of measurement values as in Naito because Naito teaches that accounting for the rate of change of measurement data enables the correction of the data thereby ensuring that temperature does not affect the measurement and providing better accuracy (Naito; [123]). Alternatively, Watanabe teaches the analogous art of a measurement system and reducing the difference of temperature dependence on measurement signal values by correcting measurements by accounting for rate of measurement signal changes due to temperature changes; [20]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the determination of change of values and measurement correction based on pre-calibrated data on temperature or other parameters of Jena to have accounted for the rate of change of measurement values as in Watanabe because Watanabe teaches that accounting for the rate of measurement reduces the difference of temperature dependence on the measurement signal (Watanabe; [20]). Alternatively, Konig teaches the analogous art of an analyzing unit configured to measure a concentration signal in dependence of a variation in a change rate of the temperature during a calibration of the sensor and to analyze this variation in the concentration signal and setting up an error correction function to compensate for the temperature-change-rate-dependent concentration signal variation; [21]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the determination of change of values and measurement correction based on pre-calibrated data on temperature or other parameters of Jena to have accounted for the rate of change of measurement values as in Konig because Konig teaches that accounting for the rate of change of the measurement values enables correction to compensate for the temperature dependent signal (Konig; [21]).
As to claim 3, Jena teaches the measurement system according to claim 1, wherein the display light source is configured to generate reference light having a reference light quantity as a reference of intensity of the display light, and the light source controller is configured to switch between the display light and the reference light to cause the display light source to emit light (Jena teaches lights 143, 137/138, and 124 where the light sources are switched to display light whereby there is a reference that is used to generate various intensities and colors of the different lights; [79-88]).
As to claim 4, Jena teaches the measurement system according to claim 3, wherein the processor is configured to determine the intensity of the display light imaged by the camera based on the reference light imaged by the camera (Jena teaches that the lights can change intensity, and also correlates the color wavelength, all of which is read by the controller; [86, 88]).
As to claim 5, Jena teaches the measurement system according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to determine a first position of the first light emitter and a second position of the second light emitter based on the image (Jena teaches sensor 140/141 which acquires temperature and then generates light at light source 143 where the light correlates to information sensed by the sensor; Fig. 8, [82-88]. Jena also teaches a sensor 135 that acquires information and then displays correlated information to the light source 137/138, and also calibrating the device; [79-88]. Jena teaches that the sensors sense out of range conditions and then correlate and convey the sensed conditions via light; [82-88, 147]. Jena also teaches LEDs 124 in combination with the calibration target 102; [75, 86, 88]. The positions of the light sources would be evaluated such that the controller would correlate each light with its corresponding position).
As to claim 6, Jena teaches the measurement system according to claim 5, wherein the processor is configured to determine the related information corresponding to the combination of the first quantity of the first light emitted by the first light emitter at the first position and the second quantity of the second light emitted by the second light emitter at the second position (Jena teaches sensor 140/141 which acquires temperature and then generates light at light source 143 where the light correlates to information sensed by the sensor; Fig. 8, [82-88]. Jena also teaches a sensor 135 that acquires information and then displays correlated information to the light source 137/138, and also calibrating the device; [79-88]. Jena teaches that the sensors sense out of range conditions and then correlate and convey the sensed conditions via light; [82-88, 147]. Jena also teaches LEDs 124 in combination with the calibration target 102; [75, 86, 88]. The positions of the light sources would be evaluated such that the controller would correlate each light with its corresponding position).
As to claim 7, Jena teaches the measurement system according to claim 1, wherein a holder that houses a test strip, to which the measurement target is applied, is provided in the housing, and the processor is configured to measure the measurement target applied to the test strip housed in the holder to acquire the measurement value, and correct the measurement value acquired by the measurement unit based on based on the rate of change of the measurement value of the measurement target due to the value of the related information (The modification of Jena is discussed in claim 1 above. Jena teaches a housing 30 which includes a holding structure for holding test strip 56; Fig. 1. Jena teaches that the camera uses the calibration info and then the detected light values and also reads the test strip in accordance with the calibrated info; [77, 97-99], Fig. 1. Jena also teaches correcting/calibrating measurement values; [82, 86, 88, 127-128, 153], claim 11).
As to claim 8, Jena teaches the measurement system according to claim 7, wherein the housing includes an attachment part, in which a measurement window is formed and the measurement device is attached to the attachment part such that the camera faces the measurement window (Jena teaches a measurement window 64/71/72 to enable viewing with the camera of the mobile phone; [71-74, 95], Fig. 2-5).
As to claim 9, Jena teaches the measurement system according to claim 8, wherein the measurement window is formed at a position at which the test strip and display light source are simultaneously imagable by the camera attached to the attachment part (Jena teaches a measurement window 64/71/72 to enable viewing with the camera of the mobile phone; [71-74, 95], Fig. 2-5. Jena teaches a measurement device as a mobile phone 32 with a camera that determines and identifies the light and correlates the imaged light to out range conditions and also images the test strip; [7, 9-11, 13, 20-23, 26, 71, 86-87, 89, 96, 147], Fig. 1, 15).
As to claim 10, Jena teaches the measurement system according to claim 1, wherein the related information is an environmental temperature, and the related information acquisition sensor is a temperature sensor (Jena teaches a temperature sensor; Fig. 8, [82-88]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the previous 35 USC 101 rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants argue on page 8 of their remarks that the communication of the environmental measurement between the light controller and measurement device provides a technical improvement. Applicants also argue that correcting the measurement value improves the measurement accuracy. The examiner respectfully disagrees. First, the examples pointed to in the specification by applicant are solely directed to temperature (see pl. 7 of arguments that discusses the change due to temperature and p. 8 of arguments which discusses avoiding the need for temperature-sensing circuitry). However, claim 1 does not require temperature, or even an environmental condition and the related information could be any information. See MPEP 2106.04(a) details that the claim must reflect the disclosed improvement. Note specifically MPEP 2106.05(a), 4th paragraph – the claim must include the components or steps of the invention that provide the improvement described in the specification. In this case, claim 1 does not recite the environmental temperature that is recited in the specification. Also, the determination of the corrected measurement value cannot be the alleged improvement, because determining the corrected measurement value is the abstract idea itself. The actual measurement is not being improved, but rather the method for determining correction, an abstract idea, is being improved. When evaluating an improvement, note that the improvement cannot be the abstract idea but must be in a particular technology. See MPEP 2106.05(a), paragraphs 4 - 7. Further, the alleged improvement is not an application of the abstract idea. The abstract ideas are the “determining” steps which rely on the light created to make the determinations. The sensing and displaying of light is not an application or integration of the abstract idea into a particular practical application. Rather, these are just being used to gather data that is then used in the abstract idea. However, data gathering to be used in the abstract idea does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because data gathering is insignificant extra-solution activity, and not a particular practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Additionally, these is recited at such a high level of generality that it amounts to just generally linking the abstract idea to a field of use per MPEP 2106.05(h), which are not particular practical applications. The configuration of the sensing and display light is well-understood, routine, and conventional under step 2B as evidenced by prior art Jena (see 101 rejection above).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the prior art rejection have been considered, but are moot because the arguments are towards the amended claims and not the current ground of rejection.
In order to advance prosecution, the examiner will address the relevant arguments that do not pertain to the claim amendments. Applicants argue that the light source of Jena is either active or inactive and cannot be two different light sources as claimed. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Jena teaches light sources Jena teaches sensor 140/141 which acquires temperature and then generates light at light source 143 where the light correlates to information sensed by the sensor; Fig. 8, [82-88]. Jena further teaches that multiple light sources can emit light which is useful to detect different parameters or different thresholds of the same parameter; [84, 88]. Jena teaches that the light sources 143, 137/138, 124 include controller circuits; [75, 79-88], Fig. 8. Jena also teaches a sensor 135 that acquires information and then displays correlated information to the light source 137/138, and also calibrating the device; [79-88]. Jena teaches that the sensors sense out of range conditions and then correlate and convey the sensed conditions via light; [82-88, 147].
Other References Cited
The prior art of made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure include;
Clay et al (US 20230001409; hereinafter “Clay”) teaches multiple temperature indicator lights that can transmit the temperature to detectors, thereby showing a correlation between emitted light from multiple lights and sensed temperature; [69, 72].
Conclusion
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 BENJAMIN R WHATLEY whose telephone number is (571) 272-9892. The examiner can normally be reached Mon- Fri 8am-5pm.
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, Charles Capozzi can be reached at (571) 270-3638. 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.
/Benjamin R Whatley/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1798
Prosecution Insights