CTNF 18/496,010 CTNF 98784 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Drawings 06-22-06 The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference signs mentioned in the description: 20, 124, and 224. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification 07-29 AIA The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In paragraph 0030, line 2, “ modular sensor client 124 ” should read “ modular sensor client 12 2 ”. In paragraph 0039, lines 4-5, “ component module 20 ” should read “ component module 20 6 ”. In paragraph 0052, line 4, “ power cable ribbon 202 ” should read “ power cable ribbon 20 4 ” . Appropriate correction is required. 07-44 AIA The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: “ a plurality of artificial nails ” in claim 13, “ layers ” in claim 13, and “ at least two artificial nails ” in claim 14 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-01 AIA 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 7-20 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 claims 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 inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding claim 7, it is unclear how one or more computer processors would be capable of mounting a sensor module of a modular sensing unit to a surface. A processor, as further stated in the instant claim, executes program instructions that are stored on one or more computer-readable media. Therefore, it is unclear how a processor would be capable of performing a physical task, such as mounting a sensor to a surface. The specification provides no further description of how the processor is capable of doing this. Claim 15 is rejected for the same reasoning as for claim 7. Regarding claims 13-14, the specification provides no written description pertaining to the plurality of artificial nails disposed in layers. The specification also provides no written description pertaining to how at least two artificial nails of the plurality of nails are different sensor types from one another. Therefore, it is unclear if artificial nails could be referring to artificial fingernails that attach to an actual fingernail, or if Applicant is referring to a different structure entirely. 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 7-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Both claims 7 and 15 recite that, “ one or more computer processors are capable of…mounting a sensor module of a modular sensing unit to a surface .” Because a processor executes program instructions that are stored on one or more computer-readable media, it is unclear how a processor could perform a physical task like mounting a sensor module to a surface. Therefore, the scope of claims 7-20 is unclear and the claims are indefinite. 07-34-05 AIA Claim 15 recites the limitation " the one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media " in line 3 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 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 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the broadest reasonable interpretation of “ a computer program product (CPP)” in claim 15 encompasses signals per se . The specification does not provide a special definition of a computer program product. As understood in light of the specification, the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim 15 encompasses signals, which are not within one of the four statutory categories of invention. See MPEP 2106.03(I) . It is suggested that claim 15 be amended to recite a “non-transitory” computer program product to overcome this rejection. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-2, 6-8, 12, 15-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Heisig et al. (U.S. PGPub No. 2018/0085061) . Regarding claim 1, Heisig teaches a method (Paragraph 0007, line 2) for measuring data (Paragraph 0007, lines 4-5) utilizing a modular sensing unit (Fig. 6A-6C, Paragraph 0057, line 2, 600 ), the method comprising: mounting (Paragraph 0041, lines 11-13) a sensor module (Fig. 6B, Paragraph 0059, lines 20-21, 604 ) of the modular sensing unit to a surface (Fig. 1-3, Paragraph 0041, line 13, 101/301 ); measuring data of the surface (Paragraph 0074, lines 4-5) via a sensor component (Fig. 6A-6C, Paragraph 0057, lines 8-9, 407 ); transmitting the data from the sensor module to a component module (Fig. 6B, Paragraph 0059, lines 21-22, 605 ) of the modular sensing unit via a power cable ribbon (Fig. 6B, Paragraph 0059, lines 32-33, 606 ); and determining a metric (Paragraph 0041, lines 15-17) by the component module based on the data (Paragraph 0061, lines 5-9). The examiner notes that Heisig discloses that the sensor module can be connected to the component module via a data communications bus ( 606 ) that transfers data between hardware components. Regarding claim 2, Heisig teaches the method (Paragraph 0007, line 2) of claim 1, further comprising: transmitting data from the component module (Paragraph 0041, lines 4-9) to an external source (Paragraph 0041, lines 9-10) via a network adapter (Fig. 6B, Paragraph 0059, line 26) of the modular sensing unit. Regarding claim 6, Heisig teaches the method (Paragraph 0007, line 2) of claim 1, wherein mounting the sensor module of the modular sensing unit to the surface is performed via an adhesive (Paragraph 0041, lines 11-13). Regarding claim 7, Heisig teaches a system (Paragraph 0009, lines 5-7) for a module sensor unit (Fig. 6A-6C, Paragraph 0057, line 2, 600 ), the system comprising: one or more computer processors (Fig. 16, Paragraph 0082, line 6, 1601 ), one or more computer-readable storage media (Fig. 16, Paragraph 0082, line 8, 1607 ), and program instructions (Paragraph 0083, line 3) stored on the one or more of the computer-readable storage media (Paragraph 0083, line 4) for execution by at least one of the one or more processors (Paragraph 0084, lines 4-7) capable of performing a method (Paragraph 0084, lines 1-3), the method comprising: mounting (Paragraph 0041, lines 11-13) a sensor module (Fig. 6B, Paragraph 0059, lines 20-21, 604 ) of a modular sensing unit to a surface (Fig. 1-3, Paragraph 0041, line 13, 101/301 ); measuring data of the surface (Paragraph 0074, lines 4-5) via a sensor component (Fig. 6A-6C, Paragraph 0057, lines 8-9, 407 ); transmitting the data from the sensor module to a component module (Fig. 6B, Paragraph 0059, lines 21-22, 605 ) of the modular sensing unit via a power cable ribbon (Fig. 6B, Paragraph 0059, lines 32-33, 606 ); and determining a metric (Paragraph 0041, lines 15-17) by the component module based on the data (Paragraph 0061, lines 5-9). The examiner notes that Heisig discloses that the sensor module can be connected to the component module via a data communications bus ( 606 ) that transfers data between hardware components. Regarding claim 8, Heisig teaches the system (Paragraph 0009, lines 5-7) of claim 7, further comprising: transmitting data from the component module (Paragraph 0041, lines 4-9) to an external source (Paragraph 0041, lines 9-10) via a network adapter (Fig. 6B, Paragraph 0059, line 26) of the modular sensing unit. Regarding claim 12, Heisig teaches the system (Paragraph 0009, lines 5-7) of claim 7, wherein mounting the sensor module of the modular sensing unit to the surface is performed via an adhesive (Paragraph 0041, lines 11-13). Regarding claim 15, Heisig teaches a computer program product (CPP) (Paragraph 0009, lines 1-3), the CPP comprising: one or more computer-readable storage media (Fig. 16, Paragraph 0082, line 8, 1607 ) and program instructions (Paragraph 0083, line 3) stored on the one or more non-transitory (Paragraph 0087, lines 1-3) computer-readable storage media (Paragraph 0083, line 4) capable of performing a method (Paragraph 0084, lines 1-3), the method comprising: mounting (Paragraph 0041, lines 11-13) a sensor module (Fig. 6B, Paragraph 0059, lines 20-21, 604 ) of a modular sensing unit (Fig. 6A-6C, Paragraph 0057, line 2, 600 ) to a surface (Fig. 1-3, Paragraph 0041, line 13, 101/301 ); measuring data of the surface (Paragraph 0074, lines 4-5) via a sensor component (Fig. 6A-6C, Paragraph 0057, lines 8-9, 407 ); transmitting the data from the sensor module to a component module (Fig. 6B, Paragraph 0059, lines 21-22, 605 ) of the modular sensing unit via a power cable ribbon (Fig. 6B, Paragraph 0059, lines 32-33, 606 ); and determining a metric (Paragraph 0041, lines 15-17) by the component module based on the data (Paragraph 0061, lines 5-9). The examiner notes that Heisig discloses that the sensor module can be connected to the component module via a data communications bus ( 606 ) that transfers data between hardware components. Regarding claim 16, Heisig teaches the CPP (Paragraph 0009, lines 1-3) of claim 15, further comprising: transmitting data from the component module (Paragraph 0041, lines 4-9) to an external source (Paragraph 0041, lines 9-10) via a network adapter (Fig. 6B, Paragraph 0059, line 26) of the modular sensing unit. Regarding claim 20, Heisig teaches the CPP (Paragraph 0009, lines 1-3) of claim 15, wherein mounting the sensor module of the modular sensing unit to the surface is performed via an adhesive (Paragraph 0041, lines 11-13) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 3-4, 9-10, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heisig et al. (U.S. PGPub No. 2018/0085061) in view of Talbot et al. (U.S. PGPub No. 2011/0160553) . Regarding claim 3, Heisig teaches the method (Paragraph 0007, line 2) of claim 2. Heisig does not teach that transmitting data from the component module to an external source via the network adapter is performed by: disconnecting the component module and the power cable ribbon from the modular sensing unit via the power cable ribbon; and connecting the component module to a station unit via the power cable ribbon. Talbot, however, teaches a sensor and monitor system that includes a sensor module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, line 7, 102) and a component module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, line 5, 104 ). Talbot also teaches that the system includes a means for power and data communication between the sensor module and component module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, lines 5 and 7, 110/112 ): the recorder port ( 110 ) and sensor port ( 112 ). Talbot teaches that data can be transmitted from the component module to an external source (Paragraph 0050, lines 2-3, 114 ) wirelessly (Paragraph 0050, lines 1-7). Furthermore, Talbot teaches that the component module and recorder port can be disconnected from the sensing unit via the recorder port (Fig. 4A-5B). Talbot then teaches that the component module can be connected to a station unit (Fig. 4A-4B, Paragraph 0034, lines 12-15, 100 ) via the recorder part and dock receiver ( 108 ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heisig to incorporate the teachings of Talbot to include that the component module and the power cable ribbon can be disconnected from the modular sensing unit via the power cable ribbon; and the component module can be connected to a station unit via the power cable ribbon. Doing so would ensure that a healthcare provider can charge multiple component modules efficiently and in a central location (Paragraph 0033), as recognized by Talbot. Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of recorder/sensor ports of Talbot for the power cable ribbon of Heisig. The Applicant’s specification (Paragraph 0038) states that, “the power cable ribbon may be a communication channel for power and communication between the sensor module and component module.” The recorder/sensor ports disclosed in Talbot provide a power and communication channel between the sensor module and component module. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Regarding claim 4, Heisig teaches the method (Paragraph 0007, line 2) of claim 1. Heisig does not teach the method further comprises: removing the component module and the power cable ribbon from the sensor module via the power cable ribbon; and charging the component module via a station unit and the power cable ribbon. Talbot, however, teaches a sensor and monitor system that includes a sensor module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, line 7, 102) and a component module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, line 5, 104 ). Talbot also teaches that the system includes a means for power and data communication between the sensor module and component module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, lines 5 and 7, 110/112 ): the recorder port ( 110 ) and sensor port ( 112 ). Furthermore, Talbot teaches that the component module and recorder port can be removed from the sensing unit via the recorder port (Fig. 4A-5B). Talbot then teaches that the component module can be connected to a station unit (Fig. 4A-4B, Paragraph 0034, lines 12-15, 100 ) via the recorder part and dock receiver ( 108 ), where the component module can be charged via the station unit (Paragraph 0035, lines 1-7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heisig to incorporate the teachings of Talbot to specify that the method comprises: removing the component module and the power cable ribbon from the sensor module via the power cable ribbon; and charging the component module via a station unit and the power cable ribbon. Doing so would ensure that a healthcare provider can charge multiple component modules efficiently and in a central location (Paragraph 0033), as recognized by Talbot. Regarding claim 9, Heisig teaches the system (Paragraph 0009, lines 5-7) of claim 8. Heisig does not teach that transmitting data from the component module to an external source via the network adapter is performed by: disconnecting the component module and the power cable ribbon from the modular sensing unit via the power cable ribbon; and connecting the component module to a station unit via the power cable ribbon. Talbot, however, teaches a sensor and monitor system that includes a sensor module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, line 7, 102) and a component module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, line 5, 104 ). Talbot also teaches that the system includes a means for power and data communication between the sensor module and component module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, lines 5 and 7, 110/112 ): the recorder port ( 110 ) and sensor port ( 112 ). Talbot teaches that data can be transmitted from the component module to an external source (Paragraph 0050, lines 2-3, 114 ) wirelessly (Paragraph 0050, lines 1-7). Furthermore, Talbot teaches that the component module and recorder port can be disconnected from the sensing unit via the recorder port (Fig. 4A-5B). Talbot then teaches that the component module can be connected to a station unit (Fig. 4A-4B, Paragraph 0034, lines 12-15, 100 ) via the recorder part and dock receiver ( 108 ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heisig to incorporate the teachings of Talbot to include that the component module and the power cable ribbon can be disconnected from the modular sensing unit via the power cable ribbon; and the component module can be connected to a station unit via the power cable ribbon. Doing so would ensure that a healthcare provider can charge multiple component modules efficiently and in a central location (Paragraph 0033), as recognized by Talbot. Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of recorder/sensor ports of Talbot for the power cable ribbon of Heisig. The Applicant’s specification (Paragraph 0038) states that, “the power cable ribbon may be a communication channel for power and communication between the sensor module and component module.” The recorder/sensor ports disclosed in Talbot provide a power and communication channel between the sensor module and component module. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Regarding claim 10, Heisig teaches the system (Paragraph 0009, lines 5-7) of claim 7. Heisig does not teach the system further comprises: removing the component module and the power cable ribbon from the sensor module via the power cable ribbon; and charging the component module via a station unit and the power cable ribbon. Talbot, however, teaches a sensor and monitor system that includes a sensor module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, line 7, 102) and a component module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, line 5, 104 ). Talbot also teaches that the system includes a means for power and data communication between the sensor module and component module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, lines 5 and 7, 110/112 ): the recorder port ( 110 ) and sensor port ( 112 ). Furthermore, Talbot teaches that the component module and recorder port can be removed from the sensing unit via the recorder port (Fig. 4A-5B). Talbot then teaches that the component module can be connected to a station unit (Fig. 4A-4B, Paragraph 0034, lines 12-15, 100 ) via the recorder part and dock receiver ( 108 ), where the component module can be charged via the station unit (Paragraph 0035, lines 1-7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heisig to incorporate the teachings of Talbot to specify that the method comprises: removing the component module and the power cable ribbon from the sensor module via the power cable ribbon; and charging the component module via a station unit and the power cable ribbon. Doing so would ensure that a healthcare provider can charge multiple component modules efficiently and in a central location (Paragraph 0033), as recognized by Talbot. Regarding claim 17, Heisig teaches the CPP (Paragraph 0009, lines 1-3) of claim 16. Heisig does not teach that transmitting data from the component module to an external source via the network adapter is performed by: disconnecting the component module and the power cable ribbon from the modular sensing unit via the power cable ribbon; and connecting the component module to a station unit via the power cable ribbon. Talbot, however, teaches a sensor and monitor system that includes a sensor module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, line 7, 102) and a component module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, line 5, 104 ). Talbot also teaches that the system includes a means for power and data communication between the sensor module and component module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, lines 5 and 7, 110/112 ): the recorder port ( 110 ) and sensor port ( 112 ). Talbot teaches that data can be transmitted from the component module to an external source (Paragraph 0050, lines 2-3, 114 ) wirelessly (Paragraph 0050, lines 1-7). Furthermore, Talbot teaches that the component module and recorder port can be disconnected from the sensing unit via the recorder port (Fig. 4A-5B). Talbot then teaches that the component module can be connected to a station unit (Fig. 4A-4B, Paragraph 0034, lines 12-15, 100 ) via the recorder part and dock receiver ( 108 ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heisig to incorporate the teachings of Talbot to include that the component module and the power cable ribbon can be disconnected from the modular sensing unit via the power cable ribbon; and the component module can be connected to a station unit via the power cable ribbon. Doing so would ensure that a healthcare provider can charge multiple component modules efficiently and in a central location (Paragraph 0033), as recognized by Talbot. Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of recorder/sensor ports of Talbot for the power cable ribbon of Heisig. The Applicant’s specification (Paragraph 0038) states that, “the power cable ribbon may be a communication channel for power and communication between the sensor module and component module.” The recorder/sensor ports disclosed in Talbot provide a power and communication channel between the sensor module and component module. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Regarding claim 18, Heisig teaches the CPP (Paragraph 0009, lines 1-3) of claim 15. Heisig does not teach the CPP further comprises: removing the component module and the power cable ribbon from the sensor module via the power cable ribbon; and charging the component module via a station unit and the power cable ribbon. Talbot, however, teaches a sensor and monitor system that includes a sensor module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, line 7, 102) and a component module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, line 5, 104 ). Talbot also teaches that the system includes a means for power and data communication between the sensor module and component module (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0019, lines 5 and 7, 110/112 ): the recorder port ( 110 ) and sensor port ( 112 ). Furthermore, Talbot teaches that the component module and recorder port can be removed from the sensing unit via the recorder port (Fig. 4A-5B). Talbot then teaches that the component module can be connected to a station unit (Fig. 4A-4B, Paragraph 0034, lines 12-15, 100 ) via the recorder part and dock receiver ( 108 ), where the component module can be charged via the station unit (Paragraph 0035, lines 1-7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heisig to incorporate the teachings of Talbot to specify that the method comprises: removing the component module and the power cable ribbon from the sensor module via the power cable ribbon; and charging the component module via a station unit and the power cable ribbon. Doing so would ensure that a healthcare provider can charge multiple component modules efficiently and in a central location (Paragraph 0033), as recognized by Talbot . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 5, 11, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heisig et al. (U.S. PGPub No. 2018/0085061) . Regarding claim 5, Heisig teaches the method (Paragraph 0007, line 2) of claim 1, wherein the sensor component measures data (Paragraph 0007, lines 4-5) and determines a metric, wherein the metric is strain (Paragraph 0041, lines 15-17). Heisig also teaches that the sensor component is a strain gauge (Fig. 6A-6C, Paragraph 0057, lines 8-9, 407 ). While Heisig does not explicitly disclose that the data is electrical resistance, it would be well known by a person of ordinary skill in the art that a strain gauge, by definition, measures electrical resistance and converts it into strain values. Regarding claim 11, Heisig teaches the system (Paragraph 0009, lines 5-7) of claim 7, wherein the sensor component measures data (Paragraph 0007, lines 4-5) and determines a metric, wherein the metric is strain (Paragraph 0041, lines 15-17). Heisig also teaches that the sensor component is a strain gauge (Fig. 6A-6C, Paragraph 0057, lines 8-9, 407 ). While Heisig does not explicitly disclose that the data is electrical resistance, it would be well known by a person of ordinary skill in the art that a strain gauge, by definition, measures electrical resistance and converts it into strain values. Regarding claim 19, Heisig teaches the CPP (Paragraph 0009, lines 1-3) of claim 15, wherein the sensor component measures data (Paragraph 0007, lines 4-5) and determines a metric, wherein the metric is strain (Paragraph 0041, lines 15-17). Heisig also teaches that the sensor component is a strain gauge (Fig. 6A-6C, Paragraph 0057, lines 8-9, 407 ). While Heisig does not explicitly disclose that the data is electrical resistance, it would be well known by a person of ordinary skill in the art that a strain gauge, by definition, measures electrical resistance and converts it into strain values . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heisig et al. (U.S. PGPub No. 2018/0085061) in view of Connor (U.S. PGPub No. 2016/0313798 . Regarding claim 13, Heisig teaches the system (Paragraph 0009, lines 5-7) of claim 7, wherein the sensor component measures data of the surface (Paragraph 0007, lines 4-5). Heisig does not teach that the measuring data is performed by a plurality of artificial nails disposed in layers. Connor, however, teaches a wearable system for measuring finger motion that uses a sensor component (Paragraph 0144, line 1, 7001 ) to measure data on a surface (Paragraph 0146, lines 9-12). Connor also teaches that the sensor component can be integrated into an artificial finger nail, which is then adhered to a natural finger nail with adhesive (Paragraph 0144, lines 1-10). Connor teaches that the system can include a plurality of artificial finger nails with one or more sensor components (Fig. 47-48, Paragraph 0429, lines 5-7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heisig to incorporate the teachings of Connor to include that the system has a plurality of artificial nails with sensor components to measure data. Doing so would ensure that the sensor component can be easily and ergonomically attached to the actual fingernail of the user (Paragraph 0144), as recognized by Connor. Furthermore, the courts have held that rearrangement of parts requires only ordinary skill in the art and hence is considered a routine expedient. “In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950): Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.” MPEP § 2144.04-VI-C . Connor discloses that “ there can be multiple motion sensors and/or different types of inertial motion sensors attached to the same finger nail ” (Paragraph 0144, lines 12-14). Although Connor does not disclose that the plurality of artificial nails are stacked on top of each other in layers, it would have only taken routine skill in the art to take one artificial nail from one finger and stack it onto another artificial nail on another finger. Regarding claim 14, Heisig teaches the system (Paragraph 0009, lines 5-7) of claim 13. Heisig does not teach that at least two artificial nails of the plurality of artificial nails are different sensor types from one another. Connor, however, teaches a wearable system for measuring finger motion that uses a sensor component (Paragraph 0144, line 1, 7001 ) that is integrated into an artificial finger nail (Paragraph 0144, lines 1-10). Connor further teaches that system can include a plurality of artificial finger nails with one or more sensor components (Fig. 47-48, Paragraph 0429, lines 5-7), wherein the sensors can be different types from one another (Paragraph 0144, lines 10-14). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heisig to incorporate the teachings of Connor to include that at least two artificial nails of the plurality of artificial nails are different sensor types from one another. Doing so would ensure that a variety of metrics can be recorded from the same finger (Paragraph 0144, lines 10-14), as recognized by Connor . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure : Kim et al. (U.S. PGPub No. 2009/0278798) discloses a finger-mounted implement with a sensor component, artificial fingernail, and adhesive to attach the artificial fingernail to a user’s actual nail (Abstract). Wang et al. (U.S. PGPub No. 2020/0026352) discloses a system that includes a finger device, wherein the finger device includes a sensor component, communication circuitry, a processor, and memory (Fig. 1 and Paragraph 0041). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Heidi Hilsmier whose telephone number is (571)272-2984. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Fridays from 7:30 AM - 3:30 PM. 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 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 (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. /H.A.H./Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3796 /CARL H LAYNO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3796 Application/Control Number: 18/496,010 Page 2 Art Unit: 3796 Application/Control Number: 18/496,010 Page 3 Art Unit: 3796 Application/Control Number: 18/496,010 Page 4 Art Unit: 3796
Prosecution Insights