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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
No claim limitation has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 3 is 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.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “sector-shaped prism”, which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what constitutes “sector-shaped”. The plain meaning of the term “sector” does not connote any particular shape, and it is unclear what shapes are included and/or excluded by the term “sector-shaped”.
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.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 4-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tajiri (US Publication No. 2023/0288320 A1), further in view of Takeda et al. (US Publication No. 2018/0303333 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Tajiri discloses a non-invasive blood glucose monitoring module with polarized light, comprising:
a light emitting component (12), including a light emitting element and a first polarizing element (60B), wherein light emitted from the light emitting element passes through the first polarizing element to transform into polarized light, and a light emitting surface is formed for the light emitting component (see Figure 9 and [0042] – “As illustrated in FIGS. 3 and 4, the detection apparatus 3 includes the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12, a case 20 that accommodates the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12 in a state of being mounted at a substrate (not illustrated), a shield plate 30 disposed between the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12, a sealing material 40 that seals (molds) the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12, a cover 50 that covers the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12, and a polarizer 60 that is disposed between the light receiving unit 11 and the cover 50” and [0067] – “The polarizer 60B is disposed between the cover 50 and the light emitting unit 12”),
a light receiving component, including a light sensing element (11), and a light receiving surface is formed for the light receiving component (see Figure 4 and [0042] – “As illustrated in FIGS. 3 and 4, the detection apparatus 3 includes the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12, a case 20 that accommodates the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12 in a state of being mounted at a substrate (not illustrated), a shield plate 30 disposed between the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12, a sealing material 40 that seals (molds) the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12, a cover 50 that covers the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12, and a polarizer 60 that is disposed between the light receiving unit 11 and the cover 50”, and
a connecting member (30), connecting one side of the light emitting component and one side of the light receiving component (see Figure 4 and [0044] – “The shield plate 30 shields light emitted from the light emitting unit 12 from directly entering the light receiving unit 11. In the first exemplary embodiment, the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12 are aligned in the X direction. The shield plate 30 is disposed between the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12, and extends in the Y direction. An inner peripheral surface of the side plate portion 22 and a front surface of the shield plate 30 are colored in black, for example, to suppress reflection”).
It is noted Tajiri does not specifically teach the light receiving component including a magnetic crystal layer and a second polarizing element, wherein the light sensing element receives the polarized light being reflected and sequentially passing through the magnetic crystal layer and the second polarizing element. However, Takeda et al. teaches the light receiving component including a magnetic crystal layer (25) and a second polarizing element (26), wherein the light sensing element receives the polarized light being reflected and sequentially passing through the magnetic crystal layer and the second polarizing element (see Figure 3 and [0029] – “The compensator 25 is, for example, a magneto-optical element, such as a Faraday element using a garnet or the like. The compensator 25 causes the polarization plane of linear polarization to rotate by using the magnetic field” and [0030] – “The analyzer 26 is a member similar to the polarizer 22. The analyzer 26 allows linearly polarized light on a predetermined polarization plane to pass therethrough”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Tajiri to include the light receiving component including a magnetic crystal layer and a second polarizing element, wherein the light sensing element receives the polarized light being reflected and sequentially passing through the magnetic crystal layer and the second polarizing element, as disclosed in Takeda et al., so as to cause the polarization plane of linear polarization to rotate using a magnetic field and allow linearly polarized light on a predetermined polarization plane to pass through the second polarizing element (see Takeda et al.: [0029]-[0030]).
Regarding claim 4, Tajiri teaches a wavelength range corresponding to the light emitting element is between 500 nm and 1800 nm (see [0027] – “The first light emitting element 121 emits first light LG. The first light LG is, for example, green light having a green wavelength band from 520 nm to 550 nm, and is light having a peak wavelength of 520 nm. The second light emitting element 122 emits second light LR. The second light LR is, for example, red light having a red wavelength band from 600 nm to 800 nm, and is light having a peak wavelength of 660 nm. The third light emitting element 123 emits third light LI. The third light is, for example, near-infrared light having a near-infrared wavelength band from 800 nm to 1300 nm. The third light LI is, for example, light having a peak wavelength of 905 nm. Note that, the wavelengths of light emitted by the respective light emitting elements are not limited to the above wavelength bands”)
Regarding claim 5, Tajiri teaches the light emitting element is a vertical cavity surface emitting laser or a light emitting diode (see [0026] – “For the first light emitting element 121, the second light emitting element 122, and the third light emitting element 123, LEDs are used, for example”).
Regarding claim 6, Takeda et al. teaches the magnetic crystal layer is made from materials that can produce a magnetization phenomenon induced under influencing of an external magnetic field or that contain rare earth elements ([0029] – “The compensator 25 is, for example, a magneto-optical element, such as a Faraday element using a garnet or the like. The compensator 25 causes the polarization plane of linear polarization to rotate by using the magnetic field”). Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the magnetic crystal layer from materials that can produce a magnetization phenomenon induced under influencing of an external magnetic field or that contain rare earth elements, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 7, Tajiri teaches the first polarizing element and the second polarizing element are made from polymers or metals (see [0051] – “The polarizer 60 is, for example, a light absorbing polarizing plate made mainly with polyvinyl alcohol (PVA), by adsorbing and aligning iodine (I) compound molecules”). Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the first polarizing element and the second polarizing element from polymers or metals, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 8, Tajiri teaches a single cover (50) disposed on one side, facing away from the light emitting element, of the first polarizing element and facing away from the light sensing element, of the magnetic crystal layer (see Figure 5 and [0042] – “As illustrated in FIGS. 3 and 4, the detection apparatus 3 includes the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12, a case 20 that accommodates the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12 in a state of being mounted at a substrate (not illustrated), a shield plate 30 disposed between the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12, a sealing material 40 that seals (molds) the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12, a cover 50 that covers the light receiving unit 11 and the light emitting unit 12, and a polarizer 60 that is disposed between the light receiving unit 11 and the cover 50”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention make the cover of Tajiri into two separate elements, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961).
Regarding claim 9, Tajiri teaches the first cover and the second cover are made of glass (see [0048] – “The cover 50 is made of an optically transparent material such as glass or an optically transparent resin”).
Claim(s) 2-3 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tajiri and Takeda et al., further in view of Lin et al. (US Patent No. 11,158,757 B2).
Regarding claim 2, it is noted neither Tajiri nor Takeda et al. specifically teach one end of the connecting member, adjacent to the light emitting surface and the light receiving surface, forms an included angle A, and the included angle A is between 0 and 90 degrees. However, Lin et al. teaches one end of the connecting member (22), adjacent to the light emitting surface and the light receiving surface, forms an included angle A, and the included angle A is between 0 and 90 degrees (see Figures 3D-E and col. 10, lines 19-41 – “The inner surface 228 of the second block wall 222 facing the light-emitting device 211 is not perpendicular to the carrier plate 224 and has a second inclined angle θ.sub.2 smaller than 90° relative to the carrier plate 224… The inner surface 229 of the second block wall 222 facing the light-receiving device 231 is not perpendicular to the carrier plate 224 and has an inclined angle smaller than 90° relative to the carrier plate 224”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Tajiri and Takeda et al. to include one end of the connecting member, adjacent to the light emitting surface and the light receiving surface, forms an included angle A, and the included angle A is between 0 and 90 degrees, as disclosed in Lin et al., so as to enhance the light extraction from the light emitting component and enhance the light-receiving area and the light-receiving amount (see Lin et al.: col. 9, line 64-col. 10, line 3).
Regarding claim 3, Lin et al. teaches the connecting member is a trapezoidal prism, a triangular prism or a sector-shaped prism (see Figures 3D-3E).
Regarding claim 10, it is noted neither Tajiri nor Takeda et al. specifically teach the light emitting component further includes a first substrate and a first light shielding structure, the light emitting element is disposed on the first substrate, and the first light shielding structure is sandwiched between the first substrate and the first polarizing element, and wherein the light receiving component further includes a second substrate and a second light shielding structure, the light sensing element is disposed on the second substrate, and the second light shielding structure is sandwiched between the second substrate and the second polarizing element. However, Lin et al. teaches the light emitting component (211) further includes a first substrate (224) and a first light shielding structure (221, 222), the light emitting element is disposed on the first substrate, and the first light shielding structure is sandwiched between the first substrate and the first polarizing element (see Figures 3A-C), and wherein the light receiving component (231) further includes a second substrate (224) and a second light shielding structure (222, 223), the light sensing element is disposed on the second substrate, and the second light shielding structure is sandwiched between the second substrate and the second polarizing element (see Figures 3A-C and col. 8, lines 32-50 – “The material of the block walls 221, 222, and 223 can be a light-reflective material or an opaque material such as a light-absorbing material which reflects light less than the light-reflective material does, and the details of the materials can be referred to the previous corresponding section. The carrier plate 224 can he a printed circuit board, an organic material, an inorganic material, or a bendable or a flexible material. The organic material can be a phenolic resin, a glass fiber, an epoxy resin, PI, or BT. The inorganic material can be an aluminum material or a ceramic material. The bendable or the flexible material can be polyethylene terephthalate (PET), PI, polyvinylidene fluoride (HPVDF), or ethylene tetrafluoroethylene (ETFE). The side surfaces of the block walls in the optical sensing device facing the light-receiving device 231 can also include a light-absorbing. material so that the reflection and the scattering of the irradiating light from the background noise can be reduced”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Tajiri and Takeda et al. to include the light emitting component further includes a first substrate and a first light shielding structure, the light emitting element is disposed on the first substrate, and the first light shielding structure is sandwiched between the first substrate and the first polarizing element, and wherein the light receiving component further includes a second substrate and a second light shielding structure, the light sensing element is disposed on the second substrate, and the second light shielding structure is sandwiched between the second substrate and the second polarizing element, as disclosed in Lin et al., so as to reduce the reflection and scattering of irradiating light from the background noise (see Lin et al.: col. 8, lines 46-50).
Regarding claim 11, Lin et al. teaches the first light shielding structure and the second light shielding structure are made from non-transparent epoxy resins (see col. 8, lines 33-41 – “The material of the block walls 221, 222, and 223 can be a light-reflective material or an opaque material such as a light-absorbing material which reflects light less than the light-reflective material does, and the details of the materials can be referred to the previous corresponding section. The carrier plate 224 can he a printed circuit board, an organic material, an inorganic material, or a bendable or a flexible material. The organic material can be a phenolic resin, a glass fiber, an epoxy resin, PI, or BT”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVIN B HENSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5340. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 AM ET - 5 PM ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Robert (Tse) Chen can be reached at (571) 272-3672. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DEVIN B HENSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights