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 .
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/15/2026 has been entered. Claims 3-14, 16-20 and 22-24 are pending.
Response to Amendment
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 3, 5, 6, 8-10, 16-20 and 22-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Worral et al. (US 2018/0301014) in view of Moore (US 2015/0254965).
Claims 22-24, Worral teaches a system, method and non-transitory, computer-readable medium storing instructions for promoting hand hygiene compliance using user comparison and feedback (abstract, par. 6), the system comprising:
one or more sensors of a hand hygiene monitoring device (par. 42: image data from an image sensor directed at the user's hands is employed by an embodiment to capture images of the user's hands as he or she performs the handwashing procedure); and
a processing device, the processing device having a processor configured to execute one or more processes and a memory configured to store a process that is executable by the processor (par. 53: a processor that executes a program to compare the image data from the image sensor 404 to expected image data of a preferred handwashing technique), the process comprising:
detecting a hand hygiene event associated with a user through the one or more sensors (par. 42: image data from an image sensor directed at the user's hands is employed by an embodiment to capture images of the user's hands as he or she performs the handwashing procedure);
determining, based on sensor data from the one or more sensors, whether the hand hygiene event satisfies one or more predefined steps of a hand hygiene protocol (par. 30: Based on the identified task to be performed the system may identify a compliance step to be performed before starting and/or before completion of the identified task at 103);
calculating a compliance score associated with the user and reflective of a degree of adherence to the one or more predefined steps of the hand hygiene protocol based on the hand hygiene event (par. 54: For example, a processor executes a program of instructions that calculates a compliance score on the basis of the image analysis, the use of required components (e.g., soap dispenser 402, water faucet 403, etc.), the order of usage, the duration of usage, etc. The compliance score indicates whether a user has exceeded one or more predetermined compliance threshold);
comparing the compliance metric score with compliance metric scores to determine a comparative adherence value (par. 54: For example, a processor executes a program of instructions that calculates a compliance score on the basis of the image analysis, the use of required components (e.g., soap dispenser 402, water faucet 403, etc.), the order of usage, the duration of usage, etc. The compliance score indicates whether a user has exceeded one or more predetermined compliance threshold(s). As another example, the compliance score indicates which, if any, part of the handwashing procedure was not complied with);
presenting to the user via an output device associated with the hand hygiene monitoring device, the comparative adherence value and one or more motivational outputs tied to successful adherence to the hand hygiene protocol (par. 55: For example, a visual indicator (e.g., a display screen, LEDs, etc.) is included in an embodiment to display an indication that a correct handwashing technique is or is not being performed by the user. In an embodiment, in response to detecting that a user has not followed a preferred handwashing technique, an instructive display is given, e.g., a video demonstrating correct handwashing technique. The feedback is provided by an embodiment in one or more forms, e.g., audio feedback, visual feedback, communication of a compliance score, etc.);
transmitting the comparative adherence value to a system external to the process for storage or optional dissemination, including dissemination via one or more social media platforms (par. 54: As another example, the compliance score indicates which, if any, part of the handwashing procedure was not complied with. In an embodiment, the compliance score is communicated to another device, e.g., to a remote database, to a mobile computing device, etc.).
Worral does not teach comparing the compliance metric score with compliance metric scores associated with one or more other users.
In the field of endeavor, Moore teach a hygiene tracking compliance system. He goes on to teach a personalized hygiene compliance tracking component 302 may receive aggregated community hygiene compliance metrics 308 associated with a community of users. For example, the aggregated community hygiene compliance metrics 308 may provide an evaluation of how the user compares with the community of users, such as a comparison of hygiene compliance of the user with hygiene compliance of other users (par. 26&35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Worral’s process by comparing the compliance metric score with compliance metric scores associated with a community of users as taught by Moore in order to provide an evaluation of how the user compares with the community of users regarding hygiene compliance (Moore par. 35).
Claim 3, the combination teaches further comprising: providing remediation instructions for the user to achieve compliance with the hand hygiene protocol via a display in washroom (Worral par. 55: an instructive display is given, e.g., a video demonstrating correct handwashing technique).
Claims 5 and 17, the combination teaches wherein the process further comprises: determining, by the process, that the user has achieved compliance with the hand hygiene protocol; and providing a confirmation that the user has achieved compliance with the hand hygiene protocol in response to determining that the user has achieved compliance with the hand hygiene protocol (Worral par. 34: Although not illustrated, feedback operation 106 may also be included together with operation 105 to provide positive indication of compliance).
Claim 6, the combination teaches wherein the sensor data comprises one or more of: audio signals, visual signals, or thermal data (Worral par. 7: an image sensor that captures image data of the user at the handwashing station).
Claims 8 and 18, the combination teaches wherein the sensor data is collected from a plurality of sensors (Worral par. 21: biometric data may be obtained from a biometric sensor that is selected and configured to avoid interference with the operational process being monitored such as a non-contact or minimal contact biometric sensor, palm/fingerprint reader and the like located at a sink of a handwashing station; par. 42: The system may determine if the specific tasks have been performed by evaluating data captured during the handwashing procedure, e.g., image data from an image sensor directed at the user's hands is employed by an embodiment to capture images of the user's hands).
Claim 9, the combination teaches wherein the sensor data comprises data selected from a group of sensor data consisting of: the user entering a washroom, the user exiting the washroom, the user walking toward a sink area, the user washing their hands, the user applying soap, the user rinsing their hands, the user activating a sink faucet, the user rinsing their hands with water, the user scrubbing their hands, the user deactivating the sink faucet, and the user drying their hands (Worral par. 42: The system may determine if the specific tasks have been performed by evaluating data captured during the handwashing procedure, e.g., image data from an image sensor directed at the user's hands is employed by an embodiment to capture images of the user's hands).
Claim 10, the combination teaches wherein deviation from the hand hygiene protocol is based on a group of deviations consisting of: the user skipping one or more steps of the hand hygiene protocol, the user not washing their hands for a threshold period of time, the user not applying soap, the user not activating a sink faucet, the user not scrubbing their hands, and the user not drying their hands (Worral par. 43: Additionally, at 302, an embodiment also provides a determination if certain components, e.g., a water faucet, a liquid hand sanitizer, cleaning product dispenser, etc., have been used at appropriate times or for an appropriate duration by the user during the handwashing procedure).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Worral et al. (US 2018/0301014) in view of Moore (US 2015/0254965), and further in view of SHIM et al. (US 2020/0064781).
Claim 4, the combination does not teach further comprising: providing remediation instructions for the user to achieve compliance with the hand hygiene protocol via a wearable device.
In the field of endeavor, SHIM teaches providing guidance instruction to wash hands via a watch terminal (par. 128).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the combination’s system by providing an alternative method of washing instruction through a watch as taught by SHIM, a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one known method for another and the result would have been predictable.
Claim(s) 7, 12-13 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Worral et al. (US 2018/0301014) in view of Moore (US 2015/0254965), and further in view of Kolavennu et al. (US 2020/0074836).
Claim 7, the combination does not teach wherein the sensor data comprises one or more motion events detected by a wearable device.
In the field of endeavor, Kolavennu teaches wherein the sensor data comprises one or more motion events detected by a wearable device (par. 40&44: For example, some or part of the hand-hygiene monitor 12 may be incorporated into a watch, bracelet, ring, etc. and may be worn on one arm/hand or both arms/hands … the plurality of sensors 16 of the hand-hygiene monitor 12 may include at least an accelerometer 18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the combination’s method of motion sensing by substituting with capturing motion event through a wearable device as taught by Kolavennu as a known alternative method of motion capturing, a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one known method for another and the result would have been predictable.
Claims 12 and 19, the combination does not teach wherein identifying further comprises: using the sensor data as input to one or more machine learning-based classifiers to identify the hand hygiene event of the user.
Kolavennu teaches wherein identifying further comprises: using the sensor data as input to one or more machine learning-based classifiers to identify the hand hygiene event of the user (par. 71: the processor 24 and/or procedural compliance module 30 of the hand-hygiene monitor 12 can use a machine learning model to determine whether a person washed their hands).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the combination’s method by further inputting sensor data into machine learning based classifiers as taught by Kolavennu for the purpose of enhancing hand hygiene identification, a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art could have apply a known technique to a known system for another and the result would have been predictable.
Claims 13 and 20, the combination does not teach wherein the process further comprises: detecting a plurality of users within a washroom; and distinguishing between each of the plurality of users within the washroom and respective hand hygiene activity of each of the plurality of users.
In the field of endeavor, Kolavennu teaches wherein the process further comprises: detecting a plurality of users within a washroom; and distinguishing between each of the plurality of users within the washroom and respective hand hygiene activity of each of the plurality of users (par. 63&71: As such, radar 54 can be used in areas with one or more sinks and can collect location data on multiple people at a time … the sensor 16 data including the radar 54 may be input to a combined machine learning model that determines the presence, identity and hand washing compliance all together).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the combination’s method by further detecting and distinguishing a plurality of users within a washroom as taught by Kolavennu for the purpose of enhancing hand hygiene identification, a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art could have apply a known technique to a known system for another and the result would have been predictable.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Worral in view of Moore, and further in view of HOLLOCK et al. (US 2011/0291841).
Claim 11, the combination does not teach further comprising: obfuscating personally identifiable information associated with the user during performance of the method.
In the field of endeavor, HOLLOCK teaches blurring sensed data collected
through monitoring user (abstract, par. 20, 21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to
modify the combination’s system by blurring sensed data as taught by HOLLOCK for the purpose of protecting privacy of individual (HOLLOCK par. 21).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Worral in view of Moore, and further in view of Anagnostopoulos (US 2018/0341766).
Claim 14, the combination does not teach wherein distinguishing comprises: using temporal user identifiable data to distinguish between each of the plurality of users within the washroom.
In the field of endeavor, Anagnostopoulos teaches a system for using temporal user authentication that is not derived through an electronic device (abstract, claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to
modify the combination’s user identification by utilizing temporal data for identification as taught by Anagnostopoulos’, a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one known element for another, and the results of the substitution would have been predictable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot in view of new ground (s) of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to An T Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)270-5167. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-5 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, Brian Zimmerman can be reached on 5712723059. 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.
/AN T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686