Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/634,598

ACTIVE LEARNING FOR WEARABLE HEALTH SENSOR

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Apr 12, 2024
Examiner
SZUMNY, JONATHON A
Art Unit
3686
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Evidation Health Inc.
OA Round
4 (Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allow Rate
143 granted / 247 resolved
+5.9% vs TC avg
Strong +61% interview lift
Without
With
+60.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
58 currently pending
Career history
305
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
32.5%
-7.5% vs TC avg
§103
30.8%
-9.2% vs TC avg
§102
9.9%
-30.1% vs TC avg
§112
20.7%
-19.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 247 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Status of Claims Claims 21-44 and 46 were previously pending and subject to a non-final Office Action having a notification date of November 3, 2025 (“non-final Office Action”). Following the non-final Office Action, Applicant filed an amendment on February 4, 2026 (the “Amendment”), amending claims 21-23, 25-28, 30, 31, 34-37, 39, 42, and 46. The present Final Office Action addresses pending claims 21-44 and 46 in the Amendment. Response to Arguments Response to Applicant’s Arguments Regarding Claim Rejections Under 35 USC §101 These rejections are withdrawn in view of the Amendment, and reference is made to the discussion regarding claim 1 of Example 42 of the USPTO Eligibility Examples in this regard. Response to Applicant’s Arguments Regarding Claim Rejections Under 35 USC §112 At page 11 of the Amendment in response to the Examiner's position that the present specification does not provide support for transmitting a migraine symptom report "to a second user device of the healthcare professional" "in real time" and "upon determining that the uncertainty value satisfies a threshold," as well as both the user and the healthcare provider having real-time access to migraine symptom prediction data of the user corresponding to the migraine symptom report with the migraine symptom prediction data being "up-to-date" as recited in claims 21, 31, and 46, Applicant makes reference to Figures 1-2 and [0048], [0050], and [0057] of the present specification. In relation to Figure 1 of the specification which is a generic network diagram of users 120, health system 140 (which can be a healthcare professional per [0021]), and the active learning system 110, Applicant asserts that such diagram indicates that the active learning system 110 "may transmit information, such as a migraine symptom report, to a device of a healthcare professional, as recited in the instant claims." The Examiner disagrees and asserts that neither Figure 1 itself nor the corresponding discussion regarding claim 1 in the specification discloses or even suggests Applicant's above interpretation. In relation to [0057] of the specification, Applicant notes how this paragraph [generically] discloses how the symptom log can be provided to an authorized healthcare provider. However, where does it or any other paragraph of the specification disclose doing so "in real time" and "upon determining that the uncertainty value satisfies a threshold" as recited in the present claims? They do not. In relation to [0048] of the specification, Applicant notes how it discloses how the user and health system (health professional per [0021]) can review the log of symptom predictions which appears to provide support for the user and healthcare professional having access to migraine symptom prediction data of the user corresponding to the migraine symptom report. However, neither this paragraph nor any other paragraphs disclose/suggest that such prediction data in the report is necessarily "real-time" and that "up-to-date" access is provided as recited in the claims. Finally, [0050] of the specification discloses, inter alia, how intervention messages can be sent to the user and alerts can be sent to the healthcare professional. However, this paragraph does not disclose/suggest transmitting a migraine symptom report "to a second user device of the healthcare professional" "in real time" and "upon determining that the uncertainty value satisfies a threshold," as well as both the user and the healthcare provider having real-time access to migraine symptom prediction data of the user corresponding to the migraine symptom report with the migraine symptom prediction data being "up-to-date" as recited in claims 21, 31, and 46 Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In [0050], line 10, "to try to try" should be changed to --to try--. Appropriate correction is required. 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 21-44 and 46 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. Each of independent claims 21, 31, and 46 now recites "receiving in real time, from a second user device of a healthcare professional, second physical statistics data of the user, wherein said second user device is connected to the network, and wherein said second physical statistics data is received in a second non-standardized time-series format dependent at least in part on a type of said second user device, a preference of said healthcare professional, and a type of said second physical statistics data." While the end of [0023] generally discloses how physical statistic data can be collected from a health data repository 140 which can be a medical provider per [0021], and while [0024] discloses how physical statistic data can be received from multiple different types/models of health sensors (or other sources) in different formats/conventions and standardized for further analysis, the specification does not disclose receiving second physical statistics data from a second user device of a healthcare professional "in a second non-standardized time-series format dependent at least in part on a type of said second user device, a preference of said healthcare professional, and a type of said second physical statistics data" as now recited in independent claims 21, 31, and 46. Each of independent claims 21, 31, and 46 also recites transmitting a migraine symptom report for the user to "a said second user device of said healthcare professional and said first user device in real time" upon determining that the uncertainty value satisfies a threshold. While [0043]-[0045] and [0058] discuss how an active learning request can be sent to the user when the uncertainty value satisfies the threshold, it does not appear that these or any other portions of the present specification provide support for transmitting a migraine symptom report "to a second user device of the healthcare professional," much less where such transmission occurs "in real time" and "upon determining that the uncertainty value satisfies a threshold" as recited. Each of independent claims 21, 31, and 46 also recites "wherein both said user and said healthcare professional have real-time access to up-to-date migraine symptom prediction data of said user corresponding to said migraine symptom report." While [0025] of the present specification discloses how the physical statistic data can be used by the models to predict CHC symptoms in real-time and [0048] discloses how the user and health system (health professional per [0021]) can review the log of symptom predictions which appears to provide support for the user and healthcare professional having access to migraine symptom prediction data of the user corresponding to the migraine symptom report, neither these paragraphs nor any other paragraphs disclose/suggest that such prediction data in the report is necessarily "real-time" and that "up-to-date" access is provided as recited in the claims. The remaining claims are rejected based on their dependency from the above rejected claims. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JONATHON A. SZUMNY whose telephone number is (303) 297-4376. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-5. 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, Jason Dunham, can be reached on 571-272-8109. 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. /JONATHON A. SZUMNY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3686
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 12, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jun 11, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 11, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 03, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 10, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Oct 08, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 08, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 09, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 17, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 26, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jan 30, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 30, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 03, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597508
COMPUTERIZED DECISION SUPPORT TOOL FOR POST-ACUTE CARE PATIENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586667
PSEUDONYMIZED STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL OF MEDICAL DATA AND INFORMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12562277
METHOD OF AND SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING A PRIORITIZED INSTRUCTION SET FOR A USER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12537102
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING TRIAGE CATEGORIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12505912
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR RESTING STATE FMRI BRAIN MAPPING WITH REDUCED IMAGING TIME
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
58%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+60.6%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 247 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month