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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed on 7/7/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-5 are amended. Claims 1-6 are pending.
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.
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) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Janik (US 20160156603 A1), and further in view of Ritscher (US 20180070839 A1) and Hillyard (US 20130040574 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 5, Janik discloses a device associated with a user for tracking (wearable device 4, Abstract), comprising:
a housing configured to contain electronic components (Fig. 2);
a first transmitter to transmit unique identification data corresponding to the device over a first communication range (via BLE, Para. 52, 55, 63-67, Abstract, Figs. 4, 14);
at least one additional transmitter to transmit unique identification data to an external source at a distance that is less than the first communication range (via NFC, 36, 40, 52, 63-67, Abstract, Figs. 4, 14);
a management system to adjust power consumption for the transmitters (Para. 59-60);
Janik fails to disclose an accelerometer for detecting movement; and the management system to adjust power consumption for the transmitters based on the movement and to adjust transmission timing based on a randomized delay.
Ritscher teaches a device associated with a user for tracking can be configured to include an accelerometer for detecting movement, and a management system to adjust power consumption of the device based on the movement (Para. 70, 36).
Hillyard teaches including a randomized delay in a communication system to reduce interference likelihood (Para. 66).
From the teachings of Ritscher and Hillyard, it would have been obvious to try to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify an accelerometer for detecting movement; and the management system to adjust power consumption for the transmitters based on the movement in order to conserve battery consumption and to adjust transmission timing based on a randomized delay in order to reduce interference likelihood.
Regarding claim 2, Bluetooth low energy communications have ranges of up to 100 meters, while NFC is built to communicate at up to 4cm.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to try to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the prior arts cited to include the management system adjusts transmission timing of the first transmitter (Bluetooth) based on the randomized delay to avoid interference with other Bluetooth devices, without applying the randomized delay to transmission timing of the at least one additional transmitter (NFC) as NFC communications don’t interfere with other NFC communications due to their short range.
Regarding claim 3, Janik discloses wherein the at least one additional transmitter includes at least one of a passive communication module that does not require battery power (powered by the AC magnetic field generated by NFC reader 40, Para. 36).
Regarding claim 4, Janik discloses an identification mechanism, wherein the identification mechanism comprises a user authentication signal (Para. 67).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Janik, Ritscher, Hillyard, and further in view of Townsend (US 20160324470 A1).
Regarding claim 6, the prior arts cited fail to disclose an enclosure configured to be removably attached to a wearable item.
Townsend teaches an enclosure for an electronic device configured to be removably attached to a wearable item (Para. 2 and Fig. 1).
From the teachings of Townsend, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the prior arts cited to include an enclosure configured to be removably attached to a wearable item in order to allow securing of the enclosure in more than one way, thereby improve convenience.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection includes new references not presented before.
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 YONG HANG JIANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3024. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30-6 EST.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached at (571)272-2957. 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.
/YONG HANG JIANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights