DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: “Formula 2” should read “equation 2”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 objected to because of the following informalities: “to a generate convolutional pooling data” should read “to generate convolutional pooling data and “and fully connected layers” should read “and the fully connected layers”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the Mean Square Error” should read “a Mean Square Error”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-10 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.
Regarding claim 1, the following limitations render the claim indefinite:
“the blood glucose dataset” lack proper antecedent basis because the claim previously recites “a blood glucose level dataset”. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim “the blood glucose level dataset”;
“a PPG signal dataset” renders the claim indefinite because it is recited a second time and unclear if this is the previously recited PPG signal dataset. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim “the PPG signal dataset”;
“the correlation coefficient is greater than or equal to the threshold value” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear which of the plurality of correlation coefficients is being compared to the threshold values. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim any one of the plurality of correlation coefficients.
“an artificial intelligence model” renders the claim indefinite because is unclear if this is the previously recited AI module or a separate module. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim the AI module.
“the quality classification labels” lacks proper antecedent basis because of the previously recited “a quality classification label” (not plural). For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim “the quality classification label” (not plural).
Regarding claim 3, the limitation “were selected” renders the claim indefinite because the past tense leaves unclear when in the process this step is performed. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim “are selected”.
Regarding claim 4, the limitation “the extracted one-minute PPG feature maps” lacks proper antecedent basis. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim the PPG feature maps corresponding to the one-minute records.
Regarding claim 4, the limitation “the peak detection” lacks proper antecedent basis. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim “the peak detection method”.
Regarding claims 5, 7 and 10, the limitation “the weights” lacks proper antecedent basis. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim “weights”.
Regarding claim 7, the limitation “the long short term memory network module” lacks proper antecedent basis. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim *the long short term memory module”.
Regarding claim 8, the limitation “the second activation function” lacks proper antecedent basis. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim “a second activation function”.
Allowable Subject Matter
Reasons for allowance are set forth in the Non-Final rejection mailed 5/22/2026 (pp. 6-7).
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 SEAN PATRICK DOUGHERTY whose telephone number is (571)270-5044. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm (Pacific Time).
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, Jacqueline Cheng can be reached at (571)272-5596. 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.
/SEAN P DOUGHERTY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights