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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: NON-INVASIVE SENSOR FUSION AND AI TECHNOLOGY FOR HUMAN VITAL MEASUREMENT.
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 1-16 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 1, 2, 5, 6, 10 and 16 (rest by dependency) recite an (nx7) matrix. It is unclear what N equals. The number of samples? It is also unclear what the number 7 represents.
Claims 1, 2, 16 (rest by dependency) recite 3000 samples. 3000 is not evenly divisible by 7 – it is unclear how an nx7 matrix cam be made with 3000 samples.
Claims 1, 16 (rest by dependency) recite that the denoised signal is “is obtained as a matrix of signals”. It is unclear who or what is generating the matrix. As claimed, an elementary filter merely denoises the signal. Is that filter also generating a matrix?
Claims 1, 5, 16 (rest by dependency) recite “ECG”. It is unclear how ECG is being determined. The claim only requires a PPG sensing device. Is applicant estimating ECG based on PPG? Or is other hardware present? (such as dry electrodes mentioned in the Specification).
Claim 2 (4 by dependency) recites “concatenation” and “trimming”. This claim is unclear. It is unclear what is being concatenated, and where the individual components that are being concatenated/trimmed originate from. It appears that essential steps are missing.
Claims 2 and 12 (4 by dependency) recite “about”. This is a relative term open to interpretation, rendering the claim indefinite.
Claim 2 (4 by dependency) recite “ultralow pass” and “ultra low pass”. Clarification is requested.
Claim 3 recites “the ultralow pass conditioned signal…” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation.
Claims 2 and 10 (4 by dependency) refer to column indexes. The index is unclear as it is unclear what the structure of the matric is, where the matrix is coming from and how it is being generated. In mathematical terms, does the matrix being with a 0-index? Or 1?
Claims 2 and 4 recite “the key components”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation.
Claim 3 recites “the key two dimensional components”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) “filter the PPG signal to remove noise frequencies that are not containing information about the key body vitals; wherein the denoised signal is obtained as a matrix of signals (n x 7), wherein said matrix of signals includes 3000 data samples with a sampling frequency of 100 samples per second and a sampling period of 30 seconds; extracting features using a pre-trained artificial intelligence (Al) based model to accurately measure at least six key body vitals. The abstract idea is part of the Mathematical Concepts and/or Mental Process group(s) identified in the Ninth Edition, Revision 10.2019 (revised June 2020) of the Manual of Patent Examination Procedure (MPEP). This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer; data-gathering steps do not add a meaningful limitation to the method as they are insignificant extra-solution activity; there is no improvement to a computer or other technology; does not apply the abstract idea to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition; does not apply the abstract idea with, or by use of, a particular machine. The additional elements are identified as follows: a sensing device with LEDs; photodetector; a filter; processing module; a client application and user interface. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements, when considered both individually and as a whole, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The additional computer and data-gathering elements, which are recited at a high level of generality, provide conventional computer and data-gathering functions that do not add meaningful limitations to practicing the abstract idea.
Those in the relevant field of art would recognize the above-identified additional elements as being well-understood, routine, and conventional means for data-gathering and computing, as demonstrated by Sen Gupta et al (Towards non-invasive blood glucose measurement using machine learning: An all-purpose PPG system design; 2021). Thus, the claimed additional elements “are so well-known that they do not need to be described in detail in a patent application to satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 112(a).” Berkheimer Memorandum, III. A. 3.
When considered in combination, the additional elements (generic computer functions and conventional equipment/steps) do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The Federal Circuit has held that combining additional elements for data-gathering with abstract ideas does not make a claim patent-eligible. Looking at the claim limitations as a whole adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementation.
Regarding the dependent claims, the dependent claims are directed to either 1) steps that are also abstract or 2) additional data gathering that is well-understood, routine and previously known to the industry. Although the dependent claims are further limiting, they do not recite significantly more than the abstract idea. A narrow abstract idea is still an abstract idea and an abstract idea with additional well-known data-gathering equipment/functions is not significantly more than the abstract idea.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ferber et al. US-10638982-B2
Lafon et al. US-20200000441-A1
Menon et al. US-20190192085-A1
Gulati et al. US-9459202-B2
Wilmering et al. US-20140187992-A1
Biswas et al. US-20200196897-A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY B SHAH whose telephone number is (571)272-0686. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Jennifer Robertson can be reached at 571-272-5001. 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.
JAY SHAH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3791
/JAY B SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights