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 .
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s amendment and request for continued examination filed 07/17/2026. Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-13, 15, and 27-34 are currently pending in this application. Claims 27-34 have been withdrawn from consideration.
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 1-3, 5-7, 9-13, and 15 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.
The term “close proximity” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “close proximity” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear as to the metes and bounds of what is considered to be “close proximity”, wherein broadest reasonable interpretation of the term “close proximity” is interpretable as being equivalent to “close to” or “near to”. What is in close proximity to one of ordinary skill in the art may not be in close proximity to another. Claims 2-3, 5-7, 9-13, and 15 are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, because of their dependency on claim 1.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/22/2026 and claim amendments filed 07/17/2026, with respect to claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-13, and 15 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous rejection of claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-13, and 15 has been withdrawn.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-13, and 15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest related prior art to the Applicant’s claimed invention are Aarnio et al. (U.S. 2021/0196121 A1) and Geheb et al. (U.S. 5,685,314). Aarnio discloses a patient monitor having a housing, a graphic user interface, a power source, a communication interface, and a physiological sensor interface (see Aarnio, Fig. 1: 15). Aarnio further discloses a plurality of transmitters throughout a care facility that transmit location identifiers to the patient monitor wherein the devices receiving the location identifiers determine their location based on the received identifiers (see Aarnio, Paragraph [0046]). Geheb discloses a first portable mount comprising a docking portion having at least two docking arms extending outward to receive the patient monitor (see Geheb, Fig. 3: 100c, 110d, 110g, Col. 4, Lines 66-67 through Col. 5, Lines 1-19) wherein the docking station communicates with the patient monitor (see Geheb, Col. 4, Lines 33-39). Aarnio in view of Geheb, however, does not disclose the docking station broadcasting a first location signal at a maximum distance of 10 cm from the first mount housing using the first wireless communication interface, the first location signal having a signal strength of no more than -98 dBm. Additionally, Aarnio in view of Geheb does not disclose that the first location signal is only capable of reaching the patient monitor paired with the first mount, as amended. Additionally, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify the teachings of Aarnio in view of Geheb to conclude at claim 1 of the Applicant’s claimed invention, as amended, without using improper hindsight reasoning.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES J YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5170. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-6:00p M-F.
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 at (571) 272-3059. 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.
/JAMES J YANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686
Prosecution Insights