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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-14, 17, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Brien (US 2021/0196143) in view of Minkoff (US 9,386,939).
O’Brien discloses a system for characterization of metabolite compounds, the system comprising: a magnetic resonance spectrometer (104) comprising a bore (106), wherein the bore is sized and shaped to receive a an appendage of a user (108; [0180]), wherein the appendage comprises a tissue volume of the user (108; Fig. 1A), wherein the magnetic resonance spectrometer generates an in vivo magnetic resonance dataset ([0182]); and a radio frequency transmitter ([0272]) and a RF detector ([0273]), wherein the RF detector detects a signal from the tissue volume in response to a transmitted RF signal from the RF transmitter ([0273]), and wherein the signal from the tissue volume is used in generating the in vivo magnetic resonance dataset ([0273]); a processor operably coupled to the spectrometer ([0267]); a memory operably coupled to the processor providing instructions to the processor to extract one or more metabolomic parameters from the in vivo magnetic resonance dataset, wherein the one or more metabolomic parameters relate to a concentration of one or more metabolites within the tissue volume of the user ([0260]; [0267]). O’Brien discloses the subject matter substantially as claimed except for wherein the at least one antenna is a phased array. However, Minkoff teaches in the same field of endeavor wherein the antenna is a phased array antenna to match the shape of the human anatomy (col. 6, lines 16-20). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided O’Brien with a phased array antenna as taught by Minkoff as the use of a phased array antenna is well known in the art.
With respect to claim 2, O’Brien discloses wherein the magnetic resonance spectrometer comprises a volume less than one meter cubed and a weight less than 25 kilograms ([0335]).
With respect to claim 3, O’Brien discloses a magnetic array produces a dipole magnetic field ([0357]).
With respect to claim 4, O’Brien discloses an electromagnet or a permanent magnet ([0185]; [0188]; [0399]).
With respect to claim 5, O’Brien discloses a Halbach arrangement ([0378]).
With respect to claim 8, O’Brien discloses a radiofrequency detector ([0174-0175]).
With respect to claims 10-11, O’Brien discloses kiosk comprising a user interface ([0100]).
With respect to claim 12, O’Brien discloses wherein the magnetic resonance spectrometer is configured to direct data from the user to cloud computing system ([0181]).
With respect to claim 13, O’Brien discloses wherein the data comprises the at least one metabolic parameter paired with at least one measurement time or user identify information ([0277]).
With respect to claim 14, O’Brien discloses wherein the at least one metabolomic parameter comprises at least one metabolite concentration level, comprises at least one of glucose ([0091]) and lactate ([0194]).
With respect to claim 17, O’Brien discloses a magnetic field less than 3 Tesla ([0006]).
With respect to claim 21, O’Brien disclose a hand (108).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Brien (US 2021/0196143) in view of Minkoff (US 9,386,939)as applied to claim 1, further in view of Wang (US 2019/0056470).
O’Brien discloses the subject matter substantially as claimed except for wherein the radiofrequency waveform comprises a variable spectral and temporal profile set at least partly based on a set of parameters selected by a user. However, Wang teaches in the same field of endeavor providing one or more user-selectable parameters ([0004]; [0046]; [0049]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided O’Brien with user selectable parameters as taught by Wang in order to obtain a targeted objective metric ([0146]).
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Brien (US 2021/0196143) in view of Minkoff (US 9,386,939) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Iannello (US 2016/0011290).
O’Brien discloses the subject matter substantially as claimed except for cholesterol. However, Iannello teaches in the same field of endeavor monitoring the concentration of cholesterol. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided O’Brien with monitoring cholesterol as taught by Iannello as it is a well known metabolite and substitution of monitoring one metabolite for another is well known in the art.
Claim(s) 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Brien (US 2021/0196143) in view of Minkoff (US 9,386,939) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Dacey, JR. et al. (US 2010/0234793).
O’Brien discloses the subject matter substantially as claimed except for acetoacetate, apolipoprotein, creatine, fatty acids, glutamic acid, histidine, lactate, leucine, proline, pyruvate, taurine, tryptophan, and urea. However, Dacey, JR. et al. teaches in the same field of endeavor detectable blood components include acetoacetate, apolipoprotein, creatine, fatty acids, glutamic acid, histidine, lactate, leucine, proline, pyruvate, taurine, tryptophan, and urea ([0206]; [0218-0220]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided O’Brien with apolipoprotein as taught by Dacey, JR. et al. as it is a well known metabolite and substitution of detecting one metabolite for another is well known in the art.
Claim(s) 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Brien (US 2021/0196143) in view of Minkoff (US 9,386,939) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Lee et al. (US 2019/0347790).
O’Brien discloses the subject matter substantially as claimed except for machine learning or Bayesian optimization. However, Lee et al. teaches in the same field of endeavor analysis using machine learning algorithms and Bayesian classifiers ([0002]; [0021]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided O’Brien with machine learning or Bayesian optimization as taught by Lee et al. as the use of automated analysis is well known and a substitution of one analysis technique for another is well within the skill level of one of ordinary skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-17 and 21-23 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 PETER LUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1609. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6.
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, Anhtuan T Nguyen can be reached at (571)272-4963. 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.
/PETER LUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797