DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. According to the Amendment, filed 17 June 2026, the status of the claims is as follows:
Claim 1 is currently amended; and
Claims 2-9 are as originally filed.
3. The Specification has been amended in view of the Amendment, filed 17 June 2026. No new matter was introduced.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, pp. 6-7, filed 17 June 2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-9 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement, and the rejection of claims 1-9 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, have been fully considered, and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 1-9 have been withdrawn.
As to “processing unit”, Applicant contends the following:
Applicant respectfully submits that "processing unit" is a common term in the art, and it is even widely-known by the general public. Specifically, the processing unit may be any logic circuits well known by a person skilled in the art, such as CPU, TPU, MPU, and so on. There is no need to define the structure or material of the processing unit in the specification to serve the goal of rendering a person in art understand the technical means claimed in the present application well. In addition, as shown on Page 11 of the Office Action, the Examiner also can understand that the processing unit can be presented as an MPU. Furthermore, the term "processing unit" has been used in several patent literature, such as: US12621918 and US12621970, without additional definition.
This argument is found persuasive. The claimed limitation “processing unit” will be defined by what is understood by a person skilled in the art as stated above by the Applicant’s argument.
As to “pressure sensing unit”, Applicant contends the following:
On the other hand, according to FIG. 1 of the present Application, the pressure sensing unit 27 in the original specification of the present Application is directly coupled with the processing unit 21. As well known by a person in the art, the processing unit is configured to receive electronic signals and execute various kinds of processing on the electronic signals. Thus, the pressure sensing unit in original Claim 1 and the original specification must be a circuit so that the pressure transmitted by the pressure sensing unit in original Claim 1 and the original specification is an electronic signal that can be processed by the processing unit. The Application has amended the "pressure sensing unit" to "pressure sensing circuit" throughout Claims and the specification, and 35 U.S. C. 112(f) is inapplicable to the term "circuit" according to MPEP 2181.
Thus, amended Claim 1 ought to be not indefinite, and correspondingly, Claim 2-9 also ought to be not indefinite due to the dependence on amended Claim 1.
This argument is found persuasive in view of the Amendment, filed 17 June 2026.
5. Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, pp. 7-8, filed 17 June 2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 3, and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ota et al., U.S. Patent No. 5,778,879 A (“Ota”), in view of Pan et al., C.N. Patent No. 202553919 U (“Pan”), have been fully considered. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is discussed below.
Firstly, Applicant contends, see Remarks, p. 7, the following:
Firstly, as agreed on Page 13 of the Office Action, Ota does not disclose "the processing unit outputting a signal associated with the inclination angle and the heart sound" as recited in amended Claim 1.
After further consideration of the teachings of Ota and of the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed phrase “associated with”, Ota does disclose the claimed subject matter. Ota teaches a processing unit (“MPU (microprocessor unit)”) 3 outputting a signal (“The location … is communicated …” or “when it is aligned with the heart, start switch 7 is turned on”) associated with the inclination angle and the heart sound. Based on broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed phrase ‘associated’, the communicated “location” by the “MPU (microprocessor unit) 3” is associated with the “angle of inclination .THETA.” detected by the “inclination sensor 8” and the intensity of the “heart sounds” detected by the “heart sound sensor 16” (see “When blood pressure meter 12 is correctly positioned, i.e., when it is aligned with the heart, start switch 7 is turned on and the processing required to measure the blood pressure commences. With this embodiment, the intensity of the heart sounds is detected in the part of the body where the measurement is to be taken. The location is detected where the intensity of the heart sounds peaks, and is communicated to enable positioning of the patient's wrist (in this case), level with the patient's heart. This ensures that the blood pressure can be measured accurately. Quantifying, displaying and storing the intensity of the heart sounds makes it easier to align the wrist with the heart each time a measurement is to be taken, and it enhances the reproducibility of the measurement. Since only a single location, that where the heart sounds are most intense, need be detected, a circuit of a simple configuration can be used.” in col. 3, l. 56, to col. 4, l. 5). Communicating the “location” or “start switch 7” represents the strongest intensity of heart sounds at a specific inclination angle of the wrist with the heart.
Secondly, Applicant contends, see Remarks, pp. 7-8, the following:
Secondly, the whole content of paragraphs [0029]-[0031] of Pan, based on which the Examiner considers "the processing unit outputting a signal associated with the inclination angle and the heart sound" is disclosed by Pan, read as follows:
[0029] As for an angle sensor, detection of a wrist type blood-pressure meter requires that the blood-pressure meter and the heart must be at the same height, so the including of angle sensor in the device can judge whether the detected posture of user keeps as high as the heart, and can effectively solve the problem of the abnormal blood pressure data due to the incorrect posture for collecting data.
[0030] The network communication module transmits the collected blood pressure data to the server through the intermediate device.
Said server synchronously feedbacks the blood pressure data to the monitoring terminal. The angle sensor is configured to detect the position of the arm of the user, and the angle sensor is connected with the processor.
[0031] In the process of pressing, the heart sound is simultaneously detected. When pressurizing is finished, the result of the blood pressure is simultaneously determined.
As shown above, paragraphs [0029]-[0031] of Pan merely disclose that two separate signals, the height of the blood-pressure meter (that can be converted into the inclination angle) and the heart sound, are simultaneously detected, but does not disclose that the height of the blood-pressure meter and the heart sound are integrated into a single signal like a signal associated with the inclination angle and the heart sound. Therefore, Pan does not disclose "the processing unit outputting a signal associated with the inclination angle and the heart sound" as recited in amended Claim 1 either.
This argument is found persuasive.
Thirdly, Applicant contends, see Remarks, p. 8, the following:
Thirdly, after a careful review, it is confirmed that Sato does not disclose "the processing unit outputting a signal associated with the inclination angle and the heart sound" as recited in amended Claim 1 either.
Examiner agrees that Sato does not disclose the claimed limitation.
Lastly, Applicant contends, see Remarks, p. 8, the following:
Fourthly, after a careful review, it is firmly found that whether Ota, Pan, or Sato merely discloses "a filling gas is inflated to the airbag unit", but does not disclose "a filling gas is inflated to the airbag unit based on a certain signal". In addition, as illustrated above, all Ota, Pan, and Sato do not disclose the integrated signal-a signal associated with the inclination angle and the heart sound. Accordingly, all Ota, Pan, and Sato do not disclose "an inflation and deflation unit, configured to inflate a filling gas to the airbag unit based on the signal" as recited in amended Claim 1, where the signal is defined as the signal associated with the inclination angle and the heart sound.
However, respectfully, this argument is not persuasive. Based on broadest reasonable interpretation, Ota teaches the claimed subject matter. As discussed above, Ota does in fact teach a processing unit (“MPU (microprocessor unit)”) 3 outputting a signal (“The location … is communicated …” or “when it is aligned with the heart, start switch 7 is turned on”) associated with the inclination angle and the heart sound (see col. 3, l. 60, to col. 4, l. 5, where communicating the “location” represents the strongest intensity of heart sounds at a specific inclination angle of the wrist with the heart). In addition, Ota teaches the following:
an inflation and deflation unit (not labeled, means that performs “… the wrist may be pressurized by the cuff and the pressure increased until a given pressure is achieved in the cuff. The pressure is then decreased.”, see col. 3, ll. 17-19), connected to the airbag unit (“cuff”, not labeled), and configured to inflate a filling gas to the airbag unit (see “The blood pressure may be measured using any appropriate method. For example, the wrist may be pressurized by the cuff and the pressure increased until a given pressure is achieved in the cuff. The pressure is then decreased. The data series representing the amplitude of the pulsewaves detected by pulsewave sensor 1 during pressurization and depressurization and the cuff pressure are used to determine the maximum (i.e., systolic) pressure, which is then shown on display 4 (ST 9). The minimum (i.e., diastolic) pressure is then determined and displayed in the same fashion (ST 10).” in col. 3, ll. 16-25) based on the signal (“The location … is communicated …” or “when it is aligned with the heart, start switch 7 is turned on”) so that the wearable pressure component (“cuff” and “blood pressure meter 12”) exerting a pressure on the wrist (see “When blood pressure meter 12 is correctly positioned, i.e., when it is aligned with the heart, start switch 7 is turned on and the processing required to measure the blood pressure commences. With this embodiment, the intensity of the heart sounds is detected in the part of the body where the measurement is to be taken. The location is detected where the intensity of the heart sounds peaks, and is communicated to enable positioning of the patient's wrist (in this case), level with the patient's heart. This ensures that the blood pressure can be measured accurately.” in col. 3, ll. 56-66).
Claim Interpretation
6. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
7. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
8. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a wearable pressure component” in claim 1, which corresponds to “an inflatable wristband” in the specification;
“an airbag unit” in claim 1, which corresponds to “airbag” that is “inflated” in the specification;
“a wearing unit” in claim 1, which corresponds to “Velcro, buckles, etc.” in the specification;
“a posture sensing unit” in claim 1, which corresponds to a sensor provided for “detecting a wrist posture of the user P” and “detecting an inclination angle θ of the wrist P1 of the user P” in the specification;
“a sound sensing unit” in claim 1, which corresponds to “microphone” in the specification;
“an inflation and deflation unit” in claim 1, which corresponds to “a pump” in the specification;
“an output unit” in claim 1, which corresponds to “a display screen, a speaker, or a combination of the above” in the specification; and
“a heart sound matching algorithm” in claim 8, which corresponds to an “algorithm” that “determines whether the heart sound S meets a standard by matching the voiceprint V and the plurality of heart sound data 211a in the big data database 211” in the specification.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
9. 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.
10. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
11. Claims 1, 3, and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ota.
As to Claim 1, Ota teaches the following:
A wrist blood pressure measuring device (“wrist-type electronic blood pressure meter”, not labeled), worn on a wrist of a user (see “FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a wrist-type electronic blood pressure meter, according to the first embodiment of the present invention.” in col. 2, ll. 23-25, and see figs. 1, 6, and 7), the wrist blood pressure measuring device comprising:
a wearable pressure component (not labeled, component includes “cuff” and “blood pressure meter 12”), comprising an airbag unit (“cuff”, not labeled) and a wearing unit (“blood pressure meter”) 12 for fixing the airbag unit to the wrist (“patient’s wrist”) 11 of the user (see “This electronic blood pressure meter comprises: pulsewave sensor 1, which detects a pulsewave; … Although not shown in the drawing, display 4 is an intrinsic part of the device, and the cuff is an integral part of the blood pressure meter. … In this example shown in FIG. 2, blood pressure meter 12 is fastened to the patient's wrist 11.” in col. 2, ll. 25-45);
a posture sensing unit (“inclination sensor”) 8 (see “This electronic blood pressure meter comprises: … inclination sensor 8, which detects the height of the cuff; …” in col. 2, ll. 24-34), configured to detect whether an inclination angle of the wrist of the user being between 24° and 26° (see “FIG. 3 illustrates a possible relationship between angle of inclination .THETA. and height difference H. Thus, height difference H may be derived from angle of inclination .THETA.. Accordingly, by using an inclination sensor to determine angle of inclination .THETA., the height of the blood pressure meter 12 can be determined.” in col. 2, ll. 50-55);
a sound sensing unit (“heart sound sensor”) 16, configured to detect a heart sound of the user (see “This blood pressure meter comprises: … heart sound sensor 16, which detects the height of the part of the body on which the measurement is to be taken; …” in col. 3, ll. 28-39);
a processing unit (“MPU (microprocessor unit)”) 3, coupled to the posture sensing unit 8 and sound sensing unit 16 (see “… MPU (microprocessor unit) 3, which executes the processing required to measure the blood pressure; display 4, which displays the measured blood pressure value, the number of pulses, and other relevant data; power supply circuit 5, which supplies power supply voltage to the other various circuits; power supply switch 6; start switch 7; inclination sensor 8, which detects the height of the cuff; … and memory 10.” in col. 2, ll. 24-34; and see “… MPU (microprocessor unit) 3, which executes the processing required to measure the blood pressure; … memory 10; heart sound sensor 16, which detects the height of the part of the body on which the measurement is to be taken; noise filter 17, which removes the noise component from the signal detected by heart sound sensor 16; and memory switch 18.” in col. 3, ll. 28-39), the processing unit 3 outputting a signal (“The location … is communicated …” or “when it is aligned with the heart, start switch 7 is turned on”) associated with the inclination angle and the heart sound (Based on broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed phrase ‘associated’, the communicated “location” or “start switch 7” by the “MPU (microprocessor unit) 3” is associated with the “angle of inclination .THETA.” detected by the “inclination sensor 8” and the intensity of the “heart sounds” detected by the “heart sound sensor 16”. See “When blood pressure meter 12 is correctly positioned, i.e., when it is aligned with the heart, start switch 7 is turned on and the processing required to measure the blood pressure commences. With this embodiment, the intensity of the heart sounds is detected in the part of the body where the measurement is to be taken. The location is detected where the intensity of the heart sounds peaks, and is communicated to enable positioning of the patient's wrist (in this case), level with the patient's heart. This ensures that the blood pressure can be measured accurately. Quantifying, displaying and storing the intensity of the heart sounds makes it easier to align the wrist with the heart each time a measurement is to be taken, and it enhances the reproducibility of the measurement. Since only a single location, that where the heart sounds are most intense, need be detected, a circuit of a simple configuration can be used.” in col. 3, l. 56, to col. 4, l. 5);
an inflation and deflation unit (not labeled, means that performs “… the wrist may be pressurized by the cuff and the pressure increased until a given pressure is achieved in the cuff. The pressure is then decreased.”, see col. 3, ll. 17-19), connected to the airbag unit (“cuff”, not labeled), and configured to inflate a filling gas to the airbag unit (see “The blood pressure may be measured using any appropriate method. For example, the wrist may be pressurized by the cuff and the pressure increased until a given pressure is achieved in the cuff. The pressure is then decreased. The data series representing the amplitude of the pulsewaves detected by pulsewave sensor 1 during pressurization and depressurization and the cuff pressure are used to determine the maximum (i.e., systolic) pressure, which is then shown on display 4 (ST 9). The minimum (i.e., diastolic) pressure is then determined and displayed in the same fashion (ST 10).” in col. 3, ll. 16-25) based on the signal (“The location … is communicated …” or “when it is aligned with the heart, start switch 7 is turned on”) so that the wearable pressure component (“cuff” and “blood pressure meter 12”) exerting a pressure on the wrist (see “When blood pressure meter 12 is correctly positioned, i.e., when it is aligned with the heart, start switch 7 is turned on and the processing required to measure the blood pressure commences. With this embodiment, the intensity of the heart sounds is detected in the part of the body where the measurement is to be taken. The location is detected where the intensity of the heart sounds peaks, and is communicated to enable positioning of the patient's wrist (in this case), level with the patient's heart. This ensures that the blood pressure can be measured accurately.” in col. 3, ll. 56-66);
a pressure sensing unit (“pulsewave sensor”) 1, coupled to the airbag unit (“cuff”), and configured to transmit the pressure detected to the processing unit 3, and the processing unit 3 generating a blood pressure data (see “The blood pressure may be measured using any appropriate method. For example, the wrist may be pressurized by the cuff and the pressure increased until a given pressure is achieved in the cuff. The pressure is then decreased. The data series representing the amplitude of the pulsewaves detected by pulsewave sensor 1 during pressurization and depressurization and the cuff pressure are used to determine the maximum (i.e., systolic) pressure, which is then shown on display 4 (ST 9). The minimum (i.e., diastolic) pressure is then determined and displayed in the same fashion (ST 10).” in col. 3, ll. 16-25); and
an output unit (“display”) 4, coupled to the processing unit 3, and configured to output a measurement result associated to the blood pressure data (see “The blood pressure may be measured using any appropriate method. For example, the wrist may be pressurized by the cuff and the pressure increased until a given pressure is achieved in the cuff. The pressure is then decreased. The data series representing the amplitude of the pulsewaves detected by pulsewave sensor 1 during pressurization and depressurization and the cuff pressure are used to determine the maximum (i.e., systolic) pressure, which is then shown on display 4 (ST 9). The minimum (i.e., diastolic) pressure is then determined and displayed in the same fashion (ST 10).” in col. 3, ll. 16-25).
As to Claim 3, Ota teaches the following:
wherein the sound sensing unit 16 is a microphone (“heart sound sensor”) (see col. 3, ll. 37-41).
As to Claim 5, Ota teaches the following:
wherein the output unit 4 is a display screen (“display”) 4, a speaker (“buzzer”) 9, or a combination of the above (see “… display 4, which displays the measured blood pressure value, the number of pulses, and other relevant data; power supply circuit 5, which supplies power supply voltage to the other various circuits; power supply switch 6; start switch 7; inclination sensor 8, which detects the height of the cuff; buzzer 9, which indicates incorrect posture; and memory 10.” in col. 2, ll. 29-35).
As to Claim 6, Ota teaches the following:
wherein the blood pressure data comprises systolic pressure, diastolic pressure, pulse, and heart rate (see “Display 4 might, for example, be an LCD panel to display numerical or character values for the blood pressure and the pulse rate. If the device were being held at an incorrect level, it could be configured to display, for example, symbols to communicate this fact and give appropriate instructions.” in col. 3, ll. 38-42; and see “The data series representing the amplitude of the pulsewaves detected by pulsewave sensor 1 during pressurization and depressurization and the cuff pressure are used to determine the maximum (i.e., systolic) pressure, which is then shown on display 4 (ST 9). The minimum (i.e., diastolic) pressure is then determined and displayed in the same fashion (ST 10).” in col. 3, ll. 19-25).
As to Claim 7, Ota teaches the following:
wherein the posture sensing unit 8 detects the inclination angle not in a range of 24° to 26°, the wrist blood pressure measuring device is in a non-activated state (see “… inclination sensor 8, which detects the height of the cuff; buzzer 9, which indicates incorrect posture; …” in col. 2, ll. 33-34; and see “If the device were being held at an incorrect level, it could be configured to display, for example, symbols to communicate this fact and give appropriate instructions.” in col. 2, ll. 40-42).
As to Claim 8, Ota teaches the following:
wherein the sound sensing unit performs a heart sound matching algorithm to determine whether the heart sound is detected based on a big data database associated with a plurality of heart sound data (see “In this embodiment, blood pressure meter 12 is fastened to the wrist, and must be held at the level of the patient's heart 15, as shown in FIG. 7. To find this level, heart sound sensor 16 is used to search in the vicinity of the patient's heart for the location where the heart sounds are most intense. This location where the intensity peaks is indicated in FIG. 8 as point L.sub.P, and indicates the location of the patient's heart. The detection of point L.sub.P may be communicated via display 4 or by sounding buzzer 9.” in col. 3, ll. 42-50).
As to Claim 9, Ota teaches the following:
wherein the heart sound is not detected by the sound sensing unit 16, the wrist blood pressure measuring device is in a non-activated state (see “… heart sound sensor 16, which detects the height of the part of the body on which the measurement is to be taken; …” in col. 3, ll. 37-39; and see “In this embodiment, blood pressure meter 12 is fastened to the wrist, and must be held at the level of the patient's heart 15, as shown in FIG. 7. To find this level, heart sound sensor 16 is used to search in the vicinity of the patient's heart for the location where the heart sounds are most intense. This location where the intensity peaks is indicated in FIG. 8 as point L.sub.P, and indicates the location of the patient's heart. The detection of point L.sub.P may be communicated via display 4 or by sounding buzzer 9.” in col. 3, ll. 42-50).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
12. 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.
13. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ota in view of Pan, and further in view of Sato et al., U.S. Patent No. 9,895,084 B2 (“Sato”).
As to Claim 2, Ota in view of Pan teaches the subject matter of claim 1 above. Ota in view of Pan do not explicitly teach the following:
wherein the posture sensing unit is an acceleration sensor.
However, Sato teaches the following:
wherein the posture sensing unit is an acceleration sensor (“acceleration sensor”) 17 (see “A later-described acceleration sensor 17 is built into the main body portion 10. The acceleration sensor 17 is a triaxial gravitational acceleration sensor that detects weight acceleration in three directions, namely an x axis direction, a y axis direction, and a z axis direction, shown in FIG. 1. Note that the display surface of the display unit 19 is parallel with the xy plane.” in col. 3, ll. 48-54; and see “The main body portion 10 includes a pressure sensor 11, a pump 12, and an exhaust valve (called simply a “valve” hereinafter) 13 that are connected to the air tube 40, an oscillation circuit 14, a pump drive circuit 15, a valve drive circuit 16, an acceleration sensor 17, an artery detection unit 18, the display unit 19, a control unit (CPU) 20 that performs overall control of the main body portion 10 and carries out various types of computational processes, the operation unit 21, a memory 22, and a power supply 23 that supplies power to the units of the main body portion 10.” in col. 3, ll. 58-67).
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the present application was effectively filed to modify Ota’s posture sensing unit (“inclination sensor”) 8 to be an acceleration sensor (“acceleration sensor”) 17, as taught by Sato, because it would have been a simple substitution of one known feature, i.e. Ota’s “inclination sensor 8”, for another, i.e. Sato’s “acceleration sensor 17”, in order to provide the same predictable result, i.e. providing inclination angle data of the wrist.
14. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ota, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pan.
As to Claim 4, Ota teaches the subject matter of claim 1 above. Ota does not explicitly teach the following:
wherein the inflation and deflation unit is a pump.
However, Pan teaches the following:
wherein the inflation and deflation unit is a pump (“air pump”, not labeled) (see “said gas pump is connected with pressure sensor and an exhaust port through the pipeline, said electronic control exhaust valve connected through pipeline and pressure sensor and an exhaust port, the processor is electrically connected with electronic control exhaust valve; air pump is pressure pump, using constant velocity pump; the pressure sensor for detecting the pressure and detecting current air path.” in para. [0022]).
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the present application was effectively filed to modify Ota’s inflation and deflation unit (means, not labeled, for inflating and deflating the cuff) to include a pump (“air pump”), as taught by Pan, in order to properly inflate the cuff and a controlled rate.
Conclusion
15. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAVIN NATNITHITHADHA whose telephone number is (571)272-4732. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 8:00 am - 4:00 pm.
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, Jason M Sims can be reached at 571-272-7540. 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.
/NAVIN NATNITHITHADHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791 09/02/2026
Prosecution Insights