CTNF 18/767,471 CTNF 97924 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Drawings 06-22-07 AIA The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “370” in fig. 11 . Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 10 is 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 10 recites “one or more polarization filters” in lines 6, 7-8, 10, and 12. It is unclear if the one or more polarization filters are in addition to or the same as the “at least one polarization filter” recited in claim 1. For examination purposes it will be treated as referring to the same at least one polarization filter and the limitation is suggested to recite “the at least one polarization filter”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) as a whole, considering all claim elements both individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea. A streamlined analysis of claims 1 and 13 follows: STEP 1 Regarding claims 1 and 13, the claims recite a series of structural elements and/or a series of steps or acts, including a device. Thus, the claims are directed to a machine and/or a process, which is one of the statutory categories of invention. STEP 2A, PRONG ONE The claim is then analyzed to determine whether it is directed to any judicial exception. The steps of: wherein the processor is configured to determine at least one physiological parameter based on a pulsatile (AC) component and a static (DC) component of the reflected waveform; determining at least one physiological parameter based on a pulsatile (AC) component and a static (DC) component of the polarized waveform. set forth a judicial exception. These steps describe a concept performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) and/ or mathematical concepts (including mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, and mathematical calculations). Thus, the claims are drawn to a Mental Process and/or Mathematical Concepts, which is an Abstract Idea. STEP 2A, PRONG TWO Next, the claim as a whole is analyzed to determine whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claim fails to recite an additional element or a combination of additional elements to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limitation on the judicial exception. Claims 1 and 13 recites a biometric measurement device and/or performing photoplethysmography to emit and receive a polarized light/waveform, which is merely adding insignificant pre-solution activity (i.e. mere data gathering) to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)). The emitting and receiving of a polarized light/waveform do not provide an improvement to the technological field, the method does not effect a particular treatment or effect a particular change based on the polarized light/waveform, nor does the method use a particular machine to perform the Abstract Idea. STEP 2B Next, the claim as a whole is analyzed to determine whether any element, or combination of elements, is sufficient to ensure that the claim amounts to significantly more than the exception. Besides the Abstract Idea, the claim recites additional elements/steps of: a photodiode array comprising a plurality of photodiodes and at least one polarization filter covering at least one of the plurality of photodiodes; a light-emitting diode array comprising a plurality of light-emitting diodes proximate to the photodiode array; a non-volatile memory device; a processor in electronic communication with the non-volatile memory device; wherein the photodiode array is configured to receive a reflected waveform from light emitted from the light-emitting diode array; emitting light from at least one light-emitting diode of a plurality of light-emitting diodes arranged in a light-emitting diode array; receiving a polarized waveform, with at least one photodiode of a plurality of photodiodes arranged in a photodiode array, from reflected light of the light emitted by the at least one light-emitting diode. The emitting and receiving steps are well-understood, routine and conventional activities for those in the field of medical diagnostics. Further, the emitting and receiving steps are each recited at a high level of generality such that it amounts to insignificant pre-solution activity, e.g., mere data gathering step necessary to perform the Abstract Idea. When recited at this high level of generality, there is no meaningful limitation, such as a particular or unconventional step that distinguishes it from well-understood, routine, and conventional data gathering and comparing activity engaged in by medical professionals prior to Applicant's invention. Furthermore, it is well established that the mere physical or tangible nature of additional elements such as the obtaining and comparing steps do not automatically confer eligibility on a claim directed to an abstract idea (see, e.g., Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 134 S.Ct. 2347, 2358-59 (2014) ). Consideration of the additional elements as a combination also adds no other meaningful limitations to the exception not already present when the elements are considered separately. Unlike the eligible claim in Diehr in which the elements limiting the exception are individually conventional, but taken together act in concert to improve a technical field, the claim here does not provide an improvement to the technical field. Even when viewed as a combination, the additional elements fail to transform the exception into a patent-eligible application of that exception. Thus, the claim as a whole does not amount to significantly more than the exception itself. The claim is therefore drawn to non-statutory subject matter. Regarding claim 1, the device recited in the claim is a generic device comprising generic components configured to perform the abstract idea. The recited device and photodiode array having at least one polarization filter covering at least one of the plurality of photodiodes and a light-emitting diode array comprising a plurality of light-emitting diodes proximate to the photodiode array are generic sensors configured to perform pre-solutional data gathering activity, and the non-volatile memory and processor are configured to perform the Abstract Idea. According to section 2106.05(f) of the MPEP, merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea does not integrate the Abstract Idea into a practical application. See the Non-Patent Literature of record: Sarkar et al., (2022). Noninvasive Non-Contact SpO2 Monitoring Using an Integrated Polarization-Sensing CMOS Imaging Sensor. Sensors, 22(20), 7796. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22207796; Mishra et al., "Blood Oxygen Saturation Measurement Using Polarization-Dependent Optical Sectioning," in IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 17, no. 12, pp. 3900-3908, 15 June 2017, doi: 10.1109/JSEN.2017.2698520; Meenal Kulkarni and Viktor Gruev, "Integrated spectral-polarization imaging sensor with aluminum nanowire polarization filters," Opt. Express 20, 22997-23012 (2012); Lee et al., "Stretchable PPG sensor with light polarization for physical activity-permissible monitoring," SCIENCE ADVANCES, 2022, 9 pages. The dependent claims also fail to add something more to the abstract independent claims. Claims 2, 9-11, 16-17, and 19 are directed to more abstract ideas and Claims 3-8, 12, 14-15, and 18 are directed to generic sensors/components for pre-solutional data gathering activity, which does not add anything significantly more. The steps recited in the independent claims maintain a high level of generality even when considered in combination with the dependent claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by De Haan (US 20210219884 A1 – cited by Applicant in IDS filed 7/9/24) . Regarding claim 13, De Haan discloses a method of performing photoplethysmography (“method”, Abstract) , the method comprising: emitting light from at least one light-emitting diode (“emit differently modulated electromagnetic radiation in two or more wavelength channels”, para. [0038, 0054, 0065]) of a plurality of light-emitting diodes (radiation sources 20, 21, fig. 1, para. [0054-0055]) arranged in a light-emitting diode array (illumination unit 2, as seen in fig. 1, para. [0054-0055]) ; receiving a polarized waveform, with at least one photodiode (“both the cross- and the parallel polarized channels can be obtained”; “signals from the individual detection elements … two signals obtained with different polarization filters”, para. [0040, 0056, 0063, 0071]) of a plurality of photodiodes (“16 photodiodes”; “plurality of detection elements … photodiodes”, para. [0029, 0039]) arranged in a photodiode array (“detection unit 4 … array of photo-diodes”, para. [0056], fig. 1) , from reflected light of the light emitted by the at least one light-emitting diode (“detect electromagnetic radiation reflected from the skin region of the subject 50”, para. [0056]) ; and determining at least one physiological parameter based on a pulsatile (AC) component and a static (DC) component of the polarized waveform (“signature vector (PBV vector) … ratio AC/DC … relative signal strength/pulsatility … PBV vector is chosen to correspond with the relative pulsatilities in the detection signals for … SpO2 value”, para. [0106-0111]) . Regarding claim 14, De Haan discloses the method of claim 13, wherein the emitting the light from the at least one light-emitting diode comprises emitting polarized light (“emit electromagnetic radiation with different polarization”; “polarized light for illumination”, para. [0036, 0080]) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Haan in view of Lee (US 20220364924 A1) . Regarding claim 1, De Haan discloses a biometric measurement device (system 1, fig. 1, para. 0054]) comprising: a photodiode array (“detection unit 4 … array of photo-diodes”, para. [0056], fig. 1) comprising a plurality of photodiodes (“16 photodiodes”; “plurality of detection elements … photodiodes”, para. [0029, 0039]) and at least one polarization filter covering at least one of the plurality of photodiodes (“polarizer 10 in front of or as part of the detection unit 4”; “polarizer a polarization filter … used”, para. [0040, 0080, 0086], figs. 2-4) ; and a light-emitting diode array (illumination unit 2 comprising radiation sources 20, 21, as seen in fig. 1, “LEDs”, para. [0054]) comprising a plurality of light-emitting diodes proximate to the photodiode array (radiation sources 20, 21, as seen in fig. 1, para. [0054-0055]) ; and a processor (“processing unit 11 … vital signs determination unit 5 … computer”, para. [0057-0058]) , wherein the photodiode array (“detection unit 4 … array of photo-diodes”, para. [0056], fig. 1) is configured to (Examiner’s Note: functional language, i.e., capable of) receive a reflected waveform from light emitted from the light-emitting diode array (“detect electromagnetic radiation reflected from the skin region of the subject 50”, para. [0056]), wherein the processor (“processing unit 11 … vital signs determination unit 5 … computer”, para. [0057-0058]) is configured to determine at least one physiological parameter based on a pulsatile (AC) component and a static (DC) component of the reflected waveform (“signature vector (PBV vector) … ratio AC/DC … relative signal strength/pulsatility … PBV vector is chosen to correspond with the relative pulsatilities in the detection signals for … SpO2 value”, para. [0106-0111]) . De Haan further discloses that the present invention may also be applied in other fields such as neonate monitoring, general surveillance applications, security monitoring or so-called live style environments, such as fitness equipment, a wearable, a handheld device like a smartphone, or the like. De Haan does not expressly disclose that the plurality of light-emitting diodes is proximate to the photodiode array; a non-volatile memory device; and that the processor is in electronic communication with the non-volatile memory device. However, Lee directed to an electronic device for detecting whether the electronic device is worn using polarization and selectively measuring a biosignal discloses a plurality of light-emitting diodes (as least one LED 402/ LED module 1202, as seen in figs. 4 & 12, para. [0136]) proximate to a photodiode array (photodiodes 410, 420, 1210, 1220, 1230, 1240 figs. 4 & 12, para. [0137-0138]) ; a non-volatile memory device (non-volatile memory 134, para. [0033], fig. 1) ; a processor (processor 120/430, figs. 1 & 4; “processor 120”, para. [0033]) ; and that the processor is in electronic communication with the non-volatile memory device (as seen in fig. 1, para. [0033]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify De Haan such that the plurality of light-emitting diodes are proximate to the photodiode array and such that the device comprises a non-volatile memory device, the processor is in electronic communication with the non-volatile memory device, in view of the teachings of Lee, as this would aid in integrating/arranging the system/optical sensors of De Haan into a wearable/electronic device for measuring biometric information and would aid in storing the received data from the sensor module (Lee, para. [0033, 0134]) . Regarding claim 2, De Haan, as modified by Lee hereinabove, discloses the biometric measurement device of claim 1, wherein the processor (“processing unit 11 … vital signs determination unit 5 … computer”, para. [0057-0058]) is further configured to determine one or more health metrics utilizing the at least one physiological parameter, wherein the one or more health metrics are selected from the group consisting of respiratory rate, heart rate, blood oxygen saturation, blood pressure, heart rate variability, maximal oxygen consumption, systolic volume, cardiac output, cardiac index, metabolic rate, and metabolic fitness (“SpO2”; “monitoring … blood pressure, cardiac output, respiration”, para. [0058, 0106-0111, 0115-0116]) . Regarding claim 3, De Haan, as modified by Lee hereinabove, discloses the biometric measurement device of claim 1, wherein at least one of the plurality of light-emitting diodes is configured to emit polarized light (“emit electromagnetic radiation with different polarization”; “polarized light for illumination”, para. [0036, 0080]) . Regarding claim 4, De Haan, as modified by Lee hereinabove, discloses the biometric measurement device of claim 1, further comprising at least one polarization filter on at least one of the plurality of light-emitting diodes (polarizer 9, 9a, 9b, as seen in figs. 2-3, “multiple … polarization filter”, para. [0080, 0085-0086]) . Regarding claim 5, De Haan, as modified by Lee hereinabove, discloses the biometric measurement device of claim 1, wherein a first-emitting diode of the plurality of light-emitting diodes is configured to emit light having a first wavelength (“first modulation frequency for modulating the emitted electromagnetic radiation”, para. [0033, 0038, 0054-0055]) , and wherein a second-emitting diode of the plurality of light-emitting diodes is configured to emit light having a second wavelength different than the first wavelength (“second modulation frequency applied by the second radiation source for modulating the emitted electromagnetic radiation”, para. [0033, 0038, 0054-0055]) (“first radiation source 20 and a second radiation source 21, which are configured to emit differently modulated electromagnetic radiation in two or more wavelength channels”; ““range from 400 nm to 1000 nm”, para. [0038, 0054-0055, 0065]) . Regarding claim 7, upon the modification of De Haan to integrate/arrange the system/optical sensors into a wearable/electronic device for measuring biometric information, as described with respect to claim 1 above, De Haan, as modified by Lee hereinabove, discloses the biometric measurement device of claim 1, wherein the plurality of photodiodes (Lee, photodiodes 1210, 1220, 1230, 1240, fig. 12) is arranged in an annular (Lee, as seen inf fig. 12) configuration around the light-emitting diode array (Lee, LED module 1202 having at least one LED, as seen in fig. 12) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Haan in view Lee , as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hu (US 20260083329 A1) . Regarding claim 6, De Haan, as modified by Lee hereinabove, discloses the biometric measurement device of claim 1. De Haan, as modified by Lee hereinabove, does not disclose wherein the plurality of light-emitting diodes is arranged in an annular configuration around the photodiode array. However, Hu directed to an opto-physiological sensor system comprising a plurality of illumination sources 105, 107, 109, 111 (fig. 1, para. [0039]) and a plurality of photodiodes 101 (fig. 1, para. [0039]) discloses wherein the plurality of light-emitting diodes (105, 107, 109, 111, fig. 1) is arranged in an annular configuration around the photodiode array (101, fig. 1) (as seen in fig. 1, “concentric circles”, para. [0167-0168]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify De Haan, as modified by Lee hereinabove, such that the plurality of light-emitting diodes is arranged in an annular configuration around the photodiode array, in view of the teachings of Hu, as this would aid in determining SpO 2 for specific tissue types by positioning light emitting diodes of longer wavelengths further away from each of the photodiodes such that the wavelength of the illumination sources increases with radial distance from the photodiode (para. [0167-0168]) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 8-9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Haan in view Lee , as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Schilthuizen (US 20170172476 A1) . Regarding claim 8, De Haan, as modified by Lee hereinabove, discloses the biometric measurement device of claim 1. De Haan, as modified by Lee hereinabove, does not disclose wherein the plurality of photodiodes and the plurality of light-emitting diodes are arranged in a linear array. However, Schilthuizen directed to a measurement device worn on the body for measuring a signal representative of a physiological parameter of a user comprising a plurality of light receiving surfaces/photodiodes 16 (fig. 1, para. [0019, 0041]) and a plurality of light emitting sources/LEDs 12 (fig. 1, para. [0019, 0041]) discloses wherein the plurality of photodiodes (16, fig. 1) and the plurality of light-emitting diodes (12, fig. 1) are arranged in a linear array (as seen in fig. 1, “array”, para. [0032]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify De Haan, as modified by Lee hereinabove, such that the plurality of photodiodes and the plurality of light-emitting diodes are arranged in a linear array, in view of the teachings of Schilthuizen, as this would aid in arranging the lighting emitting sources and the light receiving surfaces in a position close to each other to maximize the light coupling and the light receiving and would aid in incorporating/securing the lighting emitting sources and the light receiving surfaces on a band of a wrist worn device to enable abutment against the palmar side of a wrist for measuring a physiological parameter of a user (Schilthuizen, para. [0035, 0102]). Regarding claim 9, De Haan, as modified by Lee hereinabove, discloses biometric measurement device of claim 1. De Haan further discloses a control unit 3 configured to control the radiation sources and emitting radiation in at least two or three different wavelength intervals (RGB, or invisible wavelengths using NIR) in a modulated (frequency or phase) (para. [0055, 0067]) . De Haan, as modified by Lee hereinabove, does not disclose wherein the non-volatile memory device comprises instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to: activate a first light-emitting diode of the plurality of light-emitting diodes at a first time to emit light having a first wavelength; receive, with at least one of the plurality of photodiodes, a first reflected waveform from the first light-emitting diode; activate a second light-emitting diode of the plurality of light-emitting diodes at a second time to emit light having a second wavelength; and receive, with at least one of the plurality of photodiodes, a second reflected waveform from the second light-emitting diode. However, Schilthuizen directed to a measurement device worn on the body for measuring a signal representative of a physiological parameter of a user comprising a plurality of light receiving surfaces/photodiodes 16 (fig. 1, para. [0019, 0041]) and a plurality of light emitting sources/LEDs 12 (fig. 1, para. [0019, 0041]) discloses the processor (control unit 4 & processing unit 6, figs. 1-2) to: activate a first light-emitting diode of the plurality of light-emitting diodes at a first time to emit light having a first wavelength (“first measurement session … at least one light source … first wavelength”, para. [0025, 0053, 0109]) ; receive, with at least one of the plurality of photodiodes, a first reflected waveform from the first light-emitting diode (“first measurement session”; “received light signal … at least one light receiver”; “ 600-660 nm”; “reflected light”, para. [0025-0026, 0053, 0088]) ; activate a second light-emitting diode of the plurality of light-emitting diodes at a second time to emit light having a second wavelength (“second measurement session … at least one light source … second wavelength”, para. [0026, 0053, 0109]) ; and receive, with at least one of the plurality of photodiodes, a second reflected waveform from the second light-emitting diode (“second measurement session”; “received light signal … at least one light receiver”; “ 880-940 nm”; “reflected light”, para. [0025-0026, 0053, 0088]) . Schilthuizen further discloses that using light in a first wavelength range followed by light in a second wavelength range etc. allows for additional health indicators to be determined and/or to determine the heart rate parameter via two measurements (para. [0057, 0109]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify De Haan, as modified by Lee hereinabove, such that the non-volatile memory device comprises instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to: activate a first light-emitting diode of the plurality of light-emitting diodes at a first time to emit light having a first wavelength; receive, with at least one of the plurality of photodiodes, a first reflected waveform from the first light-emitting diode; activate a second light-emitting diode of the plurality of light-emitting diodes at a second time to emit light having a second wavelength; and receive, with at least one of the plurality of photodiodes, a second reflected waveform from the second light-emitting diode, in view of the teachings of Schilthuizen, as this would aid in determining additional health indicators. Regarding claim 12, De Haan, as modified by Lee and Schilthuizen hereinabove, discloses the biometric measurement device of claim 9. De Haan, as modified by Lee and Schilthuizen hereinabove, does not disclose wherein the polarization state P is selected from the group consisting of 0°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 90°, 120°, 135°, 150°, R, and L. However, Lee directed to an electronic device for detecting whether the electronic device is worn using polarization and selectively measuring a biosignal comprising a plurality of light- emitting diodes (as least one LED 402/ LED module 1202, as seen in figs. 4 & 12, para. [0136]) , a photodiode array (photodiodes 410, 420, 1210, 1220, 1230, 1240 figs. 4 & 12, para. [0137-0138]) , and a polarizer 411/421/1211 applied to a photodiode (para. [0082, 0092, 0136]) discloses the polarization state P is selected from the group consisting of 0°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 90°, 120°, 135°, 150°, R, and L (“polarizer having a polarization angle of 0 to 90 degrees … polarization angle of 90°”, para. [0092, 0136]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify De Haan, as modified by Lee and Schilthuizen hereinabove, such that the polarization state P is selected from the group consisting of 0°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 90°, 120°, 135°, 150°, R, and L, in view of the teachings of Lee, as such a modification would have been merely a substitution of the polarization filters of De Haan for the polarizer having a polarization angle of Lee and would aid in more accurately measuring a biosignal (Lee para. [0006]) and improve light robustness or decrease sensitivity for specular reflections (De Haan, para. [0071]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Haan in view Lee, and Schilthuizen, as applied to claim 9 above, further in view of Priem (US 20220369943 A1), and further in view of Bolus (US 11660005 B1) . Regarding claim 10, De Haan, as modified by Lee and Schilthuizen hereinabove, discloses the biometric measurement device of claim 9. De Haan further discloses the first reflected waveform through one or more polarization filters collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1 and the second reflected waveform through one of more polarization filters collected from the light having the second wavelength λ2 (“two or more wavelength channels and/or in two or more polarization channels”; “received light with different polarization directions”, para. [0027, 0040-0041, 0063, 0080, 0110]) . De Haan, as modified by Lee and Schilthuizen hereinabove, does not disclose wherein the non-volatile memory device comprises instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to determine oxygen saturation SpO2 as follows: SpO2=α-β.R wherein α and β are constants, and wherein R is calculated as follows: = ( A C r m s , λ 1 / D C λ 1 ) / A C r m s , λ 2 / D C λ 2 ) where AC rms,λ1 is a root-mean-square of a pulsatile (AC) component of the first reflected waveform through one or more polarization filters collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1; DC λ1 is a static (DC) component of the first reflected waveform through one or more polarization filters collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1; AC rms,λ2 is a root-mean-square of a pulsatile (AC) component of the second reflected waveform collected through one or more polarization filters from the light having the second wavelength λ2; and DC λ2 is a static (DC) component of the second reflected waveform through one of more polarization filters collected from the light having the second wavelength λ2. However, Priem directed to a method intended for the evaluation of the quality of ratio of ratios (RR) values computed for at least two photoplethysmographic (PPG) signals discloses determining oxygen saturation SpO2 as follows: SpO2=α-β.R wherein α and β are constants ( PNG media_image1.png 37 170 media_image1.png Greyscale “SpO2 value is obtained by applying a calibration model … B and C are parameters of the model that may be optimized para. [0111]) . Priem further discloses calculating the ratio of ratios RR/RR value (para. [0075-0078]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify De Haan, as modified by Lee and Schilthuizen hereinabove, such that the non-volatile memory device comprises instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to determine oxygen saturation SpO2 as follows: SpO2=α-β.R wherein α and β are constants, in view of the teachings of Priem, as this would aid in determining SpO2 values by applying a calibration model to the measured RR value. De Haan, as modified by Lee, Schilthuizen, and Priem hereinabove, does not disclose wherein R is calculated as follows: = ( A C r m s , λ 1 / D C λ 1 ) / A C r m s , λ 2 / D C λ 2 ) where AC rms,λ1 is a root-mean-square of a pulsatile (AC) component of the first reflected waveform through one or more polarization filters collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1; DC λ1 is a static (DC) component of the first reflected waveform through one or more polarization filters collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1; AC rms,λ2 is a root-mean-square of a pulsatile (AC) component of the second reflected waveform collected through one or more polarization filters from the light having the second wavelength λ2; and DC λ2 is a static (DC) component of the second reflected waveform through one of more polarization filters collected from the light having the second wavelength λ2. However, Bolus directed to a cardiorespiratory analysis system including a PPG sensor discloses deriving SpO2 data points discloses wherein R is calculated as follows: = ( A C r m s , λ 1 / D C λ 1 ) / A C r m s , λ 2 / D C λ 2 ) ( PNG media_image2.png 104 326 media_image2.png Greyscale , col. 4 lines 35-54 & col. 12 lines 7-47) where AC rms,λ1 is a root-mean-square of a pulsatile component of the first reflected waveform collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1 (“pulsatile component”; “AC rms RED is a root means square of the red AC data”, col. 4 lines 35-54 & col. 11 lines 49-51 & col. 12 lines 7-47) ; DC λ1 is a static (DC) component of the first reflected waveform through one or more polarization filters collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1 (“non-pulsatile component”; “DC rms RED is a root means square of the red DC data”, col. 4 lines 35-54 & col. 11 lines 49-51 & col. 12 lines 7-47) ; AC rms,λ2 is a root-mean-square of a pulsatile (AC) component of the second reflected waveform collected from the light having the second wavelength λ2 (“pulsatile component”; AC rms IR is a root means square of the IR AC data”, col. 4 lines 35-54 & col. 11 lines 49-51 & col. 12 lines 7-47) ; and DC λ2 is a static (DC) component of the second reflected waveform collected from the light having the second wavelength λ2 (“non-pulsatile component”; “DC rms IR is a root means square of the IR DC data”, col. 4 lines 35-54 & col. 11 lines 49-51 & col. 12 lines 7-47) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify De Haan, as modified by Lee, Schilthuizen, and Priem hereinabove, such that R is calculated as follows: = ( A C r m s , λ 1 / D C λ 1 ) / A C r m s , λ 2 / D C λ 2 ) where AC rms,λ1 is a root-mean-square of a pulsatile (AC) component of the first reflected waveform through one or more polarization filters collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1; DC λ1 is a static (DC) component of the first reflected waveform through one or more polarization filters collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1; AC rms,λ2 is a root-mean-square of a pulsatile (AC) component of the second reflected waveform collected through one or more polarization filters from the light having the second wavelength λ2; and DC λ2 is a static (DC) component of the second reflected waveform through one of more polarization filters collected from the light having the second wavelength λ2, in view of the teachings of Bolus, as this would aid in calculating the optical ratio for calculating oxygen saturation content . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Haan in view Lee, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of De Haan (US 20210361203 A1) (herein De Haan 1203). Regarding claim 11, De Haan as modified by Lee hereinabove, discloses the biometric measurement device of claim 1. De Haan as modified by Lee hereinabove, does not disclose wherein the non-volatile memory device comprises instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to calculate a physiological parameter S t at a time t as follows: S t = f A C ( λ n , P ) D C ( λ n , P ) wherein f is a function; (ACλ n ,P) is a pulsatile (AC) component of the reflected waveform collected with light from a light-emitting diode n having a wavelength λ n and a polarization state P; DC(λ n ,P) is the static (DC) component of the reflected waveform collected with light from a light-emitting diode n having a wavelength λ n and the polarization state P . However, De Haan 1203 discloses calculating a physiological parameter St at a time t as follows: S t = f A C ( λ n , P ) D C ( λ n , P ) (“determines SpO2 indirectly based on the signal quality … SpO2 ‘signatures’ … P b v → ”, para. [0092]) wherein f is a function (“APBV method … SpO2 ‘signatures’ … mathematically”, para. [0092]) ; A C ( λ n , P ) is a pulsatile (AC) component of the polarized waveform collected with light from a light-emitting diode n having a wavelength λn and a polarization state P (“first detection signal comprising reflection information in a first wavelength channel and a first polarization channel having a first polarization direction”; “ratio AC/DC … relative signal strength/pulsatility”, para. [0039, 0075. 0088]) ; D C ( λ n , P ) is the static (DC) component of the polarized waveform collected with light from a light-emitting diode n having a wavelength λ n and the polarization state P (“first detection signal comprising reflection information in a first wavelength channel and a first polarization channel having a first polarization direction”; “ratio AC/DC … relative signal strength/pulsatility”, para. [0037, 0039, 0075, 0088]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify De Haan as modified by Lee hereinabove, such that the non-volatile memory device comprises instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to calculate a physiological parameter S t at a time t as follows: S t = f A C ( λ n , P ) D C ( λ n , P ) wherein f is a function; A C ( λ n , P ) is a pulsatile (AC) component of the polarized waveform collected with light from a light-emitting diode n having a wavelength λ n and a polarization state P; D C ( λ n , P ) is the static (DC) component of the polarized waveform collected with light from a light-emitting diode n having a wavelength λ n and the polarization state P, in view of the teachings of De Haan 1203, as this would aid in determining SpO2 using the APBV method and exploiting various combinations of detection signals and polarization/wavelength channels . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Haan in view of Schilthuizen . Regarding claim 15, De Haan discloses the method of claim 13. De Haan does not disclose wherein the emitting the light from the at least one light-emitting diode comprises: emitting a first light signal having a first wavelength from a first light-emitting diode of the plurality of light-emitting diodes at a first time; receiving a first polarized waveform from a first reflected signal of the first light signal; emitting a second light signal having a second wavelength from a second light-emitting diode of the plurality of light-emitting diodes at a second time different than the first time; and receiving a second polarized waveform from a second reflected signal of the second light signal. However, Schilthuizen directed to a measurement device worn on the body for measuring a signal representative of a physiological parameter of a user comprising a plurality of light receiving surfaces/photodiodes 16 (fig. 1, para. [0019, 0041]) and a plurality of light emitting sources/LEDs 12 (fig. 1, para. [0019, 0041]) discloses wherein the emitting the light from the at least one light-emitting diode (para. [0025, 0053]) comprises: emitting a first light signal having a first wavelength from a first light-emitting diode of the plurality of light-emitting diodes at a first time (“first measurement session … at least one light source … first wavelength”; “predetermined amount of time”, para. [0025, 0053, 0109]) ; receiving a first polarized waveform from a first reflected signal of the first light signal (“first measurement session”; “received light signal … at least one light receiver”; “ 600-660 nm”; “reflected light”, para. [0025-0026, 0053, 0088]) ; emitting a second light signal having a second wavelength from a second light-emitting diode of the plurality of light-emitting diodes at a second time different than the first time (“second measurement session … at least one light source … second wavelength”; “predetermined amount of time”, para. [0026, 0053, 0109]) ; and receiving a second polarized waveform from a second reflected signal of the second light signal (“second measurement session”; “received light signal … at least one light receiver”; “ 880-940 nm”; “reflected light”, para. [0025-0026, 0053, 0088]) . Schilthuizen further discloses that using light in a first wavelength range followed by light in a second wavelength range etc. allows for additional health indicators to be determined and/or to determine the heart rate parameter via two measurements (para. [0057, 0109]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify De Haan such that the emitting the light from the at least one light-emitting diode comprises: emitting a first light signal having a first wavelength from a first light-emitting diode of the plurality of light-emitting diodes at a first time; receiving a first polarized waveform from a first reflected signal of the first light signal; emitting a second light signal having a second wavelength from a second light-emitting diode of the plurality of light-emitting diodes at a second time different than the first time; and receiving a second polarized waveform from a second reflected signal of the second light signal, in view of the teachings of Schilthuizen, as this would aid in determining additional health indicators . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Haan in view of Schilthuizen, as applied to claim 15 above, further in view of Priem, and further in view of Bolus . Regarding claim 16, De Haan, as modified by Schilthuizen hereinabove, discloses the method of claim 15. De Haan further discloses the first reflected waveform through one or more polarization filters collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1 and the second reflected waveform through one of more polarization filters collected from the light having the second wavelength λ2 (“two or more wavelength channels and/or in two or more polarization channels”; “received light with different polarization directions”, para. [0027, 0040-0041, 0063, 0080, 0110]) . De Haan, as modified by Schilthuizen hereinabove, does not disclose determining oxygen saturation SpO2 as follows: SpO2=α-β.R wherein α and β are constants, and wherein R is calculated as follows: R = ( A C r m s , λ 1 / D C λ 1 ) / A C r m s , λ 2 / D C λ 2 ) where ACrms,λ1 is a root-mean-square of a pulsatile (AC) component of the first polarized waveform collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1; DC λ1 is a static (DC) component of the first polarized waveform collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1; AC rms,λ2 is a root-mean-square of a pulsatile (AC) component of the second polarized waveform collected from the light having the second wavelength λ2; and DC λ2 is a static (DC) component of the second polarized waveform collected from the light having the second wavelength λ2. However, Priem directed to a method intended for the evaluation of the quality of ratio of ratios (RR) values computed for at least two photoplethysmographic (PPG) signals discloses determining oxygen saturation SpO2 as follows: SpO2=α-β.R wherein α and β are constants ( PNG media_image1.png 37 170 media_image1.png Greyscale “SpO2 value is obtained by applying a calibration model … B and C are parameters of the model that may be optimized para. [0111]) . Priem further discloses calculating the ratio of ratios RR/RR value (para. [0075-0078]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify De Haan, as modified by Schilthuizen hereinabove, such that the method comprises determining oxygen saturation SpO2 as follows: SpO2=α-β.R wherein α and β are constants, in view of the teachings of Priem, as this would aid in determining SpO2 values by applying a calibration model to the measured RR value. De Haan, as modified by Schilthuizen and Priem hereinabove, does not disclose wherein R is calculated as follows: R = ( A C r m s , λ 1 / D C λ 1 ) / A C r m s , λ 2 / D C λ 2 ) where ACrms,λ1 is a root-mean-square of a pulsatile (AC) component of the first polarized waveform collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1; DC λ1 is a static (DC) component of the first polarized waveform collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1; AC rms,λ2 is a root-mean-square of a pulsatile (AC) component of the second polarized waveform collected from the light having the second wavelength λ2; and DC λ2 is a static (DC) component of the second polarized waveform collected from the light having the second wavelength λ2. However, Bolus directed to a cardiorespiratory analysis system including a PPG sensor discloses deriving SpO2 data points discloses wherein R is calculated as follows: = ( A C r m s , λ 1 / D C λ 1 ) / A C r m s , λ 2 / D C λ 2 ) ( PNG media_image2.png 104 326 media_image2.png Greyscale , col. 4 lines 35-54 & col. 12 lines 7-47) where AC rms,λ1 is a root-mean-square of a pulsatile component of the first reflected waveform collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1 (“pulsatile component”; “AC rms RED is a root means square of the red AC data”, col. 4 lines 35-54 & col. 11 lines 49-51 & col. 12 lines 7-47) ; DC λ1 is a static (DC) component of the first reflected waveform through one or more polarization filters collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1 (“non-pulsatile component”; “DC rms RED is a root means square of the red DC data”, col. 4 lines 35-54 & col. 11 lines 49-51 & col. 12 lines 7-47) ; AC rms,λ2 is a root-mean-square of a pulsatile (AC) component of the second reflected waveform collected from the light having the second wavelength λ2 (“pulsatile component”; AC rms IR is a root means square of the IR AC data”, col. 4 lines 35-54 & col. 11 lines 49-51 & col. 12 lines 7-47) ; and DC λ2 is a static (DC) component of the second reflected waveform collected from the light having the second wavelength λ2 (“non-pulsatile component”; “DC rms IR is a root means square of the IR DC data”, col. 4 lines 35-54 & col. 11 lines 49-51 & col. 12 lines 7-47) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify De Haan, as modified by Schilthuizen and Priem hereinabove, such that R is calculated as follows: = ( A C r m s , λ 1 / D C λ 1 ) / A C r m s , λ 2 / D C λ 2 ) where AC rms,λ1 is a root-mean- square of a pulsatile (AC) component of the first reflected waveform through one or more polarization filters collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1; DC λ1 is a static (DC) component of the first reflected waveform through one or more polarization filters collected from the light having the first wavelength λ1; AC rms,λ2 is a root-mean-square of a pulsatile (AC) component of the second reflected waveform collected through one or more polarization filters from the light having the second wavelength λ2; and DC λ2 is a static (DC) component of the second reflected waveform through one of more polarization filters collected from the light having the second wavelength λ2, in view of the teachings of Bolus, as this would aid in calculating the optical ratio for calculating oxygen saturation content . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Haan in view of De Haan 1203 . Regarding claim 17, De Haan discloses the method of claim 13. De Haan does not disclose wherein the determining the at least one physiological parameter comprises determining signal S t at a time t as follows: S t = f A C ( λ n , P ) D C ( λ n , P ) wherein f is a function; A C ( λ n , P ) is a pulsatile (AC) component of the polarized waveform collected with light from a light-emitting diode n having a wavelength λ n and a polarization state P; D C ( λ n , P ) is the static (DC) component of the polarized waveform collected with light from a light-emitting diode n having a wavelength λ n and the polarization state P. However, De Haan 1203 discloses wherein the determining the at least one physiological parameter comprises determining signal S t at a time t as follows: S t = f A C ( λ n , P ) D C ( λ n , P ) (“determines SpO2 indirectly based on the signal quality … SpO2 ‘signatures’ … P b v → ”, para. [0092]) wherein f is a function (“APBV method … SpO2 ‘signatures’ … mathematically”, para. [0092]) ; A C ( λ n , P ) is a pulsatile (AC) component of the polarized waveform collected with light from a light-emitting diode n having a wavelength λn and a polarization state P (“first detection signal comprising reflection information in a first wavelength channel and a first polarization channel having a first polarization direction”; “ratio AC/DC … relative signal strength/pulsatility”, para. [0039, 0075. 0088]) ; D C ( λ n , P ) is the static (DC) component of the polarized waveform collected with light from a light-emitting diode n having a wavelength λ n and the polarization state P (“first detection signal comprising reflection information in a first wavelength channel and a first polarization channel having a first polarization direction”; “ratio AC/DC … relative signal strength/pulsatility”, para. [0037, 0039, 0075, 0088]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify De Haan such that the determining the at least one physiological parameter comprises determining signal S t at a time t as follows: S t = f A C ( λ n , P ) D C ( λ n , P ) wherein f is a function; A C ( λ n , P ) is a pulsatile (AC) component of the polarized waveform collected with light from a light-emitting diode n having a wavelength λ n and a polarization state P; D C ( λ n , P ) is the static (DC) component of the polarized waveform collected with light from a light-emitting diode n having a wavelength λ n and the polarization state P, in view of the teachings of De Haan 1203, as this would aid in determining SpO2 using the APBV method and exploiting various combinations of detection signals and polarization/wavelength channels . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Haan in view of De Haan 1203 , as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Lee . Regarding claim 18, De Haan, as modified by De Haan 1203 hereinabove, discloses the method of claim 17. De Haan, as modified by De Haan 1203 hereinabove, does not disclose wherein the polarization state P is selected from the group consisting of 0°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 90°, 120°, 135°, 150°, R, and L. However, Lee directed to an electronic device for detecting whether the electronic device is worn using polarization and selectively measuring a biosignal comprising a plurality of light-emitting diodes (as least one LED 402/ LED module 1202, as seen in figs. 4 & 12, para. [0136]) , a photodiode array (photodiodes 410, 420, 1210, 1220, 1230, 1240 figs. 4 & 12, para. [0137-0138]) , and a polarizer 411/421/1211 applied to a photodiode (para. [0082, 0092, 0136]) discloses the polarization state P is selected from the group consisting of 0°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 90°, 120°, 135°, 150°, R, and L (“polarizer having a polarization angle of 0 to 90 degrees … polarization angle of 90°”, para. [0092, 0136]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify De Haan, as modified by De Haan 1203 hereinabove, such that the polarization state P is selected from the group consisting of 0°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 90°, 120°, 135°, 150°, R, and L, in view of the teachings of Lee, as such a modification would have been merely a substitution of the polarization filters of De Haan for the polarizer having a polarization angle of Lee and would aid in more accurately measuring a biosignal (Lee para. [0006]) and improve light robustness or decrease sensitivity for specular reflections (De Haan, para. [0071]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Haan in view of in view of Dashevsky (US 10561863 B1) . Regarding claim 19, De Haan discloses the method of claim 13. De Haan does not disclose the method further comprising processing the polarized waveform with an artificial neural network model to improve accuracy and a wider range of healthcare metric prediction. However, Dashevsky directed to a wearable device for comprehensive bio-monitoring of physiologic metrics discloses processing the signals with an artificial neural network model to improve accuracy and a wider range of healthcare metric prediction (“processor … algorithm … identifying or predicting dangerous health conditions … signals received from the connected sensors … calculates … oxygen saturation … artificial neural network”, col. 31 line 33-col. 32 line 42) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention being made to modify De Haan such that the method further comprises processing the polarized waveform with an artificial neural network model to improve accuracy and a wider range of healthcare metric prediction, in view of the teachings of Dashevsky, as this would aid in calculating physiological metrics and identifying or predicting dangerous health conditions by incorporating the algorithm/artificial neural network of Dashevsky . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure : Sakkalis (US 20200405233 A1) directed to systems and methods for measuring biomarkers in a non-invasive manner; Fan (US 20200138360 A1) directed to apparatuses and techniques for non-invasive and non-contact optical imaging; Verkruijsse (US 20190167124 A1) directed to a processing device, system and method for use in blood oxygen saturation measurement . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW ELI HOFFPAUIR whose telephone number is (571)272-4522. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00. 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, Charles Marmor II can be reached at (571) 272-4730. 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. /A.E.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3791 /AURELIE H TU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 2 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 3 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 4 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 5 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 6 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 7 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 8 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 9 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 10 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 11 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 12 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 13 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 14 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 15 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 16 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 17 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 18 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 19 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 20 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 21 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 22 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 23 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 24 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 25 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 26 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 27 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 28 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 29 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 30 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 31 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 32 Art Unit: 3791 Application/Control Number: 18/767,471 Page 33 Art Unit: 3791
Prosecution Insights