DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/23/2024 was received and placed in the record on file. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
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.
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.
Currently, no claim limitations were interpreted as invoking a 35 USC 112(f) interpretation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-9, 11, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vaidyanathan et al (US 2019/0320944 A1), at least as broadly as currently recited.
Regarding claims 1-4, 6-9, 11, 14 and 15; Vaidyanathan discloses a system (figures 1-3 and 12) comprising:
a medical device (element 1) comprising an accelerometer (element 3) configured to sense motion of a patient (paragraphs [0048]-[0049]; figures 1-3, 12); and
processing circuitry (element 5) configured to:
obtain a first motion signal generated by the accelerometer (element 3) during a calibration period, wherein the first motion signal is associated with a directed activity of the patient that relates to an amount of motion of the patient that is significant for treatment of a health condition of the patient (wherein Vaidyanathan discloses the process for classifying different activities includes a threshold setting period for identifying the activities so as to calibrate the classification module to identify the correct activity including having the user perform the activity such as walking and setting a threshold associated with that activity via trial and error until the system provides an acceptable classification accuracy; paragraphs [0060]-[0101] and [0141]);
determine a motion threshold based on the first motion signal, wherein the motion threshold relates to the amount of motion of the patient that is significant for treatment of the health condition of the patient (wherein Vaidyanathan discloses determining and setting the threshold value per subject by a controlled event such as walking and testing during calibration; paragraphs [0060]-[0101], specifically [0061]-[0066]);
obtain a second motion signal generated by the accelerometer during a collection period (steps 1802 and 1902 obtain motion signals from the motion sensor which includes the accelerometer; paragraphs [0144]-[0150]; figures 18 and 19); and
responsive to the second motion signal satisfying the motion threshold, store data related to the treatment of the health condition of the patient (wherein data representing the physiological signal of interest is stored after processing to remove signals indicative of user motion and noise; paragraph [0115]-[0126], [0144]-[0147]; figures 13 and 18).
Further regarding claim 2; Vaidyanathan discloses sensing circuitry (circuitry associated with IMU element 3 and MMG or EMG element 4) configured to collect patient data of a patient, wherein the data related to the treatment of the health condition is the patient data (wherein the collected patient data is related to the treatment of the health condition, i.e. foetal and maternal health data; paragraphs [0060]-[0101], [115]-[0126] and [0144]-[0147]; figures 13 and 18).
Further regarding claim 3; Vaidyanathan discloses the patient data comprises at least one of respiration data, impedance data, activity level data, posture data, temperature data, blood pressure data, and heart rate data (wherein Vaidyanathan discloses the patient data comprises respiration, activity, and heart rate data; paragraphs [0126] and [0145]-[0146]).
Further regarding claim 4; Vaidyanathan discloses the second motion signal satisfies the motion threshold when the second motion signal is equal to or less than the motion threshold (wherein the movement is below a movement threshold value indicating there is less noise and/or other motion thus providing the separated data of interest; paragraphs [0060]-[0154]; specifically, [0064]-[0067]).
Further regarding claim 6; Vaidyanathan discloses communication circuitry configured to: wirelessly communicate with an external device (paragraph [0054]); and receive a communication from the external device indicating that the patient is performing the directed activity (wherein the system can provide feedback that the user is performing an activity; paragraphs [0015] and [0073]-[0074]).
Further regarding claim 7; Vaidyanathan discloses the motion threshold relates to one or more of noise in the data related to the treatment of the health condition of the patient or that the patient is being active (wherein the threshold is selected based on identifying when the user is not in an active state which produces noise and motion artifact in order to identify the physiological signal of interest by measuring/recording when the noise/motion artifact is gone/reduced; paragraph [0128]).
Further regarding claim 8; Vaidyanathan discloses the processing circuitry is further configured to determine an activity count for the directed activity based on one or more of a frequency or duration of satisfaction of the motion threshold (wherein Vaidyanathan discloses the charting the data over time for review by a clinician or the patient which would include a count of the number of times an activity was classified; logging data related to the periods of maternal activity; and counting steps; paragraphs [0020], [0073]-[0074] and [0122]).
Further regarding claim 9; Vaidyanathan discloses the medical device further comprises a plurality of sensors (elements 3 and 4), wherein the plurality of sensors comprises the accelerometer (element 3), and wherein at least one sensor of the plurality of sensors (elements 4) measures the data related to the treatment of the health condition of the patient (wherein there can be a plurality of IMU sensor, elements 3, and MMG sensors, element 4, which measure data related to the treatment of the health condition of maternal and foetal activity; figures 12 and 13).
Further regarding claim 11; Vaidyanathan discloses the medical device is a wearable device (see figures 2, 3, 10 and 12).
Further regarding claim 14; Vaidyanathan discloses the directed activity is based on clinician input or historical data collected by the medical device (wherein the directed activity is from the clinician asking the user to walk or from historiacal data from a library/database of known activity and posture types; paragraph [0061]-[0066]).
Further regarding claim 15; Vaidyanathan discloses the processing circuitry is configured to obtain the first motion signal by recording the first motion signal until the first motion signal satisfies one or more collection metrics (records the first motion signal until at the desired level of accuracy; paragraphs [0060]-[0101]).
Claims 1-5, 7, 9, 10, 14, 15, 17, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kraetschmer et al (US 2012/0283544 A1).
Regarding claims 1-5, 7, 9, 10, 14, 15, 17, 18 and 20; Kraetschmer discloses a system (figures 1 and 4) comprising:
a medical device (element 100) comprising an accelerometer (elements 190a and 190b) configured to sense motion of a patient (paragraphs [0019]-[0021]; figures 1 and 4); and
processing circuitry (element 110) configured to:
obtain a first motion signal generated by the accelerometer (element 190a and 190b) during a calibration period, wherein the first motion signal is associated with a directed activity of the patient that relates to an amount of motion of the patient that is significant for treatment of a health condition of the patient (wherein patient is instructed to perform movements detected by accelerometer and saved in memory for pattern comparison which use thresholds for determining patterns; paragraph [0019]-[0025], specifically [0024]);
determine a motion threshold based on the first motion signal, wherein the motion threshold relates to the amount of motion of the patient that is significant for treatment of the health condition of the patient (wherein Kraetschmer discloses determining patterns which can be identified by comparing measured acceleration data to stored movements which have thresholds associated therewith; paragraphs [0019]-[0025] and [0029]-[0030]; figures 4 and 5);
obtain a second motion signal generated by the accelerometer during a collection period (paragraphs [0029]-[0030]; figures 4 and 5); and
responsive to the second motion signal satisfying the motion threshold, store data related to the treatment of the health condition of the patient (wherein collected electrode heart rate data is stored as an arrhythmia if the motion thresholds are satisfied as less than the motion threshold or stored as an incorrect potential arrhythmia if the motion thresholds are satisfied by exceeding the threshold; paragraphs [0019]-[0030]; figures 4 and 5).
Further regarding claim 2; Kraetschmer discloses sensing circuitry (figure 4) configured to collect patient data of a patient, wherein the data related to the treatment of the health condition is the patient data (wherein the electrodes/leads record heart electrical signals from ECG; paragraphs [0019]-[0034]; figures 1 and 4-9).
Further regarding claim 3; Kraetschmer discloses the patient data comprises at least one of respiration data, impedance data, activity level data, posture data, temperature data, blood pressure data, and heart rate data (wherein Kraetschmer discloses the patient data comprises heart rate data as ECG; paragraphs [0019]-[0034]; figures 1 and 4-9).
Further regarding claim 4; Kraetschmer discloses the second motion signal satisfies the motion threshold when the second motion signal is equal to or less than the motion threshold (wherein the movement is below a movement threshold value it indicates it as a positive arrhythmia; paragraph [0030]).
Further regarding claim 5; Kraetschmer discloses wherein the second motion signal satisfies the motion threshold when the second motion signal is equal to or greater than the motion threshold (wherein the examiner notes that Kraetschmer discloses storing incorrect arrhythmia events in said memory which occurs when the threshold is greater than the motion threshold, thus meeting the BRI of the claim limitation as the data is stored responsive to the second motion satisfies exceeding the motion threshold; claim 20).
Further regarding claim 7; Kraetschmer discloses the motion threshold relates to one or more of noise in the data related to the treatment of the health condition of the patient or that the patient is being active (wherein the threshold is selected based on identifying when the user is stationary or active state/posture which produce different motion artifact and noise in order to identify if the physiological signal of interest is confirmed or incorrect; paragraph [0019]-[0034]).
Further regarding claim 9; Kraetschmer discloses the medical device further comprises a plurality of sensors (elements 102, 103 and 190a,b), wherein the plurality of sensors comprises the accelerometer (elements 190a and b), and wherein at least one sensor of the plurality of sensors (elements 102 and 103) measures the data related to the treatment of the health condition of the patient (wherein the device has multiple accelerometers and leads for measuring ECG which measure data related to the treatment of the cardiac health condition; paragraphs [0019]-[0034]).
Further regarding claim 10; Kraetschmer discloses the medical device is implantable (paragraph [0019]; figures 1-3).
Further regarding claim 14; Kraetschmer discloses the directed activity is based on clinician input or historical data collected by the medical device (wherein the clinician instructs the user to perform actions and/or assume posture; paragraph [0019]-[0025]).
Further regarding claim 15; Kraetschmer discloses the processing circuitry is configured to obtain the first motion signal by recording the first motion signal until the first motion signal satisfies one or more collection metrics (wherein the calibration period continues until enough data is collected to calculate the rotational matrix; paragraphs [0019]-[0025]).
Regarding claims 17 and 18; Kraetschmer discloses an implantable medical device (figure 1) comprises:
an accelerometer (elements 190a and 190b) configured to sense motion of a patient (paragraphs [0019]-[0021]; figures 1 and 4); and
processing circuitry (element 110) configured to:
obtain a first motion signal generated by the accelerometer (element 190a and 190b) during a calibration period, wherein the first motion signal is associated with a directed activity of the patient that relates to an amount of motion of the patient that is significant for treatment of a health condition of the patient (wherein patient is instructed to perform movements detected by accelerometer and saved in memory for pattern comparison which use thresholds for determining patterns; paragraph [0019]-[0025]);
determine a motion threshold based on the first motion signal, wherein the motion threshold relates to the amount of motion of the patient that is significant for treatment of the health condition of the patient (wherein Kraetschmer discloses determining patterns which can be identified by comparing measured acceleration data to stored movements which have thresholds associated therewith; paragraphs [0019]-[0025] and [0029]-[0030]; figures 4 and 5);
obtain a second motion signal generated by the accelerometer during a collection period (paragraphs [0029]-[0030]; figures 4 and 5); and
responsive to the second motion signal satisfying the motion threshold, store data related to the treatment of the health condition of the patient (wherein collected electrode heart rate data is stored as an arrhythmia if the motion thresholds are satisfied as less than the motion threshold or stored as an incorrect potential arrhythmia if the motion thresholds are satisfied by exceeding the threshold; paragraphs [0019]-[0030]; figures 4 and 5).
Further regarding claim 18; Kraetschmer discloses the implantable medical device comprises and insertable cardiac monitor (figure 1), and wherein the plurality of sensors comprises one or more electrodes (paragraphs [0019]-[0034]; figures 1-4).
Regarding claim 20; Kraetschmer discloses a method comprising:
obtaining, by processing circuitry (figure 4), a first motion signal generated by an accelerometer (element 190a and 190b) of an implantable medical device (element 100) during a calibration period, wherein the first motion signal is associated with a directed activity of the patient that relates to an amount of motion of the patient that is significant for treatment of a health condition of the patient (wherein patient is instructed to perform movements detected by accelerometer and saved in memory for pattern comparison which use thresholds for determining patterns; paragraph [0019]-[0025]);
determining, by processing circuitry (figure 4), a motion threshold based on the first motion signal, wherein the motion threshold relates to the amount of motion of the patient that is significant for treatment of the health condition of the patient (wherein Kraetschmer discloses determining patterns which can be identified by comparing measured acceleration data to stored movements which have thresholds associated therewith; paragraphs [0019]-[0025] and [0029]-[0030]; figures 4 and 5);
obtaining, by processing circuitry (figure 4), a second motion signal generated by the accelerometer during a collection period (paragraphs [0029]-[0030]; figures 4 and 5); and
responsive to the second motion signal satisfying the motion threshold, storing, by the processing circuitry (figure 4), data related to the treatment of the health condition of the patient (wherein collected electrode heart rate data is stored as an arrhythmia if the motion thresholds are satisfied as less than the motion threshold or stored as an incorrect potential arrhythmia if the motion thresholds are satisfied by exceeding the threshold; paragraphs [0019]-[0030]; figures 4 and 5).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 6 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kraetschmer.
Kraetschmer is described in the rejection of claims 1 and 17 above.
Regarding claims 6; Kraetschmer further discloses the system comprises communication circuitry (element 140 and 150) configured to: wirelessly communicate with an external device (element 150) during calibration (paragraphs [0019]-[0025]; figure 1). Kraetschmer further discloses providing a communication to indicate that a patient has performed a directed activity with feedback that calibration is completed when using a non-telemetric calibration method (paragraph [0023]).
However, Kraetschmer does not explicitly discloses receiving a communication from the external device indicating that the patient is performing the directed activity.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Kraetschmer’s telemetry device and remote programming device to provide a communication on the external device indicating that the patient is performing or completed performing the directed activity in order to let the clinician know that the calibration period is over as taught by Kraetschmer’s feedback teaching.
Regarding claim 19; Kraetschmer’s implantable medical device is described and depicted in figures 1-3, wherein the implantable medical device comprises a housing configured for subcutaneous implantation in the patient, he housing having a first end and a second end, a width less than the length; wherein the one or more electrodes comprises: a first electrode (element 103) at or proximate to the first end of the housing, and a second electrode (element 102) at or proximate the second end of the housing (paragraphs [0019]-[0020]; figure 1). Kraetschmer also discloses that the implantable can be in the form of known pacemakers, defibrillators and ICD (paragraph [0003]).
However, Kraetschmer does not explicitly discloses all of the dimensions of the housing including that the length is between 40 mm and 60 mm between the first end and second end, or that the depth is less than the width.
There is no evidence of record that establishes that changing the length or depth of the device would result in a difference in function of the device of Kraetschmer and there does not appear to be any criticality to the ranges of the dimensions as claimed (only suggested ranges as described in paragraph [0037] which does not discloses any criticality to the suggested ranges). Further, a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, being faced with modifying the implantable device of Kraetschmer, would have a reasonable expectation of success in making such a modification and it appears the device would function as intended being given the claimed dimensions.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the dimensions of Kraetschmer’s dimensions to have a length is between 40 mm and 60 mm between the first end and second end, or that the depth is less than the width as an obvious matter of design choice within the skill of the art.
Furthermore, in the alternative, based on Kratschmer’s disclosure that the device could be implanted in known pacemakers, cardioverters/defibrillators and ICDs, the examiner takes official notice that it is well known in the art of implantable cardiac devices to size the device as a rectangular prism for minimally invasive implantation and sized to maintain its position within the body (which Kraetschmer also relies on based on the calibration as described in paragraph [0019]-[0025]) as it is well known, conventional in the art at the time of filing, including the claimed ranges as currently recited.
Claims 12, 13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vaidyanathan et al (US 2019/0320944 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ly et al (US 2017/0258374 A1).
Regarding claims 12, 13 and 16; Vaidyanathan is described in the rejection of claim 1 above. However, Vaidyanathan does not explicitly disclose that he processing circuitry is configured:
to initiate the calibration period in response to detection of a change in an orientation of the medical device (claim 12)
to initiate the calibration period in response to detection of a calibration profile of the medical device deviating from historical data by at least a predetermined threshold (claim 13); or
periodically initiate the calibration period; obtain an updated first motion signal, wherein the first motion signal is associated with an activity of the patient that relates to the amount of motion of the patient that is significant for treatment of the health condition of the patient; and update the motion threshold based on the updated first motion signal (claim 16).
Ly teaches a system and method for updating calibration of a motion/posture detecting system through manual or automatic posture calibration which includes initiating the calibration period in response to detection of a change in an orientation of the medical device (wherein autocalibration is initiation when detected that the oriented in the base walking orientation; paragraphs [0017],[0034],[0044],[0080]-[0091]); to initiate the calibration period in response to detection of a calibration profile of the medical device deviating from historical data by at least a predetermined threshold (wherein the autocalibration is initiated when a threshold different is detected; paragraphs [0017],[0034],[0044],[0080]-[0091], specifically [0091]); and periodically initiate the calibration period; obtain an updated first motion signal, wherein the first motion signal is associated with an activity of the patient that relates to the amount of motion of the patient that is significant for treatment of the health condition of the patient; and update the motion threshold based on the updated first motion signal (wherein the autocalibration update can occur when the user is detected in base walking position and the calibration is initiated as the user completes the walking motion and updates the calibration accordingly; paragraphs [0017],[0034],[0044],[0080]-[0091]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Vaidyanathan’s system to be programmed into include an auto/manual calibration/recalibration algorithm described above with relation to the limitations of claims 12, 13 and 16 as taught by Ly in order to account for changes in orientation and offset/drift of the accelerometer/device to maintain proper calibration of the device and accuracy of the activity/posture classification and measurements.
Claims 12, 13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kraetschmer et al (US 2012/0283544 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ly et al (US 2017/0258374 A1).
Regarding claims 12, 13 and 16; Vaidyanathan is described in the rejection of claim 1 above. However, Vaidyanathan does not explicitly disclose that he processing circuitry is configured:
to initiate the calibration period in response to detection of a change in an orientation of the medical device (claim 12)
to initiate the calibration period in response to detection of a calibration profile of the medical device deviating from historical data by at least a predetermined threshold (claim 13); or
periodically initiate the calibration period; obtain an updated first motion signal, wherein the first motion signal is associated with an activity of the patient that relates to the amount of motion of the patient that is significant for treatment of the health condition of the patient; and update the motion threshold based on the updated first motion signal (claim 16).
Ly teaches a system and method for updating calibration of a motion/posture detecting system through manual or automatic posture calibration which includes initiating the calibration period in response to detection of a change in an orientation of the medical device (wherein autocalibration is initiation when detected that the oriented in the base walking orientation; paragraphs [0017],[0034],[0044],[0080]-[0091]); to initiate the calibration period in response to detection of a calibration profile of the medical device deviating from historical data by at least a predetermined threshold (wherein the autocalibration is initiated when a threshold different is detected; paragraphs [0017],[0034],[0044],[0080]-[0091], specifically [0091]); and periodically initiate the calibration period; obtain an updated first motion signal, wherein the first motion signal is associated with an activity of the patient that relates to the amount of motion of the patient that is significant for treatment of the health condition of the patient; and update the motion threshold based on the updated first motion signal (wherein the autocalibration update can occur when the user is detected in base walking position and the calibration is initiated as the user completes the walking motion and updates the calibration accordingly; paragraphs [0017],[0034],[0044],[0080]-[0091]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Vaidyanathan’s system to be programmed into include an auto/manual calibration/recalibration algorithm described above with relation to the limitations of claims 12, 13 and 16 as taught by Ly in order to account for changes in orientation and offset/drift of the accelerometer/device to maintain proper calibration of the device and accuracy of the activity/posture classification and measurements.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2015/0265219 A1 to Feiweier et al; discloses a method for adapting a medical system to patient motion during medical examination, and system therefor.
US 2015/0157252 A1 to Sabesan; discloses a system and method for limb-based accelerometer assessments of neurological disorders which includes a calibration method.
WO 2019/078328 A1 to Ushiba et al; discloses a physiological measurement system which includes a calibration method which determines when to activate when to collect the physiological measurements.
US 2017/0319103 A1 to Levy et al; discloses a physiological measurement system which includes a calibration method which determines when to activate when to collect the physiological measurements and update calibration.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM J EISEMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3818. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (7:00 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, Jacqueline Cheng can be reached at 571-272-5596. 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.
/ADAM J EISEMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights