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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/28/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As to Applicant’s argument that Baker does not teach “the processor of the first wearable device determines that all three wearable devices are on the user’s body independently and without input from the at least one external device” (Remarks, p. 9), the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Baker, [0057] states:
Typically, each sensor sends physiological data via
Bluetooth to patient monitor 112 and patient monitor 112, in
turn, sends the physiological data to server computer 118 via
LAN/WAN connection 116. The server computer 118 or
patient monitor 112 includes software that correlates the
physiological data. For example, if the physiological data
measured is the heart rate of a patient, application software on
the server computer determines the beat-to-beat interval of
the heart rate. The beat-to-beat interval measured by a plurality
of sensors is correlated to verify that the sensors are all on
the same patient. Alternately, the patient monitor 112 or any
other computing device, including the sensors themselves,
may perform the correlation.
The last line specifically states that comparing biometric signals can be performed on the sensors themselves. Therefore, the rejection is maintained.
As to Applicant’s argument that, “Bluetooth pairing is a link-layer protocol mechanism. It establishes an encrypted channel at the communication layer between two devices. It does not constitute the processor of the first wearable device performing an application level authentication of incoming sensor data from the external device wherein first wearable device’s processor is specifically, verifying, independently of the Bluetooth pairing protocol, that the external device is an authorized PAN member before accepting or distributing the sensor data” (Remarks, pp. 10-11), the Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., link-layer protocols, application level authentication) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). The Personal Area Network (PAN) of Baker can be any of a number of protocols including Bluetooth and Zigbee and once the secure PAN is established, additional sensors can be added automatically to the PAN including automatically performing di-directional authentication between the entities of the PAN for secure communication links (Baker, [0028-0029]). Therefore, the rejection is maintained.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1 and 13 have been amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 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 1 contains the trademark/trade name Bluetooth. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe Near Field Communication (NFC) and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
As to claims 2-12, they are rejected for being dependent to a rejected base claim.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US PG Pub. No. 2011/0221590 to Baker et al. (hereinafter Baker).
As to claim 1, Baker teaches a wireless personal area network (Baker, [0015]):
a. A first wearable device configured to be worn on a user’s body, the first wearable device including: a processor, a memory, and a first set of sensors configured to collect a first set of biometric data from the user (device includes at least a memory, a processor, and physiological (biometric) sensors including a thermometer, ECG sensor, blood pressure to name a few examples) (Baker, [0087 and 0047]).
b. A second wearable device configured to be worn on the user’s body, the second wearable device including: a processor, a memory, and a second set of sensors configured to collect a second set of biometric data from the user (device includes at least a memory, a processor, and physiological (biometric) sensors including a thermometer, ECG sensor, blood pressure to name a few examples with the number of wearable sensors is not limited to a single one) (Baker, [0027, 0087, and 0047] and fig. 1).
c. A third wearable device configured to be worn on the user’s body, the third wearable device including: a processor, a memory, and a third set of sensors configured to collect a third set of biometric data from the user (device includes at least a memory, a processor, and physiological (biometric) sensors including a thermometer, ECG sensor, blood pressure to name a few examples with the number of wearable sensors is not limited to a single one) (Baker, [0027, 0087, and 0047] and fig. 1).
d. At least one external device not located on the user (patient monitor) (Baker, at least [0017]).
e. The processor of the first wearable device is configured to: receive the second set of biometric data from the second wearable device and the third set of biometric data from the third wearable device and determine, independently and without input from the at least one external device, at the first wearable device that both the first wearable device and the second wearable device and the third wearable device are on the user’s body by comparing the first set of biometric data with the second set of biometric data and the third set of biometric data at the processor of the first wearable device (sensor data are obtained and compared to each other in order to determine if the wearables are on the same person including the sensors themselves) (Baker, [0037-0040, 0051, and 0057]).
f. The processor of the first wearable device is configured to: receive and authenticate sensor data from the at least one external device not located on the user by the processor of the first wearable device verifying, independently of any Bluetooth pairing protocol, that the at least one external device is an authorized member of the personal area network before accepting or distributing the sensor data and distribute the first biometric data of the user, the second biometric data of the user, the third set of biometric data, the sensor data from the at least one external device from the first wearable device over the personal area network (Each device of the PAN communicates with each other, including patient monitor (external device), exchanging data to ensure that each device is authenticated and actually in the same PAN and on the same patient. The PAN is not restricted to only the Bluetooth protocol.) (Baker, [0037-0041, 0057, and 0027]).
As to claim 2, Baker teaches the first wearable device and the second wearable device communicate via a wireless communication protocol (personal area network is wireless such as Bluetooth) (Baker, [0018]).
As to claim 3, Baker teaches the first wearable device and the third wearable device communicate via a wireless communication protocol (personal area network is wireless such as Bluetooth) (Baker, [0018]).
As to claim 4, Baker teaches the first set of biometric data and the second set of biometric data includes at least one of heart rate, blood pressure, body temperature, gait, and movement (blood pressure) (Baker, [0051]).
As to claim 5, Baker teaches the first set of biometric data and the second set of biometric data and the third set of biometric each include at least one of heart rate, blood pressure, body temperature, gait, and movement (blood pressure) (Baker, [0051]).
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.
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.
Claims 6-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US PG Pub. No. 2011/0221590 to Baker et al. (hereinafter Baker) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US PG Pub. 2017/0208222 to Boesen et al. (hereinafter Boesen).
As to claims 6 and 18, Baker does not explicitly recite an earpiece. However, in an analogous art Boesen teaches the first wearable device is a wireless earpiece (the wearable device can be an earpiece) (Boesen, [0030]).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to implement the personal area network of Baker with the earpiece of Boesen in order to monitor biometrics and actions of the user as suggested by Boesen (Boesen, [0003]).
As to claim 7, Baker as modified teaches the wireless earpiece is configured to execute an application for an AI assistant (wireless earpieces execute instructions including activating a digital assistant) (Boesen, [0007 and 0052]).
As to claim 8, Baker does not explicitly recite an earpiece. However, in an analogous art Boesen teaches the second wearable device is a wireless earpiece (wireless earpieces are a pair) (Boesen, [0017]).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to implement the personal area network of Baker with the earpiece of Boesen in order to monitor biometrics and actions of the user as suggested by Boesen (Boesen, [0003]).
As to claim 9, Baker does not explicitly recite a smart wristband. However, in an analogous art Boesen teaches the third wearable device is a smart wristband (smart watches and bracelets are contemplated as wearable sensor devices) (Boesen, [0036]).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to implement the personal area network of Baker with the bracelet/smart watch of Boesen in order to monitor biometrics and actions of the user as suggested by Boesen (Boesen, [0003]). (wireless earpieces are a pair) (Boesen, [0017]).
As to claim 10, Baker does not explicitly recite a smart watch. However, in an analogous art Boesen teaches the third wearable device is a smart watch (smart watches and bracelets are contemplated as wearable sensor devices) (Boesen, [0036]).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to implement the personal area network of Baker with the bracelet/smart watch of Boesen in order to monitor biometrics and actions of the user as suggested by Boesen (Boesen, [0003]).
As to claim 11, Baker does not explicitly recite smart clothing. However, in an analogous art, Boesen teaches the third wearable device is a smart sock (smart clothing can be connected to the personal area network) (Boesen, [0017]).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to implement the personal area network of Baker with the smart clothing of Boesen in order to monitor biometrics and actions of the user as suggested by Boesen (Boesen, [0003]). (wireless earpieces are a pair) (Boesen, [0017]).
As to claim 12, Baker does not explicitly recite smart clothing. However, in an analogous art, Boesen teaches the third wearable device is a smart shirt (smart clothing can be connected to the personal area network) (Boesen, [0017]).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to implement the personal area network of Baker with the smart clothing of Boesen in order to monitor biometrics and actions of the user as suggested by Boesen (Boesen, [0003]). (wireless earpieces are a pair) (Boesen, [0017]).
As to claim 13, Baker teaches a wireless personal area network (Baker, [0015]):
a. A first wearable device configured to be worn on a user’s body, the first wearable device including: a processor, a memory, and a first set of sensors configured to collect a first set of biometric data from the user (device includes at least a memory, a processor, and physiological (biometric) sensors including a thermometer, ECG sensor, blood pressure to name a few examples) (Baker, [0087 and 0047]).
Baker does not explicitly recite an earpiece as an example of a wearable device. However, in an analogous art, Boesen teaches wearable devices can be earpieces (the wearable device can be an earpiece) (Boesen, [0030]).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to implement the personal area network of Baker with the earpiece of Boesen in order to monitor biometrics and actions of the user as suggested by Boesen (Boesen, [0003]).
Baker as modified further teaches:
b. A second earpiece (wireless earpieces are a pair) (Boesen, [0017]). configured to be worn on the user’s body, the second wearable device including: a processor, a memory, and a second set of sensors configured to collect a second set of biometric data from the user (device includes at least a memory, a processor, and physiological (biometric) sensors including a thermometer, ECG sensor, blood pressure to name a few examples with the number of wearable sensors is not limited to a single one) (Baker, [0027, 0087, and 0047] and fig. 1).
c. A third wearable device configured to be worn on the user’s body, the third wearable device including: a processor, a memory, and a third set of sensors configured to collect a third set of biometric data from the user (device includes at least a memory, a processor, and physiological (biometric) sensors including a thermometer, ECG sensor, blood pressure to name a few examples with the number of wearable sensors is not limited to a single one) (Baker, [0027, 0087, and 0047] and fig. 1).
d. The processor of the first wearable device is configured to: receive the second set of biometric data from the second wearable device and the third set of biometric data from the third wearable device and determine, independently and without input from any external device, at the processor of the first wireless earpiece that the first wearable device and the second wearable device and the third wearable device are on the user’s body by comparing the first set of biometric data with the second set of biometric data and the third set of biometric data at the processor of the first wireless earpiece (sensor data are obtained and compared to each other in order to determine if the wearables are on the same person including the sensors themselves) (Baker, [0037-0040, 0051, and 0057]).
As to claim 14, Baker as modified teaches the first wireless earpiece and the second wireless earpiece communicate via a wireless communication protocol (personal area network is wireless such as Bluetooth) (Baker, [0018]).
As to claim 15, Baker as modified teaches the first wireless earpiece and the wearable device communicate via a wireless communication protocol (personal area network is wireless such as Bluetooth) (Baker, [0018]).
As to claim 16, Baker as modified the first set of biometric data and the second set of biometric data include at least one of heart rate, blood pressure, body temperature, gait, and movement (blood pressure) (Baker, [0051]).
As to claim 17, Baker as modified teaches the first set of biometric data and the second set of biometric data and the third set of biometric each include at least one of heart rate, blood pressure, body temperature, gait, and movement (blood pressure) (Baker, [0051]).
As to claim 19, Baker as modified teaches the third wearable device is a smart watch (smart watches and bracelets are contemplated as wearable sensor devices) (Boesen, [0036]).
As to claim 20, Baker as modified teaches the third wearable device is a smart wristband (smart watches and bracelets are contemplated as wearable sensor devices) (Boesen, [0036]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM S POWERS whose telephone number is (571)272-8573. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-17:30.
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, Jorge L Ortiz-Criado can be reached at (571) 272-7624. 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.
/WILLIAM S POWERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2496
Prosecution Insights