DETAILED ACTION
The Examiner acknowledges the amendments received on 13 August 2026. Claims 1-20 are cancelled; claims 21-40 are pending.
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
Applicant should note that the large number of references in the attached IDS have been considered by the examiner in the same manner as other documents in Office search files are considered by the examiner while conducting a search of the prior art in a proper field of search. See MPEP 609.05(b). Applicant is requested to point out any particular references in the IDS which they believe may be of particular relevance to the instant claimed invention in response to this office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 13 August 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Since the amendments pertain to the amendments to the claims, they will be addressed below in the prior art rejection.
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 21-25, 30-35 and 38-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Connor (U.S. 2017/0164878). Connor discloses (Figures 1-3) a wearable device (par. 0115) comprising: an optical sensing unit comprising: a processor (par. 0123); a plurality of first light emitters configured to emit light of a first wavelength (par. 0419); a plurality of second light emitters configured to emit light of a second wavelength different than the first wavelength, the plurality of second light emitters comprising a first emitter and a second emitter (“different emitters in this array can emit light at different wavelengths”); a plurality of light detectors (par. 0408); and a plurality of optical components positioned over the plurality of second light emitters (“a light emitter and light receiver can be paired together. In an example, a light emitter and light receiver together can be referred to as a spectroscopic sensor.”); and a strap (101, 201, 301) attached to the wearable device and configured to attach the wearable device to a user, wherein: the plurality of optical components is configured to direct a first light emitted by the first emitter toward the strap and to direct a second light emitted by the second emitter to a first side of the strap (see Figures 1-3, with arrows pointing from 104-108, 204-204 to the underside of the strap); the processor determines, using a first signal corresponding to return light from the first emitter and a second signal corresponding to return light from the second emitter, a sub-state of the wearable device from a plurality of sub-states of the wearable device when in an off-wrist state (par. 0258).
Regarding claim 22, Connor discloses (par. 0426) the optical sensing unit comprises a window (“lens”).
Regarding claim 23, Connor discloses (par. 0446) a corresponding center ray of the first light has a normal angle of incidence on the window; and a corresponding center ray of the second light has a non-normal angle of incidence on the window (“different sets of light emitters and receivers can have different angles at which they reflect light from a body surface. In an example, a first set comprising a light emitter and a light receiver can reflect light from a body surface at a first angle and a second set comprising a light emitter and a light receiver can reflect light from a body surface at a second angle. In an example, an array of sets can optimally measure light reflected from a body surface at different angles. In an example, at least one of these sets can optimally measure light reflected from a body surface at an angle which is substantially perpendicular to the body surface”).
Regarding claim 24, Connor discloses (par. 0418) the plurality of optical components comprises: a first Fresnel lens positioned between the first emitter and the window; and a second Fresnel lens positioned between the second emitter and the window.
Regarding claim 25, Connor discloses (par. 0418) the first Fresnel lens is positioned between the plurality of first emitters and the window.
Regarding claim 30, Connor discloses (par. 0436) the optical sensing unit comprises an optical isolation positioned between the plurality of detectors and the plurality of first emitters.
Regarding claim 31, Connor discloses (Figures 1-3) a wearable device (par. 0115) comprising: a processor (par. 0123); an optical sensing unit comprising: a plurality of light emitters comprising a first emitter and a second emitter (par. 0419) ; a plurality of light detectors (par. 0408); and a plurality of optical components comprising a first optical component and a second optical component (“a light emitter and light receiver can be paired together. In an example, a light emitter and light receiver together can be referred to as a spectroscopic sensor.”); and a strap (101, 201, 301) attached to the wearable device and configured to attach the wearable device to a user, wherein: the first optical component is configured to direct a first light emitted by the first emitter toward the strap; the second optical component is configured to direct a second light emitted by the second emitter to a first side of the strap (see Figures 1-3, with arrows pointing from 104-108, 204-204 to the underside of the strap); and the processor determines, using a first signal corresponding to return light from the first emitter and a second signal corresponding to return light from the second emitter, a sub-state of the wearable device from a plurality of sub-states of the wearable device when in an off-wrist state (par. 0258).
Regarding claim 32, Connor discloses (par. 0426) the optical sensing unit comprises a window (“lens”).
Regarding claim 33, Connor discloses (par. 0446) a corresponding center ray of the first light has a normal angle of incidence on the window; and a corresponding center ray of the second light has a non-normal angle of incidence on the window (“different sets of light emitters and receivers can have different angles at which they reflect light from a body surface. In an example, a first set comprising a light emitter and a light receiver can reflect light from a body surface at a first angle and a second set comprising a light emitter and a light receiver can reflect light from a body surface at a second angle. In an example, an array of sets can optimally measure light reflected from a body surface at different angles. In an example, at least one of these sets can optimally measure light reflected from a body surface at an angle which is substantially perpendicular to the body surface”).
Regarding claim 34, Connor discloses (par. 0418) the first optical component is a Fresnel lens.
Regarding claim 35, Connor discloses (par. 0418) the Fresnel lens is a first Fresnel lens; and the second optical component is a second Fresnel lens.
Regarding claim 38, Connor discloses (Figure 4) the plurality of light emitters comprises a third emitter (404); the plurality of optical components comprises a third optical component that is configured to direct a third light emitted by the third emitter to a second side of the strap (see arrows, where light is directed over a top surface of the strap).
Regarding claim 39, Connor discloses (par. 0444) the first light, the second light, and third light are directed to intersect (“a beam of light can: be emitted by the light emitter along a first vector; pass through the first (transmissive) side of an angled one-way mirror; hit body tissue; reflect back from the body tissue; reflect off the second (reflective) side of the angled one-way mirror; and enter the light receiver along a second vector which is perpendicular to the first vector.”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 26-29, 36-37 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Connor (U.S. 2017/0164878) in view of Block et al (U.S. 11,266,320). Regarding claims 26 and 36, Connor discloses the claimed invention except for an optical film positioned between the second emitter and the window. Block, however, discloses (col. 6, line 62-col. 7, line 52) components for optical collection that include an optical film (240) and Fresnel lens (242). Block and Connor both disclose systems for emitting and sensing light. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in order to restrict light from passing through a peripheral region of the light detectors (col. 18, lines 62-64 of Block).
Regarding claim 27, Block discloses (Fig. 2B) the plurality of second light emitters comprises a third emitter; the plurality of optical components comprises an additional optical film positioned between the third emitter and the window and is configured to direct a third light emitted by the third emitter to a second side of the strap (see two optical films on either side of center region 209).
Regarding claim 28, Connor discloses (par. 0444) the first light, the second light, and third light are directed to intersect (“a beam of light can: be emitted by the light emitter along a first vector; pass through the first (transmissive) side of an angled one-way mirror; hit body tissue; reflect back from the body tissue; reflect off the second (reflective) side of the angled one-way mirror; and enter the light receiver along a second vector which is perpendicular to the first vector.”).
Regarding claim 29, Block discloses (Fig. 2B) the Fresnel lens (242) is positioned between the plurality of first emitters 206D, 208A, 206B) and the window (203).
Regarding claim 37, Block discloses (Figure 2D) the optical sensing unit comprises a window and a baffle (211A; col. 8, lines 32-34, “partially blocks” light); and the optical film is positioned between the baffle and the window.
Regarding claim 40, Block discloses (Fig. 2B) the second optical component is a first optical film and the third optical component is a second optical film (see two optical films on either side of center region 209).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEBORAH L MALAMUD whose telephone number is (571)272-2106. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 1:00-9:30 Eastern.
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, Unsu Jung can be reached at (571) 272-8506. 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.
/DEBORAH L MALAMUD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Prosecution Insights