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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed April 22, 2026 have been entered. Claims 1-13 remain pending, but stand rejected for the reasons detailed below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s amendments clarify the optically transparent material that encapsulates the internal devices protrudes above an exterior surface of the wearable device. Examiner submits Hario (US Patent No. 8148735) teaches a first protrusion (Figures 1,15, 20 and 27, first lens portion 52), wherein the first protrusion (first 52) extends a first height (see Figures 1,15, 20 and 27) above an exterior surface (upper surface of body 5A). US Patent Nos. 11837686, 6590152, 7737369, and 6998647 also teach similar protruding encapsulants that serve as lenses for the encapsulated devices.
For these reasons, and the reasons detailed below, claims 1-13 stand rejected.
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 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Al-Ali (US Publication No. 2023/0028745) in view of Hario (US Patent No. 8148735) and Basin (US Publication No. 2008/0157114).
Regarding claim 1, Al-Ali discloses a method for manufacturing a wearable device (see Figures 3-10), comprising: dispensing an Figures 9A-9B and Paragraph [0469]-[0474], encapsulant, via side channel of fill channels 146) through a first aperture (opening corresponding to first set of detectors 106a) of an inner housing (frame 126) of the wearable device into a first cavity (space accommodating first set of 106a) of the wearable device, wherein the inner housing (126) forms at least a portion of an exterior surface (exterior surface of 126) of the wearable device that is configured to contact a tissue of a user (see Figure 1B);
forming a first protrusion (cured encapsulant within space accommodating first set of 106a) at least partially over the first aperture (opening corresponding to first set of 106a) based at least in part on dispensing the Paragraph [0469]-[0474], encapsulant) into the first cavity (space accommodating first set of 106a), wherein the first protrusion (cured encapsulant) extends a first height above a surface of the wearable device (inner surface of 126); and
forming a second protrusion (cured encapsulant within space accommodating second set of 106a) at least partially over a second aperture (opening within 126 accommodating second set of 106a) associated with a second cavity (space accommodating second set of 106a) based at least in part on dispensing the Paragraph [0469]-[0474], encapsulant) into the first cavity (via side channel of 146), wherein the encapsulant) is dispensed into the second cavity (space accommodating second set of 106a) via a channel (side channel of 146) that connects the first cavity (space accommodating first set of 106a) with the second cavity (space accommodating second set of 106a), wherein the second protrusion (cured encapsulant within space accommodating second set of 106a) extends the first height above the surface (inner surface of 126; see Figures 7-10) based at least in part on the encapsulant) flowing through the channel (side channel of 146; where cured encapsulant within first and second 106a are the same height at their connecting channel -- see Figure 9B).
Al-Ali does not teach wherein a first protrusion extends a first height above the exterior surface, and wherein the second protrusion extends the first height above the exterior surface.
However, Hario teaches forming a first protrusion (Figures 20, first lens portion 52), wherein the first protrusion (first 52) extends a first height (see Figure 20) above an exterior surface (upper surface of body 5A), and forming a second protrusion (Figures 20, second lens portion 52), wherein the second protrusion (second 52) extends the first height above the exterior surface (upper surface of 5A) (see Figures 1,15, 20 and 27).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have substituted the lenses and encapsulant of Al-Ali for the encapsulant of Hario, such that the encapsulant was used to form the lenses above the exterior surface, as taught in Hario. Doing so would have decreased the assembly time by decreasing the number of pieces needed to assemble the device, and would have created a lens shape that would help direct light from the emitters to the receivers (see Figures 3-4 and col. 3, ln. 59-67 in Hario).
Al-Ali in view of Hario suggests, but does not explicitly disclose/teach, wherein the dispensed material is optically transparent material.
However, Basin teaches dispensing an optically transparent material (liquid lens 20; see Paragraph [0040]) within a first cavity and a second cavity (see Figures 1-4).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have substituted the filler material of Al-Ali as modified by Hario for the optical transparent filler material of Basin, based on its suitability for its intended use, here being an injected material used to fill a cavity corresponding to sensors within a wearable device. MPEP § 2144.07 and Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945); In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (selection of a known plastic to make a container of a type made of plastics prior to the invention was held to be obvious).
Regarding claim 2, Al-Ali in view of Hario and Basin teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising (in Al-Ali): dispensing the optically transparent material (liquid lens 20 in Basin) through a third aperture of the inner housing (opening corresponding to emitter 104a, via center channel of 146) of the wearable device into a third cavity (cavity corresponding to 104a) of the wearable device; and forming a third protrusion (Figures 15 and 20 in Hario, first lens 51 in Hario within cavity corresponding to 104a in Al-Ali) at least partially over the third aperture (opening corresponding to 104a, via center channel of 146) based at least in part on dispensing the optically transparent material (20 in Basin) into the third cavity (space corresponding to 104a), wherein the third protrusion (first 51 in Hario) extends a second height (see Figures 3-4 and 21 in Hario) above the exterior surface (upper surface of 5A in Hario, corresponding to outer surface of 126 in Al-Ali) that is different from the first height (see Figure 21 in Hario; see Figure 10 in Al-Ali).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have modified the protruding lenses of Al-Ali as previously modified by Hario and Basin to be at different heights, as taught in Hario, considering a change in shape has been held to be an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art, absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed feature is significant, See MPEP § 2144.04 and In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (The court held that the configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant.), and considering the stated limitation is held to be merely a selection of optimal working parameters established through routine experimentation, and thus obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A); In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929) ("It is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions."). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to formulate the claimed heights because doing so would have assisted in directing light from the emitters to the receivers (see Figures 3-4 and col. 3, ln. 59-67 in Hario).
Regarding claim 3, Al-Ali in view of Hario and Basin teaches the method of claim 2, further comprising: forming a fourth protrusion (second lens 51 in Hario within space corresponding to 104b in Al-Ali) at least partially over a fourth aperture (opening corresponding to 104b, via center channel of 146) associated with a fourth cavity (space corresponding to 104b) based at least in part on dispensing the optically transparent material (20 in Basin) into the third cavity (cavity corresponding to 104a), wherein the optically transparent material (20 in Basin) is dispensed into the fourth cavity (space corresponding to 104b) via a second channel (center channel of 146) that connects the third cavity (space corresponding to 104a) with the fourth cavity (space corresponding to 104b), wherein the fourth protrusion (second lens 51 in Hario within space corresponding to 104b in Al-Ali) extends the second height above the exterior surface of the inner housing (upper surface of 5A in Hario, corresponding to outer surface of 126 in Al-Ali) based at least in part on the optically transparent material (20 in Basin) flowing through the second channel (center channel of 146).
Regarding claim 4, Al-Ali in view of Hario and Basin teaches the method of claim 1, and further teaches (in Al-Ali) wherein the first protrusion (first 52 in Hario within first 106a of Al-Ali) and the second protrusion (second 52 within second 106a of Al-Ali) extend the first height above the exterior surface of the inner housing (upper surface of 5A in Hario, corresponding to outer surface of 126 in Al-Ali) based at least in part on atmospheric pressure, a surface tension, or both being exerted on the first protrusion (first 52 in Hario within first 106a of Al-Ali) and the second protrusion (second 52 in Hario within first 106a of Al-Ali; see Paragraph [0041]-[0042], wherein uncured resin necessarily has a surface tension that allows it to be formed/fill space under atm pressure before being heat cured).
Regarding claim 5, Al-Ali in view of Hario and Basin teaches the method of claim 1, and further teaches (in Al-Ali) wherein the first cavity (space accommodating first 106a) houses a first one or more sensors (first 106a) and the second cavity (space accommodating second 106a) houses a second one or more sensors (second 106a), and wherein the wearable device is operable to obtain one or more physiological measurements from a user (see Paragraphs [0477]) via the first one or more sensors (first 106a) and the second one or more sensors (second 106a).
Regarding claim 6, Al-Ali in view of Hario and Basin teaches the method of claim 5, and further teaches (in Al-Ali) wherein a volume of the first cavity (volume of space within first 106a) is different from a volume of the second cavity (volume of space accommodating second 106a) based at least in part on the first one or more sensors (first 106a) and the second one or more sensors (second 106a; volume of first 106a being greater than space accommodating second 106a, considering first and second 106a are identical and space accommodating second 106a is smaller -- see Figures 5-10).
Regarding claim 7, Al-Ali in view of Hario and Basin teaches the method of claim 1, and further teaches (in Basin) wherein the optically transparent material (20) comprises an epoxy material, an ultraviolet curable material, a heat curable material, or any combination thereof (see Paragraph [0040]-[0042]).
Regarding claim 8, Al-Ali discloses a wearable device, comprising: an inner housing (frame 126) comprising one or more apertures (bottom openings corresponding to 104, 106), wherein the inner housing (126) forms at least a portion of an exterior surface of the wearable device (exterior surface of 126) that is configured to contact a tissue of a user (see Figure 1B); one or more cavities (spaces accommodating 104, 106) corresponding to the one or more apertures (openings corresponding to 104, 106), the one or more cavities (spaces accommodating 104, 106) housing one or more sensor components (106) of the wearable device, wherein the one or more cavities (spaces accommodating 106) are connected by one or more channels (lateral fill channels 146); and an encapsulant) that fills the one or more cavities (spaces accommodating 104, 106) the one or more channels (lateral 146), wherein the encapsulant) forms a first protrusion (encapsulant corresponding to first 106a) at least partially over a first aperture (first bottom opening of 126) of the one or more apertures (first bottom opening of 126 corresponding to first 106a) and a second protrusion (encapsulant) at least partially over a second aperture of the one or more apertures (bottom opening correspond to second 106a), and wherein the first protrusion (encapsulant corresponding to first 106a) and the second protrusion (encapsulant corresponding to second 106a) extend a first height above a surface of the wearable device (inner surface of 126) based at least in part on the one or more channels (lateral 146; where first and second 106a are the same height at their connecting channel -- see Figure 9B).
Al-Ali does not teach wherein a first protrusion and a second protrusion extends a first height above the exterior surface.
However, Hario teaches forming a first protrusion (Figures 20, first lens portion 52) and a second protrusion (second lens portion 52), wherein the first protrusion (first 52) and the second protrusion (second 52) extends a first height (see Figure 20) above an exterior surface (upper surface of body 5A).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have substituted the lenses and encapsulant of Al-Ali for the encapsulant of Hario, such that the encapsulant was used to form the lenses above the exterior surface, as taught in Hario. Doing so would have decreased the assembly time by decreasing the number of pieces needed to assemble the device, and would have created a lens shape that would help direct light from the emitter to the receiver (see Figures 3-4 and col. 3, ln. 59-67 in Hario).
Al-Ali in view of Hario suggest, but does not explicitly disclose/teach, wherein the dispensed material is optically transparent material.
However, Basin teaches dispensing an optically transparent material (liquid lens 20; see Paragraph [0040]) within a first cavity and a second cavity (see Figures 1-4).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have substituted the filler material of Al-Ali as modified by Hario for the optical transparent material of Basin, based on its suitability for its intended use, here being an injected material used to fill a cavity corresponding to sensors within a wearable device. MPEP § 2144.07 and Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945); In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (selection of a known plastic to make a container of a type made of plastics prior to the invention was held to be obvious).
Regarding claim 9, Al-Ali in view of Hario and Basin teaches the wearable device of claim 8, and further teaches (in Al-Ali) wherein the optically transparent material (liquid lens 20 in Basin) forms a third protrusion (Figures 15 and 20 in Hario, first lens 51 in Hario within cavity corresponding to 104a of Al-Ali) at least partially over a third aperture (opening corresponding to 104a), wherein the third protrusion (first lens 51 in Hario within cavity corresponding to 104a of Al-Ali) extends a second height above the exterior surface (upper surface of 5A in Hario, corresponding to outer surface of 126 in Al-Ali) that is different from the first height (see Figures 3-4 and 21 in Hario), and wherein a third cavity (space accommodating 104a) corresponding to the third aperture (opening corresponding to 104a) is not connected to the one or more cavities (space accommodating 106a) by the one or more channels (lateral 146).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have modified the protruding lenses of Al-Ali as previously modified by Hario and Basin to be at different heights, as taught in Hario, considering a change in shape has been held to be an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art, absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed feature is significant, See MPEP § 2144.04 and In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (The court held that the configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant.), and considering the stated limitation is held to be merely a selection of optimal working parameters established through routine experimentation, and thus obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A); In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929) ("It is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions."). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to formulate the claimed heights because doing so would have assisted in directing light from the emitters to the receivers (see Figures 3-4 and col. 3, ln. 59-67 in Hario).
Regarding claim 10, Al-Ali in view of Hario and Basin teaches the wearable device of claim 9, and further teaches (in Al-Ali) wherein the optically transparent material (liquid lens 20 in Basin) forms a fourth protrusion (second lens 51 in Hario within space corresponding to 104b in Al-Ali) at least partially over a fourth aperture (opening corresponding to 104b) of the one or more apertures (openings corresponding to 104, 106), and wherein the fourth protrusion (second lens 51 in Hario within space corresponding to 104b in Al-Ali) extends the second height (see Figures 3-4 and 21 in Hario) above the exterior surface (upper surface of 5A in Hario, corresponding to outer surface of 126 in Al-Ali) based at least in part on one or more additional channels (center 146) connecting the third cavity (opening corresponding to 104a) and a fourth cavity (space accommodating 104b) corresponding to the fourth aperture (opening corresponding to 104b).
Regarding claim 11, Al-Ali in view of Hario and Basin teaches the wearable device of claim 8, and further teaches (in Basin) wherein the optically transparent material (20) comprises an epoxy material (see Paragraphs [0040]-[0042]).
Regarding claim 12, Al-Ali in view of Hario and Basin teaches the wearable device of claim 8, further comprising (in Al-Ali): a first one or more sensors (first detector 106a) housed within a first cavity (space accommodating first 106a) of the one or more cavities (spaces accommodating 104, 106) corresponding to the first protrusion (first lens 52 in Hario within cavity corresponding to first 106a of Al-Ali); and a second one or more sensors (second 106a) housed within a second cavity (space accommodating second 106a) of the one or more cavities (spaces accommodating 104, 106) corresponding to the second protrusion (second lens 52 in Hario within cavity corresponding to second 106a), wherein the wearable device is operable to obtain one or more physiological measurements from a user (see Paragraph [0477]) via the first one or more sensors (first 106a) and the second one or more sensors (second 106a).
Regarding claim 13, Al-Ali in view of Hario and Basin teaches the wearable device of claim 12, and further teaches (in Al-Ali) wherein a volume of the first cavity (volume of space within first 106a) is different from a volume of the second cavity (volume of space accommodating second 106a) based at least in part on the first one or more sensors (first 106a) and the second one or more sensors (second 106a; volume of first 106a being greater than space accommodating second 106a considering first and second 106a are identical and space accommodating second 106a is smaller -- see Figures 5-10).
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 GAGE STEPHEN CRUM whose telephone number is (571)272-3373. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Allen Parker can be reached at (303)297-4722. 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.
/GAGE CRUM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
gsc
Prosecution Insights