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 .
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on August 11, 2026 has been entered.
The amendment of claims 1-11 has been acknowledged.
In view of the amendment, the claim interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) has been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on August 11, 2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejections, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s Representative submits that the amended claims are eligible because facial measurement is first attempted and then switched to hands or feet measurements when needed.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The amended limitation requiring a prior measurement first before switching to different measurements when needed is a mental process that is routinely performed in human medical practice. For example, doctors often measure a vital measurement, e.g., forehead temperature, and further take additional vital measurement as backups, e.g., armpit temperature, heart rate, blood pressure, etc. None of the added and/or amended limitations make the claim eligible because the claims are directed to a mere abstract idea (mental process, organized human activity) performed by a generic computer.
Applicant's arguments filed on August 11, 2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 rejections, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s Representative submits that the prior art of record (Murakami) does not teach that in a case in which measurement of biological information, based on the facial image, fails after the facial image has been successfully acquired, switching to measurement based on a hand image or a foot image.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Murakami teaches that the image acquirer 101 acquires the skin images of face, hands, and feet, and using the images to determine the location of measurement before performing any measurements (see Murakami ¶¶0167: “The image acquirer 101 acquires an image including the user's skin. Specifically, the image acquirer 101 acquires a skin image, which is a captured image of the skin of a person including the face and hand”; Murakami ¶¶0170: “the pulse wave acquirer 102 identifies the location where the greatest luminance change takes place in a plurality of skin images, and uses the time waveform of luminance at the identified location to calculate pulse wave timing. Alternatively, the pulse wave acquirer 102 uses a face or hand pattern stored in advance to locate the face or hand in a plurality of skin images, and uses the time waveform of luminance at the identified location to calculate pulse wave timing” emphasis added).
Murakami further teaches that the hand images are used to determine the pulse wave timing when it is not possible to acquire it from the face image, i.e., the facial image is used first (Murakami ¶¶0296-¶¶0297: “the user's face is hidden behind the clothing, and thus it is not possible to acquire the pulse wave timing of the face … Accordingly, pulse wave timing may be acquired from a hand of the user recognized by the image acquirer 101. Further, when the face is hidden behind the clothing, the hand is located at substantially the same height as the face, and thus substantially the same estimate of blood pressure can be obtained”; Murakami ¶¶0368: “when it is not possible to acquire the face image of the user for reasons such as the user's posture, an image of the user's hand is captured to acquire pulse wave timing… if the user's posture at the time when movement A is performed for the first time makes it difficult to acquire pulse wave, a feedback to that effect may be given to the user to prompt the user to assume a posture that allows for easy acquisition of pulse wave” emphasis added).
Using the broadest reasonable interpretation, Murakami teaches acquiring an image (Murakami ¶¶0167), acquiring a facial image (Murakami ¶¶0170), determining whether the measurement was successful on face and switching to hands if failed (Murakami ¶¶0296-¶¶0297). Note that it requires the image to be taken and the facial location to be determined before determining that the face is hidden.
In view of this reasonable interpretation of the claims and the prior art, the examiner respectfully submits that the rejections set forth below remain proper.
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.
Claims 1-9 and 11 are 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 recites the limitations “an image of a predetermined site of the subject to be measured in the captured image”, “a facial image of the subject to be measured”, and “measurement of the biological information based on the facial image has failed”. The limitations render the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the image of a predetermined site is the same as the facial image and whether the “measurement” corresponds to the earlier-recited measurement or new/different measurement (using different images).
For the purpose of further examination, the claim has been interpreted as acquiring a captured image, obtaining a facial image from the captured image, measuring biological information from the facial image, and switching if the measurement failed (i.e., the “measurement” recited in the “switch” clause corresponding to the earlier-recited limitation in the “measure” clause).
Claims 1-9 and 11 depend from claim 1 and therefore inherit all of the deficiencies of claim 1 discussed above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) using a device to acquire facial, hand, and/or foot images to measure biological information of a subject. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims are directed to using a generic computer to perform mental processes and/or organized human activity. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because all of the processes described can be performed by a human as an organized human activity (e.g., taking a photo, measuring a pulse, directing a subject to move hands, etc.).
Step 1: The claims fall within a statutory category (device, method, and product).
Step 2A (prong one): The claims recite a judicial exception. The claims are directed to mental processes and/or organized human activity of collecting images (i.e., taking a photo, looking at a person), directing a person to move head, hands, and/or feet to fit within a contour, and taking biological information (e.g., pulse, heart rate, etc.).
Step 2A (prong two): The claims as a whole do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because all of the processes can be performed in a human brain. Using a generic computer to perform a mental process is not considered to be practically applied. The step of requiring a head measurement before moving onto hands or feet can be performed mentally by a medical practitioner in case a thermometer, probe, etc. fails.
Step 2B: The claims as a whole do not amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception because mental processes performed on a generic computer are considered to be mere instructions to apply the abstract ideas.
The claims are ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claim(s) 1, 2, 10, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Murakami et al. (US 2017/0014089 A1), hereinafter referred to as Murakami.
Regarding claim 1, Murakami teaches a terminal device, comprising:
a capturing device (Murakami Fig. 2B & ¶¶0089: “the alert information presenting apparatus 110 includes an image acquirer 101, a pulse wave acquirer 102, a signal acquirer 103, a heartbeat acquirer 104, a blood pressure calculator 105, an information presenter 106, and an undressing condition determiner 107”);
at least one processor; and at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium coupled to the at least one processor and storing one or more computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (Murakami ¶¶0371: “executed by software processing. In this case, software is recorded in one or more non-transitory recording media such as ROMs, optical discs, or hard disk drives, and when the software is executed by a processor”), cause the terminal device to:
acquire a captured image of a subject to be measured by the capturing device (Murakami Fig. 2B & ¶¶0089 discussed above);
measure biological information of the subject to be measured based on an image of a predetermined site of the subject to be measured in the captured image (Murakami ¶¶0090: “the heartbeat acquirer 104 that acquires, by using the receive signal, a pre-undressing heartbeat timing and a post-undressing heartbeat timing … the pulse wave acquirer 102 that acquires a pre-undressing pulse wave timing and a post-undressing pulse wave timing … the blood pressure calculator 105 that calculates a pre-undressing blood pressure of the user and a post-undressing blood pressure of the user … further includes the image acquirer 101 that acquires an image including the skin of the user”);
perform, after acquiring a facial image of the subject to be measured, processing of measuring the biological information based on the facial image of the subject to be measured as the image of the predetermined site (Murakami ¶¶0090 discussed above; Murakami ¶¶0093: “an image of a person's body part such as a face or hand is captured by the image acquirer 101”; Murakami ¶¶0167: “The image acquirer 101 acquires an image including the user's skin. Specifically, the image acquirer 101 acquires a skin image, which is a captured image of the skin of a person including the face and hand”; Murakami ¶¶0170: “the pulse wave acquirer 102 identifies the location where the greatest luminance change takes place in a plurality of skin images, and uses the time waveform of luminance at the identified location to calculate pulse wave timing. Alternatively, the pulse wave acquirer 102 uses a face or hand pattern stored in advance to locate the face or hand in a plurality of skin images, and uses the time waveform of luminance at the identified location to calculate pulse wave timing”); and
switch, in a case that measurement of the biological information based on the facial image has failed to perform after acquiring the facial image of the subject to be measured, from the processing of measuring the biological information based on the facial image of the subject to be measured to processing of measuring the biological information based on a hand image or a foot image of the subject to be measured (Murakami ¶¶0167 & ¶¶0170 discussed above; Murakami ¶¶0296-¶¶0297: “the user's face is hidden behind the clothing, and thus it is not possible to acquire the pulse wave timing of the face … Accordingly, pulse wave timing may be acquired from a hand of the user recognized by the image acquirer 101. Further, when the face is hidden behind the clothing, the hand is located at substantially the same height as the face, and thus substantially the same estimate of blood pressure can be obtained”).
Regarding claim 2, Murakami teaches the terminal device according to claim 1, wherein the one or more computer-executable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the terminal device to:
output information for guiding a measurer or the subject to be measured, such that the measurer is caused to capture the hand image or the foot image of the subject to be measured, in the case that the measurement of the biological information based on the facial image has failed to perform (Murakami ¶¶0368: “when it is not possible to acquire the face image of the user for reasons such as the user's posture, an image of the user's hand is captured to acquire pulse wave timing… if the user's posture at the time when movement A is performed for the first time makes it difficult to acquire pulse wave, a feedback to that effect may be given to the user to prompt the user to assume a posture that allows for easy acquisition of pulse wave”).
Regarding claim 10, Murakami teaches a measurement method performed by a terminal device including a capturing device (Murakami ¶¶0002: “The present disclosure relates to an apparatus and method for presenting alert information”) and a computer that includes at least one processor and at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium (Murakami ¶¶0371 discussed above), the measurement method comprising:
acquiring, by the at least one processor, a facial image of a subject to be measured by the capturing device (Murakami ¶¶0167 & ¶¶0170 discussed above);
measuring, by the at least one processor, biological information of the subject to be measured based on the facial image of the subject to be measured after acquiring the facial image of the subject to be measured (Murakami Fig. 2B, ¶¶0089, ¶¶0167 & ¶¶0170 discussed above);
determining, by the at least one processor, whether measurement of the biological information based on the facial image has failed during the measuring (Murakami ¶¶0167, ¶¶0296-¶¶0297 discussed above);
acquiring, by the at least one processor, a hand image or a foot image of the subject to be measured, in a case that the measurement of the biological information based on the facial image has failed to perform after acquiring the facial image of the subject to be measured (Murakami ¶¶0296-¶¶0297 discussed above); and
measuring, by the at least one processor, the biological information based on the hand image or the foot image after acquiring the hand image or the foot image of the subject to be measured (Murakami ¶¶0167, ¶¶0170, ¶¶0296-¶¶0297, ¶¶0368 discussed above discussed above).
Regarding claim 11, Murakami teaches a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium of a device that is coupled to a processor of the device, and that stores one or more computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the device to operate as the terminal device according to claim 1 (Murakami ¶¶0009: “implemented as a system, a method, an integrated circuit, a computer program, a computer readable storage medium, or any selective combination thereof. Non-limiting examples of a computer readable storage medium include a non-volatile recording medium such as a compact disc-read only memory (CD-ROM)”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murakami et al. (US 2017/0014089 A1), in view of Takamori et al. (US 2015/0366456 A1), hereinafter referred to as Murakami and Takamori, respectively.
Regarding claim 3, Murakami teaches the terminal device according to claim 2, further comprising:
a display device configured to display an image including the subject to be measured (Murakami Figs. 10-11 & ¶¶0131: “The undressing condition determiner 107 uses information about various areas of the user's body identified as mentioned above to find how movement speed in each area is changing with time. In FIG. 10, triangles that appear blacker with increasing movement speed in an area of interest are displayed in the corresponding area and, conversely, triangles that appear whiter with increasing movement speed in an area of interest are displayed in the corresponding area”; Murakami ¶¶0210: “the information presenter 106 displays variation of blood pressure measured during the undressing process”),
wherein, in the case that the measurement of the biological information based on the facial image has failed to perform, the one or more computer-executable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the terminal device to:
guide a position of the hand or the foot of the subject to be measured to a predetermined position to be superimposed and displayed on an image including the subject to be measured (Murakami ¶¶0368 discussed above; Murakami Figs. 10-11).
However, Murakami does not appear to explicitly teach using an index image that guides the position of the hand or foot to be superimposed and displayed.
Pertaining to the same field of endeavor, Takamori teaches using an index image that guides the position of the hand or the foot of the subject to be measured to a predetermined position to be superimposed and displayed on an image including the subject to be measured (Takamori Figs. 4-5: 140, 142 & ¶¶0055: “The imaging support unit 119 (corresponding to ‘guide frame display unit’ of the present invention) includes, for example, a CPU, a microcomputer, and the like, and displays an imaging guide frame combined with the captured image on a screen of the display unit 108 … a notification message 144 such as ‘Please capture an image of the face and the hand in the frame’ is displayed in an upper portion of the screen of the display unit 108. Then, as illustrated in FIG. 5, the user tends to capture a video image of the face and the hand at a position and with a size fitted to the face guide frame 140 and the hand guide frame 142. Therefore, the image data of the face and hand captured at an appropriate position can be acquired and hence the pulse wave data at each measurement site can be obtained with a good accuracy”).
Murakami and Takamori are considered to be analogous art because they are directed to image processing for obtaining a subject’s biological information. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device and method for presenting alert information (as taught by Murakami) to use an index image (as taught by Takamori) because the combination can obtain accurate pulse wave data (Takamori ¶¶0055).
Regarding claim 4, Murakami, in view of Takamori, teaches the terminal device according to claim 3, wherein the index image is a contour guide of the hand or the foot (Takamori Figs. 4-5 & ¶¶0055 discussed above).
Regarding claim 5, Murakami, in view of Takamori, teaches the terminal device according to claim 3, wherein in the case that the measurement of the biological information based on the facial image has failed to perform, the one or more computer-executable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the terminal device to:
cause a notification image, for notifying that the processing of measuring the biological information based on the facial image of the subject to be measured is switched to the processing of measuring the biological information based on the hand image or the foot image of the subject to be measured to be superimposed and displayed on the image including the subject to be measured (Murakami ¶¶0167, ¶¶0296-¶¶0297, ¶¶0368 and Takamori Figs. 4-5 & ¶¶0055 discussed above).
Claim(s) 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murakami et al. (US 2017/0014089 A1), in view of Sakata et al. (US 2016/0007865 A1), hereinafter referred to as Murakami and Sakata, respectively.
Regarding claim 6, Murakami teaches the terminal device according to claim 2, further comprising:
a speaker (Murakami ¶¶0316: “a speaker for outputting sound”; Murakami ¶¶0322: “the result of alert determination is presented to the user by, for example, sound”; Murakami ¶¶0345: “a message ‘Please dress quickly.’ is presented on the display”; Murakami ¶¶0358: “the user may be alerted by sound”),
wherein, in the case that measurement of the biological information based on the facial image has failed to perform, the one or more computer-executable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the speaker to:
output a message that guides the subject to be measured (Murakami ¶¶0368 discussed above).
However, Murakami does not appear to explicitly teach that the speaker outputs a voice that guides the subject to be measured to turn a palm in a same orientation as a face orientation.
Pertaining to the same field of endeavor, Sakata teaches that the speaker outputs a voice that guides the subject to be measured to turn a palm in a same orientation as a face orientation (Sakata Fig. 2 & ¶¶0036: “If the hand of the subject is not in the hand guide 210, a message, such as ‘Please fit your hand into the frame’, may be displayed on the liquid crystal display, or the message may be output as voice from a speaker”).
Murakami and Sakata are considered to be analogous art because they are directed to image processing for obtaining a subject’s biological information. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device and method for presenting alert information (as taught by Murakami) to use voice guidance (as taught by Sakata) because the combination can accommodate blind subjects.
Regarding claim 7, Murakami, in view of Sakata, teaches the terminal device according to claim 6, wherein the voice guides the subject to be measured to fix a hand with respect to a face (Sakata Fig. 2 & ¶¶0036 discussed above).
Regarding claim 8, Murakami, in view of Sakata, teaches the terminal device according to claim 7, wherein the voice guides the subject to be measured to put a thumb of a right hand or a left hand on a chin and put an index finger of the right hand or the left hand on a right ear or a left ear, respectively (Sakata Fig. 2 discussed above; also see Sakata Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 9, Murakami, in view of Sakata, teaches the terminal device according to claim 7, wherein the voice guides the subject to be measured to spread fingers while placing a back of the hand on a nose (Note that no patentable distinction is made by an intended use or result limitations unless some structural difference is imposed by the use or result on the structure or material recited in the claim. Sakata Fig. 2 & ¶¶0036 discussed above).
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 SOO J SHIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9753. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 10-6.
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, Matthew Bella can be reached at (571)272-7778. 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.
/Soo Shin/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2667 571-272-9753
soo.shin@uspto.gov
Prosecution Insights