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 .
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 1-4, 6-11, 14-21 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.
Applicant recites the “and/or” throughout the claims. This term renders the claim indefinite. Applicant should either recite “and” or “or” instead of “and/or”. Clarification is requested via amendments. Further applicant should remove all the reference numbers from the claims. Applicant should either remove or change phrases such as “which is designed” or “designed” to “is”. For example, “an evaluation unit which is designed to determine” can be changed to “an evaluation unit to determine”; “characterized in that the support, in which the bending sensor is accommodated is U-shaped” can be changed to “the support, in which the bending sensor is accommodated is U-shaped”.
The term “articulated manner” in claim 1 is a vague descriptive term which renders the claim indefinite. Clarification is requested via amendments.
Claim 7 recites “is provided in order to apply”. Applicant should change this phrase to “applies”. Similar changes are required for claim 9.
Claim 10, is directed towards an apparatus claim. However, it recites a method step. Clarification is requested via amendments. Similar rejection applies to claims 17-19. Claim 15 is an independent claim and therefore it is required to positively recite all the claimed features. Therefore, instead of stating “according to claim 1”, Applicant should positively recite all the elements/structures/steps intended. Clarification is requested via amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6-11, 14-15, 17-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Adkins et al. (USPN 2007/0287923-Cited by the Applicant).
Regarding claims 1 and 15, Adkins et al. discloses a device for blood pressure measurement on a part of the body with blood vessels ([0015], [0058]), comprising: a support (104, 220, 550), a bending sensor arranged on the support, which is designed to detect a bend in the support ([0015], [0062], [0079], elements 102, 222, 500), an evaluation unit which is designed to determine a blood pressure value using sensor signals from the bending sensor, characterized in that the support, in which the bending sensor is accommodated, is U-shaped, and comprises two legs, which are arranged on opposite sides of the support at an angle to the support, wherein the bending sensor is held between the two legs, wherein the legs each have a support, wherein one leg or both legs are arranged in an articulated manner on the support, wherein the device is designed such that a movement of the support, caused by an arterial and/or venous pulsation of the blood vessels of the body part, causes a bending of the bending sensor, via the legs of the U-shaped support, wherein said bending is converted into the sensor signal. See figures 2 and 5, [0015], [0058], [0101].
Regarding claim 2, Adkins et al. discloses the bending sensor is a piezoelectric sensor ([0061]).
Regarding claim 6, Adkins et al. discloses the legs each have a support which is preferably-in the shape of a segment of a circle (figures 1-5).
Regarding claim 7, Adkins et al. discloses at least one clamping element is provided in order to apply a defined force to a leg ([0068], [0076], [0079], [0101], figures 1-5).
Regarding claim 8, Adkins et al. discloses a clamping element is assigned to each leg ([0068], [0076], [0079], [0101], figures 1-5).
Regarding claim 9, Adkins et al. discloses the clamping element has a spring element by means of which either one leg or both legs can be subjected to a force ([0068], [0076], [0079], [0101], figures 1-5).
Regarding claim 10, Adkins et al. discloses the force exerted by the clamping element is adjustable ([0068], [0076], [0079], [0101], figures 1-5).
Regarding claim 11, Adkins et al. discloses a clamping element is supported on one side on the support and on the other side on a leg ([0068], [0076], [0079], [0101], figures 1-5).
Regarding claim 14, Adkins et al. discloses the evaluation unit (9) is designed to determine a temporal course of the blood pressure ([0064]-[0067], [0077]-[0079]).
Regarding claim 17, Adkins et al. discloses the clamping element has a spring element by means of which either one leg or both legs can be subjected to a force ([0068], [0076], [0079], [0101], figures 1-5).
Regarding claim 18, Adkins et al. discloses the force exerted by the clamping element is adjustable ([0068], [0076], [0079], [0101], figures 1-5).
Regarding claim 19, Adkins et al. discloses the force exerted by the clamping element is adjustable ([0068], [0076], [0079], [0101], figures 1-5).
Regarding claim 20, Adkins et al. discloses a clamping element is supported on one side on the support and on the other side on a leg ([0068], [0076], [0079], [0101], figures 1-5).
Regarding claim 21, Adkins et al. discloses a clamping element is supported on one side on the support and on the other side on a leg ([0068], [0076], [0079], [0101], figures 1-5).
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.
Claim(s) 3-4, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adkins et al. as applied to claims 1 and 15 above, and further in view of Bridger et al. (USPN 6,491,647).
Adkins et al. fails to disclose that the bending sensor is a bimorph sensor arrangement with two individual sensors arranged around the neutral fiber and has several pairs of individual sensors with alternating antiparallel polarity. Bridger et al. discloses that the bending sensor is a bimorph sensor arrangement with two individual sensors arranged around the neutral fiber and has several pairs of individual sensors with alternating antiparallel polarity (Figure 3, Col.17 lines 27-51). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the bimorph sensor of Bridger et al. into the device of Adkins et al., in order to obtain additional parameters.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARJAN FARDANESH whose telephone number is (571)270-5508. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-17:00.
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.
/MARJAN FARDANESH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights