DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. Claims 21-40 are pending and have been examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
3. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
4. Claims 21-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception in the form of abstract ideas without significantly more. The claims recite abstract ideas that can be categorized as mathematical concepts, and mental processes that include steps for observation, evaluation, and judgement.
Claim 21 recites limitations that involve mental processes of observation such as “…receiving, at a mobile computing device, a plurality of data values relating to glucose level monitoring…”, and the mental process of judgement such as “…separating, at a first application operable on the mobile computing device, the plurality of data values into a first set of data and a second set of data according to a predetermined criteria…” and “…delaying providing a key to decrypt the encrypted second set of data to the second application for a predetermined amount of delay…”, and “…based on determining, by the first application, that a time duration between a current time and the timestamps meets the predetermined amount of delay, providing the key to the second
application…”
The claim recites limitations that involve mathematical concepts and calculations such as “…encrypting the second set of data…”.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim does not, for example, improve the functioning of a particular computer or machine since the steps are merely implemented on a generic processor. The claim does not apply the particular judicial exception to effect a treatment or prophylaxis for a particular disease. Although the claims are drawn towards steps for collecting and processing blood glucose data, they do not recite steps for the use of the data in treating a patient.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because it does not recite limitations that represent such things as: an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field, or applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine, or effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing.
Dependent claims 22-30 do not cure the deficiency of claim 21 by integrating the judicial exception into a practical application or by amounting to significantly more since they merely recite additional data collection and processing steps also which fall into the categories of abstract ideas of mathematical concepts, and mental processes that include steps for observation, evaluation, and judgement.
Claims 31-40 are drawn to the computer program-product embodied in a non-transitory memory medium that corresponds to claims 21-30. Claims 31-40 recite substantially the same limitations as claims 21-30 and are rejected on the same basis.
Conclusion
5. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Dicks et al. 8,126,728: the reference discloses steps for the secure collection and processing of blood glucose readings similar to the instant application (see esp. col. 2 lines 43-59, col. 6 lines 50-35, col. 10 lines 10-37).
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Paul E. Callahan whose telephone number is (571) 272-3869. The examiner presently works a part-time schedule and can normally be reached from 9am to 5pm on the first Monday and Tuesday and the second Thursday and Friday of the USPTO bi-week schedule.
The examiner’s email address is: Paul.Callahan1@USPTO.GOV
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's supervisor, Alexander Lagor, can be reached on (571) 270-5143. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is: (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/PAUL E CALLAHAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2437