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 § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1 and 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chausiaux et al. (US 20170311886 A1, and Chausiaux hereinafter) in view of Hirai (JP H04113093 U, and Hirai hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 1, Chausiaux discloses a wearable sensor device comprising
a housing including an outer wall (30, fig. 4), the outer wall including a back surface (31, fig. 4) facing a living body (“user-facing surface is shown at 31”, [0053]), a front surface (32, fig. 4) opposite to the back surface, and a side surface (surface that includes 33, fig. 4);
an environmental sensor configured to measure ambient environmental information around the living body (including 23, 31, and 32; fig. 3, “sensor 23 is located adjacent to a first surface 25 of the device, which will be exposed when the device is attached to a user's skin. This allows sensor 23 to provide an indication of ambient temperature”, [0047] and “The device may include sensors 31, 32 for sensing other parameters. Those other parameters could be characteristics of the ambient environment”, [0050]).
Chausiaux does not explicitly disclose a support member provided on the side surface of the outer wall, the support member configured to support the environmental sensor, wherein the environmental sensor is provided outside of the housing and is configured to be separated from and facing the side surface of the outer wall.
Hirai discloses a support member (10, fig. 2(a)) provided on the side surface of an outer wall (3, fig. 2(a)), the support member configured to support an environmental sensor, wherein the environmental sensor (17, fig. 4) provided outside of the housing (fig. 1, 10 surrounds and is external to 3) and is configured to be separated from (sensor 15 is an element distinct from housing/case and thus is configured to be separated from it at least during assembly/disassembly of the device) and facing a side surface of an outer wall (figs. 1 and 2(a)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Chausiaux to incorporate the teachings of Hirari so that it comprises a support member provided on the side surface of the outer wall, the support member configured to support the environmental sensor, wherein the environmental sensor is provided outside of the housing and is configured to be separated from and facing the side surface of the outer wall, in order to provide additional/reference environmental information from a different location (for instance, when user wears the sensor in a wrist holding mode as shown in fig. 5a of Chausiaux).
Regarding Claim 3, Chausiaux/Hirai discloses the wearable sensor device according to claim 1, further comprising a wireless communication device (29, fig. 3 of Chausiaux) configured to wirelessly transmit the ambient environmental information to an external device (“The transceiver 29 could be a short range transceiver. It could, for example, operate according to a protocol such as Bluetooth, IEEE 802.11 or ANT. The transceiver can operate under the control of the processor 22 to transmit data that has been stored in the memory to another device for analysis”, [0049] of Chausiaux), wherein:
the housing is sealed (fig. 4 of Chausiaux); and
the wireless communication device is provided in the housing (fig. 3 of Chausiaux).
Regarding Claim 4, Chausiaux/Hirai discloses the wearable sensor device according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose a protective member including a ventilation hole around the environmental sensor.
Hirai further disclose a protective member (21, fig. 2) including a ventilation hole (20, fig. 2) around an environmental sensor (fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the device of Chausiaux/Hirai to incorporate the additional teachings of Hirari so that it comprises a protective member including a ventilation hole around the environmental sensor, in order to provide a rigid structure that covers and protects the sensor while allowing fluid access to the environment to be sensed (“This protection plate 18 protects the pressure sensor 15, and has an arcuate projecting portion 21 having a large number of small holes 20 in its center”, [0007] of Hirai).
Regarding Claim 5, Chausiaux/Hirai discloses the wearable sensor device according to claim 1, wherein: the side surface of the outer wall of the housing is at an angle from a vertically downward direction (fig. 11: side surface located between 181 and 182, in view of “The applicant hereby discloses in isolation each individual feature described herein and any combination of two or more such features” [0078]) when the wearable sensor device is attached to the living body and the living body is in a standing posture (fig. 11, such as when user is in standing posture and wearing 184).
Chausiaux/Hirai does not explicitly disclose the angle in a range of 30° to 60°.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Chausiaux and Takizawa so that the side surface of the outer wall of the housing is at an angle in a range of 30° to 60° because said modification would be considered a mere change in shape/proportions (e.g., by changing the relative dimensions of the surfaces forming said angle). Absent disclosure of functional criticality, changes in proportions have been ruled to carry no patentable weight (In Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). See also, MPEP § 2144.04, IV, A). For instance, a person of ordinary skill could be motivate to implement said modification in order to facilitate a smooth air flow around the device intake port.
Claims 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chausiaux in view of Hirai, further in view of Olwal et al. (US 20210100503 A1, and Olwal hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 6, Chausiaux/Hirai discloses the wearable sensor device according to claim 1, further comprising a first coupling member (33, fig. 4 of Chausiaux) configured to attach the wearable sensor device to the living body (33 couples sensor to the body through 40-43 shown in fig. 5a of Chausiaux; “bridges 42, 43 … are sized and shaped so that they can clip snugly into the circumferential groove 33 of the sensor device”, [0057] and fig. 5a of Chausiaux) but does not explicitly disclose the first coupling member is provided only on the back surface of the outer wall of the housing.
Olwal discloses a first coupling member (155, fig. 1D) configured to attach a wearable sensor device (110, fig. 1D) to a living body (“The sensor fastener can include a plurality of fastener components that physically couple the sensor fastener to an interactive object or a user of an interactive object”, [0041]), wherein the first coupling member is provided only on the back surface of the outer wall of the housing (fig. 1D).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Chausiaux and Hirai to incorporate the teachings of Olwal so that it comprises a first coupling member configured to attach the wearable sensor device to the living body, wherein the first coupling member is provided only on the back surface of the outer wall of the housing, in order to physically couple the device to a user’s clothing ([0041] of Olwal). This modification could be implemented by adding snap fasteners to the bottom of the housing and corresponding snap fasteners to a portion of cloth worn by the user (such as 156 shown in fig. 1D of Olwal), which are a conventional attachment elements in the art, suitable for clothing (“ubiquitous commercial snap fasteners”, [0027] of Olwal).
Regarding Claim 8, Chausiaux/Hirai/Olwal discloses the wearable sensor device according to claim 6, wherein:
the environmental sensor and the first coupling member are provided on respective surfaces of the housing that are orthogonal to each other (Chausiaux, as modified by Hirai incorporates pressure sensor on sidewall, which is perpendicular to bottom surface where coupling member would be located (according to modification by Olwal). See rejection of Claims 1 and 6 above); and
the side surface of the outer wall is orthogonal to a body surface of the living body when the wearable sensor device is attached to the living body (Chausiaux as modified would allow the device to be worn with the bottom surface parallel to the user’s skin, the sidewall where the support for pressure sensor is located (see rejection of claim 1 above) is perpendicular to said surface).
Regarding Claim 9, Chausiaux/Hirai/Olwal discloses a monitoring system comprising:
the wearable sensor device according to claim 6 (see rejection of Claim 6 above); and
a wear configured to be worn on the living body (Chausiaux discloses a wear 50, fig. 5b), wherein the wear includes a second coupling member provided so as to be fitted with the first coupling member of the wearable sensor device (Chausiaux as modified by Olwal would incorporate second coupling members to be located on the wear holding the wearable sensor. See fig. 1D of Olwal and rejection of Claim 6 above).
Regarding Claim 10, Chausiaux/Hirai/Olwal discloses the monitoring system according to claim 9, wherein:
the wear is an innerwear (fig. 5b of Chausiaux) in which the second coupling member is provided on a surface opposite to a surface of the innerwear facing the living body (fig. 1D of Olwald in view of rejection of Claims 6 and 9 above).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chausiaux in view of Hirai, further in view of Park et al. (US 20180063981 A1, and Park hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 18, Chausiaux/Hirai discloses the wearable sensor device according to claim 1 but does not explicitly disclose a rigid substrate on which the environmental sensor is mounted, wherein the rigid substrate is supported by the support member and is spaced apart from the side surface of the outer wall of the housing, whereby the support member is configured to indirectly support the environmental sensor.
Park discloses a rigid substrate (140b, fig. 14B) on which an environmental sensor is mounted (140a, fig. 14B).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Chausiaux and Hirai to incorporate the teachings of Park so that it further comprises a rigid substrate on which the environmental sensor is mounted, in order to mount and fix the location of the environmental sensor (“substrate 140 b, on which the atmospheric pressure sensor 140 a is mounted, may be seated in and fixed to a specific area of the bracket 150”, [0112] of Park). Use of substrate to mount sensors is a common practice in the art, and said modification could be implemented by adding a substrate at the right end of vertical sensor element disclosed Hirai (15, fig. 1 of Hirai), inside the support member 10; doing so would necessarily satisfy the rigid substrate is supported by the support member and is spaced apart from the side surface of the outer wall of the housing, whereby the support member is configured to indirectly support the environmental sensor.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection addresses the newly amended limitation and Applicant’s arguments with newly identified prior art.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 2-4 of Applicant Arguments/Remarks, filed 08/19/2026, with respect to claims 7 and 11 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 7 and 11 has been withdrawn.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 11-17, and 19-20 are allowable.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 7 and 11, patentability exists, at least in part, with the claimed features of “a set of multiple snap buttons, the set of multiple snap buttons being arranged asymmetrically about a point on the back surface”. The closest art of record is provided in the previous office action. In addition, Pemu (US 20170265767 A1), Weir (US 20210085251 A1), Kurzweil (US 8560044 B2), Connor (US 20160349790 A1), and Wilder (US 8965479 B2), are also cited as teaching some elements of the claimed invention including a housing, an environmental sensor, a support member, and/or snap button. However, the prior art, when taken alone, or, in combination, cannot be construed as reasonably teaching or suggesting all of the elements of the claimed invention as arranged, disposed, or provided in the manner as claimed by the Applicant.
For instance, Olwal (cited in Non-Final rejection dated 05/19/2026) discloses a first coupling member (155, fig. 1D) configured to attach a wearable sensor device (110, fig. 1D) to a living body ([0041]), wherein the first coupling member is provided only on the back surface of the outer wall of the housing (fig. 1D); however, Olwal lacks a set of multiple snap buttons, the set of multiple snap buttons being arranged asymmetrically about a point on the back surface.
Pemu discloses a set of multiple snap buttons (62A-62B, fig. 5); however, Pemu lacks the set of multiple snap buttons being arranged asymmetrically about a point on the back surface.
Weir discloses a wearable sensor device comprising a set of multiple snap buttons (150, fig. 1B); however, Weir also lacks the set of multiple snap buttons being arranged asymmetrically about a point on the back surface.
The additional references cited above disclose some of the claimed features including one or more snap buttons but do not cure the deficiencies indicated 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 Martin A Asmat-Uceda whose telephone number is (571)270-7198. The examiner can normally be reached 8 AM - 5 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 L 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.
/ALLEN L PARKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/MARTIN ANTONIO ASMAT UCEDA/Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights