DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after 16 March 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation ("BRI") using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The BRI of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181(I), claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(A) the claim limitation uses the term "means" or "step" or a term used as a substitute for "means" that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term "means" or "step" or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word "for" (e.g., "means for") or another linking word or phrase, such as "configured to" or "so that"; and
(C) the term "means" or "step" or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word "means" (or "step") in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word "means" (or "step") in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word "means" (or "step") are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word "means" (or "step") are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word "means," but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a "signal acquirer configured to…," in claim(s) 1, 14, and claims dependent thereon; an "estimator configured to…" in claim(s) 1 and claims dependent thereon; and a "notifier configured to…" in claim(s) 12 and claims dependent thereon.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The corresponding disclosed structure for each of the above-noted limitations is a programmed processor (e.g., pg. 12, line 22 – pg. 13, line 1).
If Applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), Applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 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.
Claim(s) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, claim 15, and claims dependent thereon, Applicant discloses that at least one intersection point of two spectra corresponding to oxyhemoglobin and reduced hemoglobin exists within each of the first, second and third wavelength bands (i.e., at ~440 nm, ~520 nm, and ~805 nm) (pg. 31, lines 8-12). In view of this disclosure, the limitation "select lights of two or more wavelengths, in which an absorption rate of oxyhemoglobin is identical to an absorption rate of a reduced hemoglobin, from among the reflected lights" of claim 1 and the comparable limitation of claim 15 are indefinite. It is unclear if "in which an absorption rate of oxyhemoglobin is identical to an absorption rate of a reduced hemoglobin" is merely descriptive of the first, second and third wavelength bands (or the multiple wavelengths by which the skin is irradiated), or is a basis of the selection by the signal acquirer/in the selecting step. If the latter, it is further unclear how and/or on what basis said selection is made, as further discussed with respect to claims 3 and 14 below.
Regarding claim 2 and claims dependent thereon, the limitation "select any one of the third wavelength band, in which a second absorption rate of the oxyhemoglobin and the reduced hemoglobin is different from a first absorption rate of a carboxyhemoglobin; and the first wavelength band or the second wavelength band, in which the second absorption rate is identical to the first absorption rate, from among the reflected lights" is indefinite. Claim 1 requires selecting two or more wavelengths, while claim 2 appears to indicate any one of the third, first or second wavelengths bands is selected. It is unclear how many wavelengths/wavelength bands are required to be selected.
Regarding claim 3, claim 14, and claims dependent thereon, the limitations "calculate the first absorption rate corresponding to the target in the light of the first wavelength and the light of the second wavelength; and when a difference between the second absorption rate and the first absorption rate is greater than a predetermined standard, select the light of the first wavelength and the light of the second wavelength" of claim 3 and the comparable limitations of claim 14 are indefinite.
First, it is unclear to what "calculate the first absorption rate corresponding to the target in the light of the first wavelength and the light of the second wavelength" refers. Applicant discloses or illustrates light absorption rates by wavelength of oxyhemoglobin, reduced hemoglobin, and carboxyhemoglobin (Fig. 8). Applicant additionally discloses, "[The] absorption rate by the blood may be expressed by a pulsating component (AC component)" (pg. 33, lines 14-20). It is unclear to which of these absorption rates the "calculate" limitation refers, and/or what is required by the wearable device for such a calculation (e.g., is this predetermined information stored in memory; is the wearable device calculating the first absorption rate based on data by the device (e.g., reflected lights, pulse wave signals, etc.). If the latter, Applicant appears to disclose absorption rate for a target, e.g., carboxyhemoglobin, is different for each of a first and second wavelength (e.g., Figs. 8, points A-D), particularly the wavelengths recited in claim 4, such that it is further unclear how a first absorption rate corresponding to the target in the light of the first wavelength and the light of the second wavelength is/may be calculated.
Second, there is neither any indication in the claims, nor any clear indication in the specification as filed, that "the second absorption rate" is a value determined and/or received by the wearable device. There is similarly no indication as to what "predetermined standard" may be used in evaluating a difference between the first and second absorption rates. Accordingly, it is unclear how a "difference between the second absorption rate and the first absorption rate is greater than a predetermined standard" is being assessed.
In view of the above, the analysis required by the wearable device, if any, in "selecting" the two or more wavelengths is unclear.
Regarding claim 13 and claims dependent thereon, there is insufficient antecedent basis for "the wearable device" in line 2 of the claim. Further, since an electronic device and a wearable device are not mutually exclusive in scope, it is unclear if the electronic device and the wearable device refer to the same device, or are separate devices in communication. If the latter, it is unclear to which device the claim is directed. For instance, the limitations of claim 13 recite the claimed device comprises a communication interface configured to receive…from a wearable device, suggesting the claim is intended to be directed to a device other than, but in communication with, a wearable device. However, dependent claim 14 only recites further limitations of the wearable device, such that it is unclear how, if at all, these limitations would further limit the structure of the device of claim 13 if the claim is intended to be directed to a electronic device separate from but in communication with the wearable device.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 2018-0106664 A (Ahn, reference made to machine English translation mailed herewith) in view of US 5,810,723 A (Aldrich) and US 2019/0209061 A1 (Katra).
Regarding claims 1-2 and 8, Ahn discloses/suggests a wearable device (e.g., Fig. 12c) which estimates a percentage of a target to be detected in a user having a skin, the wearable device comprising:
a light emitter (light irradiation module 110) comprising:
a light source which emits lights of multiple wavelengths (light irradiator 211-21N generating lights of various wavelengths; pg. 10, LEDs having a wavelength in a visible band and LEDs having a wavelength in the near-infrared and infrared bands; etc.), the lights of the multiple wavelengths comprising:
a first wavelength band corresponding to a first bandwidth equal to or greater than 420 nanometers (nm) and equal to or less than 460 nm (e.g., pg. 3, blue LEDs that generate spectral light signals in a 430 nm to 480 nm band);
a second wavelength band corresponding to a second bandwidth equal to or greater than 500 nanometers and equal to or less than 540 nanometers (e.g., pg. 3, green LEDS that generate spectral light signals in a 500 nm to 590 nm band); and
a third wavelength band corresponding to a third bandwidth equal to or greater than 785 nanometers and equal to or less than 825 nanometers (e.g., pg. 3, infrared LEDS that generate spectral light signals in a 800 nm to 1720 nm band);
a light receiver configured to detect at least some of reflected lights which are reflected from the skin of the user by the lights of the multiple wavelengths (light receiving module 120 including optical receivers 221 to 22N);
a signal acquirer configured to select lights of two or more wavelengths; and an estimator configured to estimate a target, such as carboxyhemoglobin (COHb), to be detected based on a ratio of an absorption rate of each selected wavelength (e.g., pg. 8, using two wavelengths, concentration of a particular component, e.g., oxygen saturation, carboxyhemoglobin, etc., can be measured).
Ahn discloses absorbance for a target to be detected, such as carboxyhemoglobin, differs at the two wavelengths disclosed for use in detecting said target (430 nm and 590 nm) (see, e.g., Fig. 3). However, Ahn does not expressly disclose the signal acquirer acquires pulse waves corresponding to the selected wavelengths; and the estimator is configured to estimate the percentage of the target to be detected based on a ratio of an absorption rate of each wavelength of the pulse wave signals.
Aldrich discloses a ratio of change in absorbance at two wavelengths can be used to measure the percentage of a target using light at two wavelengths in which the absorbance for said target differs (e.g., col. 4, lines 27-45). In particular, Aldrich discloses a method comprising selecting lights of two or more wavelengths (col. 6, lines 28-43, two wavelengths, a first wavelength at which carboxy and oxy-hemoglobins absorb light to a similar degree and a second wavelength at which carboxy and oxy-hemoglobins absorb light at a different degree); acquiring pulse wave signals corresponding to the selected lights of wavelengths (Figs. 6-7, photoplethysmograms acquired for each wavelength); and estimating a percentage of a target to be detected, such as a percentage of carboxyhemoglobin of total hemoglobin, based on a ratio of an absorption rate of each wavelength of the pulse wave signals (e.g., col. 9, lines 49-61, absorbance ratios are calculated and compared to a calibration curve set up for carboxy-hemoglobin).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ahn with the signal acquirer acquiring pulse waves corresponding to the selected wavelengths; and the estimator being configured to estimate the percentage of the target to be detected, such as a percentage of carboxyhemoglobin of total hemoglobin, based on a ratio of an absorption rate of each wavelength of the pulse wave signals as disclosed/suggested by Aldrich in order to facilitate monitoring for CO intoxication and/or poisoning (Aldrich, through document) and/or as a simple substitution of one suitable means or method for estimating a value (e.g., percentage) of the target from reflected light at the selected wavelengths for another to yield no more than predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Ahn as modified does not disclose the selected wavelengths are wavelengths in which an absorption rate of oxyhemoglobin is identical to an absorption rate of a reduced hemoglobin.
Aldrich discloses selecting a first wavelength in which a second absorption rate of oxyhemoglobin is markedly different from a first absorption rate of a carboxyhemoglobin; and a second wavelength in which the second absorption rate is identical to the first absorption rate (col. 6, lines 28-43). Aldrich discloses said wavelengths are selected based on assumption that substantially no reduced hemoglobin is present in arterial blood because the patient is required to breath oxygen at in order to eliminate said reduced hemoglobin (col. 6, lines 28-42; col. 8, lines 25-42; etc.). Katra discloses the use of isosbestic points associated with the oxy-Hb and deoxy-Hb emission responses, such as approximately 550 nm, 800 nm, etc., in calculating a ratio negates transitory changes in oxy-Hb and deoxy-Hb concentrations (e.g., ¶ [0028]). Aldrich similarly discloses/illustrates ~550 nm, ~800 nm are isosbestic points associated with the oxy-Hb and deoxy-Hb emission responses (e.g., Fig. 3), and additionally discloses/illustrates the absorption rate of a carboxyhemoglobin is substantially the same as the absorption rate of oxy-Hb and deoxy-Hb at, e.g., ~550 nm, and the absorption rate of a carboxyhemoglobin is markedly different from the absorption rate of oxy-Hb and deoxy-Hb at, e.g., ~800 nm (e.g., Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ahn with the signal acquirer being configured to select lights of two or more wavelengths, in which an absorption rate of oxyhemoglobin is identical to an absorption rate of a reduced hemoglobin, from among the reflected lights, said selection including selecting a first wavelength from the second wavelength band in which the absorption rate of the oxyhemoglobin and the reduced hemoglobin is identical to the absorption rate of carboxyhemoglobin (e.g., ~550 nm), and selecting a second wavelength from the third wavelength band in which the absorption rate of the oxyhemoglobin and the reduced hemoglobin is different from the absorption rate of carboxyhemoglobin (e.g., ~800 nm) as disclosed/suggested by Aldrich and Krata in order to facilitate estimating a percentage of carboxyhemoglobin in a manner that permits said estimation when reduced hemoglobin is present; negates transitory changes in oxyhemoglobin and reduced hemoglobin concentrations (Katra, ¶ [0028]); etc.
Regarding claim 3, Ahn as modified discloses/suggests the lights of the first and second wavelengths are selected when a difference between the second absorption rate and the first absorption rate is greater than a predetermined standard (e.g., is "markedly different," see discussion of claims 1-2 above).
Regarding claim 5, Ahn as modified discloses/suggests the light emitter comprises multiple emitters (e.g., pg. 3, plurality of LEDs); and the wearable device is configured to operate the multiple emitters corresponding to different wavelengths, and acquire the pulse wave signals by the at least some of the reflected lights detected by the light receiver, based on an operation of the multiple emitters (pg. 10, light irradiation and receiving steps, etc.). Ahn as modified does not expressly disclose the emitters are operated at a set time interval.
Katra discloses a wearable device comprising multiple emitters (e.g., emitters 212a and 212b), wherein the wearable device is configured to operate the multiple emitters corresponding to different wavelengths at a set time interval (¶ [0031] emitters are controlled to generate incident light mutually exclusive of one another; ¶ [0054] subsequent measurements may be measured on a weekly basis, daily basis, hourly basis, or more frequently), and acquire the pulse wave signals by the at least some of the reflected lights detected by the light receiver, based on an operation of the multiple emitters (¶ [0031] photodetector measures an attribute (e.g., amplitude) relating to the emission response at each emission wavelength).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ahn with the wearable device being configured to operate the multiple emitters at a set time interval as disclosed/suggested by Katra in order to permit sufficient measurements of the target for a condition/disease desired to be monitored (Katra, ¶ [0018], ¶ [0054]).
Regarding claim 6, Ahn as modified discloses/suggests but does not expressly disclose the wearable device further comprises an analog circuit configured to perform signal processing comprising signal amplification and filtering on the at least some of the reflected lights detected by the light receiver; and an analog-digital converter configured to convert the signal-processed reflected lights into digital signals.
Aldrich discloses/suggests, in order to acquire/produce pulse wave signals corresponding to the selected lights of wavelengths, the device comprises an analog circuit configured to perform signal processing comprising signal amplification and filtering on the at least some of the reflected lights detected by the light receiver; and an analog-digital converter configured to convert the signal-processed reflected lights into digital signals (col. 7, line 59 – col. 8, line 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ahn to comprise an analog circuit configured to perform signal processing comprising signal amplification and filtering on the at least some of the reflected lights detected by the light receiver; and an analog-digital converter configured to convert the signal-processed reflected lights into digital signals as disclose/suggested by Aldrich in order to facilitate acquiring the pulse wave signals corresponding to the selected lights of wavelengths.
Regarding claim 7, Ahn as modified discloses/suggests the light source comprises any one of: a single light-emitting diode light source configured to generate a light of a single wavelength band; multiple light-emitting diode light sources configured to generate a light of a single wavelength band (e.g., pg. 3, multiple LED sources each configured to generate light in a single wavelength band); and a multispectral light source configured to generate multiple wavelengths in a spectral sensor.
Regarding claim 9, Ahn as modified discloses/suggests the estimator is configured to calculate a relative absorption rate by a volume change of each wavelength, based on the pulse wave signals; and estimate the percentage of the target by applying the relative absorption rate to pre-acquired information corresponding to the target, and the information corresponding to the target comprising a difference between a pre-calculated ratio and a correlation coefficient of a concentration of the target (e.g., col. 9, lines 49-61, absorbance ratios are calculated and compared to a calibration curve set up for carboxyhemoglobin to estimate carboxyhemoglobin percentage).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn in view of Aldrich and Katra as applied to claim(s) 3 above; alternatively, over Ahn in view of Aldrich and Katra as applied to claim(s) 3 above, and further in view of US 6,393,310 B1 (Kuenstner).
Regarding claim 4, Ahn as modified discloses and/or suggests the limitations of claim 3, as discussed above, and further discloses the second wavelength may be 805 nm (see discussion of claims 1-3 above, wherein 805 nm is reasonably encompassed by ~800 nm). Ahn as modified does not expressly disclose the first wavelength is 520 nm. However, at the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Ahn with the first wavelength being 520 nm because Applicant has not disclosed that this specific wavelength provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. Rather, Applicant discloses 520 nm is one point of intersection of spectra corresponding to oxyhemoglobin and reduced hemoglobin (i.e., isosbestic point associated with oxy-Hb and deoxy-Hb emission responses) (pg. 31, lines 8-12). As no evidence has been provided to the contrary, one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected Applicant's invention to perform equally well with the first wavelength being ~550 nm (another isosbestic point) because either wavelength is one in which absorption rates of oxyhemoglobin, reduced hemoglobin and carboxyhemoglobin are substantially the same.
Alternatively/Additionally, Kuenstner discloses and/or suggests 520 nm is at least a near-isosbestic point for all three of oxyhemoglobin, reduced hemoglobin and carboxyhemoglobin (e.g., col. 10, lines 39-46). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ahn with the first wavelength comprising 520 nm as disclosed/suggested by Kuenstner as a simple substitution of one wavelength in which absorption rates of oxyhemoglobin, reduced hemoglobin and carboxy-hemoglobin are substantially the same for another to yield no more than predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Claim(s) 10 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn in view of Aldrich and Katra as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and further in view of US 2002/0111748 A1 (Kobayashi).
Regarding claims 10 and 12, Ahn as modified discloses/suggests the limitations of claim 1, and further discloses/suggests the wearable device may comprise a notifier, such as a display screen (display unit 1140 for displaying biometric information to a user). Ahn does not disclose the wearable device is configured to define risk information, comprising mild, moderate, severe, and fatal, of the user depending on the estimated percentage of the target, or the notifier is configured to provide said risk information through a notification. However, Aldrich (or Ahn as modified thereby) does disclose the estimated percentage of the target may be used for monitoring CO poisoning and/or intoxication, as discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Kobayashi discloses/suggests a method comprising defining risk information of a user depending on a size of an estimated percentage of the target (dangerous level indicator 32 and/or 33); and notifying the user of the risk information through a notification, such as at least one of flickering and/or flashing (¶ [0122]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ahn to be configured to define risk information depending on a size of an estimated percentage of the target, and the notifier being configured to provide said risk information through a notification, such as screen flickering and/or flashing as disclosed and/or suggested by Kobayashi in order to inform the user of his/her current target status or level, permitting early treatment when warranted (Kobayashi, ¶ [0106]).
With respect to claim 10, Ahn as modified does not expressly disclose the risk information or levels include mild, moderate, severe, and fatal. However, at the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Ahn with the claimed risk information because Applicant has not disclosed that any particular number and/or categories of risk information provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. As no evidence has been provided to the contrary, one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected Applicant's invention to perform equally well with the risk information disclosed/suggested by Ahn as modified (e.g., low, medium, and high) because arrangement permits quantifying the user's current level of risk.
Claim(s) 11 and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn in view of Aldrich and Katra as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and further in view of US 10,966,643 B1 (Vavadi).
Regarding claim 11, Ahn as modified discloses/suggests the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above, but does not disclose the wearable device is configured to determine whether the user is sleeping based on biometric information of the user, determine whether the percentage of the target increases by a threshold or more when the user is determined to be sleeping, and notify that the user is in a risk state by the target when the percentage of the target is determined to increase by the threshold or more.
Vavadi discloses/suggests a wearable device configured to estimate the percentage of the target to be detected (e.g., col. 9, lines 4-17, estimating relative carboxyhemoglobin); determine whether the percentage of the target increases by a threshold or more; and notify that the user is in a risk state by the target when the percentage of the target is determined to increase by the threshold or more (col. 3, lines 39-63, increased CO poisoning and/or inhalation; col. 11, lines 4-12; etc.). Vavadi further discloses the wearable device may be configured to determine whether the user is sleeping based on biometric information of the user (col. 13, lines 44-61, estimating sleep time based on a PPG signal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ahn with the wearable device being configured determine whether the user is sleeping based on biometric information of the user as disclosed and/or suggested by Vavadi in order to permit additional monitoring, e.g., of the user's sleep (e.g., periods, phases, quality, etc.) (Vavadi, col. 19, line 25 – col. 20, line 47). Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ahn with the wearable device being configured to determine whether the percentage of the target increases by a threshold or more at any time when the device is worn, including at times when the user is and/or is determined to be sleeping, and notify that the user is in a risk state by the target when the percentage of the target is determined to increase by the threshold or more as disclosed/suggested by Vavadi in order to notify a user of any detected carbon monoxide poisoning, increased CO inhalation, etc. (Vavadi, col. 3, lines 39-63).
Regarding claims 13-14, Ahn as modified with respect to claims 1-3 above discloses and/or suggests an electronic device which estimates a percentage of a target to be detected in a user having a skin (e.g., wearable device of claims 1-3), the device comprising:
a signal acquirer configured to select the lights of two or more wavelengths by a difference between a second absorption rate corresponding to each of oxyhemoglobin and a reduced hemoglobin and a first absorption rate of the skin corresponding to the target from among the reflected lights, wherein the signal acquirer is configured to: select the lights of two or more wavelengths, in which the second absorption rate is identical and the difference between the second absorption rate and the first absorption rate is greater than a predetermined standard, from among the reflected lights, or the signal acquirer is configured to determine target wavelengths, in which the second absorption rate is substantially identical, among the reflected lights, calculate the first absorption rate corresponding to the target of lights of the target wavelengths; and when the difference between the second absorption rate and the first absorption rate is greater than the predetermined standard, select the lights of the target wavelengths (see discussion of claims 1-3 above); and
a processor configured to estimate the percentage of the target to be detected, based on a ratio of an absorption rate of each wavelength of the pulse wave signals (see discussion of claim 1 above, "estimator" of Ahn as modified); and an output device configured to provide a notification to the user (display unit 1140 for displaying biometric information to a user).
Ahn as modified does not disclose the device is an electronic device in communication with the wearable device, the electronic device comprising a communication interface configured to receive pulse wave signals corresponding to lights of two or more wavelengths selected from among reflected lights by lights of multiple wavelengths from the wearable device.
Vavadi discloses/suggests a system comprising an electronic device (e.g., col. 10, lines 3-12, another user device; col. 4, line 51 – col. 5, line 8, portable electronic device; etc.), the electronic device comprising a communication interface configured to receive pulse wave signals from a wearable device; a processor configured to estimate the percentage of the target to be detected based on the pulse wave signals (col. 10, lines 3-12, raw data signal from the photo-detector or a minimally processed signal may be transmitted from the wearable to another user device where such analysis may be performed, indicating the user/electronic device may include means for communicating with the wearable device and processing means for analyzing the data therefrom); and an output device configured to provide a notification to the user (col. 11, lines 4-12, user interface of the other device (e.g., smartphone) for providing alerts).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ahn with an electronic device in communication with the wearable device, the electronic device comprising a communication interface configured to receive pulse wave signals corresponding to lights of two or more wavelengths selected from among reflected lights by lights of multiple wavelengths from the wearable device; the processor (i.e., estimator) configured to estimate the percentage of the target to be detected, based on a ratio of an absorption rate of each wavelength of the pulse wave signals; and the output device as disclosed and/or suggested by Vavadi in order to provide power saving measures for the wearable device (Vavadi, col. 4, line 51 – col. 5, line 8); allow for more robust processing, particularly for wearable devices with limited capacity or processing capability (Vavadi, col. 5, line 58 – col. 6, line 7); etc.
Ahn as modified does not disclose the processor is further configured to calculate risk information corresponding to the target, based on the percentage of the target, or the output device provides a notification to the user according to the risk information.
Vavadi discloses and/or suggests a processor configured to calculate risk information corresponding to the target, based on the percentage of the target, wherein the output device provides a notification to the user according to the risk information (col. 3, lines 39-63, increased CO poisoning and/or inhalation; col. 11, lines 4-12; etc.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electronic device of Ahn with the processor being further configured to calculate risk information corresponding to the target, based on the percentage of the target, and the output device provides a notification to the user according to the risk information as disclosed and/or suggested by Vavadi in order to notify a user of any detected carbon monoxide poisoning, increased CO inhalation, etc. (Vavadi, col. 3, lines 39-63).
Regarding claim 15, Ahn as modified with respect to claim 1 discloses and/or suggests an operating method of a wearable device which estimates a percentage of a target to be detected in a user having a skin, the method comprising irradiating the skin of the user with lights of multiple wavelengths from a light source; detecting reflected lights reflected from the skin by the lights of multiple wavelengths; selecting lights of two or more wavelengths, in which an absorption rate of oxyhemoglobin is identical to an absorption rate of a reduced hemoglobin, from among the reflected lights; acquiring pulse wave signals corresponding to the selected lights of wavelengths; and estimating the percentage of the target to be detected, based on a ratio of an absorption rate of each wavelength of the pulse wave signals (see discussed of claim 1 above, where the wearable device thereof, in its normal and usual operation carries out the above-noted steps).
Ahn as modified with respect to claim 1 does not expressly disclosed the method further comprises notifying risk information corresponding to the target, based on the percentage of the target.
Vavadi discloses and/or suggests a processor configured to calculate risk information corresponding to the target, based on the percentage of the target, wherein the output device provides a notification to the user according to the risk information (col. 3, lines 39-63, increased CO poisoning and/or inhalation; col. 11, lines 4-12; etc.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Ahn to further comprise notifying risk information corresponding to the target based on the percentage of the target as disclosed and/or suggested by Vavadi in order to notify a user of any detected carbon monoxide poisoning, increased CO inhalation, etc. (Vavadi, col. 3, lines 39-63).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure: see attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Meredith Weare whose telephone number is 571-270-3957. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9 AM - 5 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. Applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice to schedule an interview.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Tse Chen, can be reached on 571-272-3672. 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.
/Meredith Weare/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights