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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to communication filed 4/30/26.
Response to Amendment
The examiner acknowledged the amendment of claims 1, the addition of claim 21 and the cancellation of claim 8.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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) 1-2,4,6,7,10-11,13,18, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bedell, Jr. US Patent Application Publication 20180220947 in view of Davis et al. US Patent 11471078.
Regarding claim 1, Bedell teaches a portable access device for accessing a restricted area comprising a support, a sensor and an access control stage, wherein the portable access device is for single use in that the sensor is capable of being brought into contact with a biological sample taken from a subject (the cartridge contain the biological sample and is therefore single use and is a consumable product, paragraph 021-028), the support comprising comprises a disposable part and a retainable part (fig. 2, the wearable device represent the retainable part and the biological-assay cartridge represent the disposable part), the sensor is capable of being carried by the disposable part of the support and is configured to measure at least one health parameter of a subject, and to deliver a detection signal representative of the measurement of each health parameter (paragraph 028), the access control stage (biological -assay reader) is capable of being carried by the retainable part of the support and is configured to store access information depending on the detection signal delivered by the sensor (paragraph 031,033), and the retainable part of the support is capable of being able to be mechanically separated from the disposable part in order to form an access key which (the cartridge is removable from the wearable device, paragraph 027), depending on the access information, permits or prohibits access to the restricted- access area (access to the vehicle is denied based on the blood alcohol level determined from the biological sensors, paragraph 037). Bedell, JR. is silent on teaching the access device does not have an electrical energy storage means. Davis et al. in an analogous art teaches alternate means of powering a wearable device other than a battery such as a solar panel, a kinetic energy device, a wireless power receiver (col. 6 line 64-col. Line 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Bedell, JR. as disclosed by Davis et al. because such modification represent the substitution of one means for powering the wearable for another and producing the predictable result of reliably powering the wearable device.
Regarding claim 2, Bedell, JR. teaches the sensor 46} is configured to deliver a detection signal representative of the presence or absence of at least one predetermined analyte in the biological sample, the detection signal also being representative of the presence or absence of at least one predetermined analyte in the biological sample (paragraph 027-028).
Regarding claim 4, Bedell teaches the access information comprises the detection signal and/or data relating to the presence or absence of at least one predetermined analyte (access to the vehicle is denied based on the blood alcohol level determined from the biological sensors, paragraph 037).
Regarding claim 6, Bedell, JR. teaches the access control stage is configured to receive the detection signal (paragraph 031), wherein the access control stage being further configured to establish, with an external data processing unit and a wireless link, and to transmit, to the data processing unit via the wireless link, the detection signal received from the sensor (the processing unit 51 receive the wireless signal from the biosensor system for processing, paragraph 033-035), the access control stage also being configured to receive, from the data processing unit via the wireless link, an analysis signal established on the basis of the detection signal and comprising the access information (access data from the MICD device regarding the user alcohol level is transmitted to the wearable device, paragraph 037).
Regarding claim 7, Bedell, JR. teaches the control stage generate an interrogation signal for the sensor, the sensor being configured to deliver the detection signal following reception of the interrogation signal generated by the access control stage (paragraph 031-032) but is silent on teaching the access control stage is also configured to receive energy via the wireless link, the access control stage being configured to take at least some of the received energy in order to generate an interrogation signal for the sensor, the sensor being configured to deliver the detection signal following reception of the interrogation signal generated by the access control stage. Davis et al. in an analogous art teaches control stage is also configured to receive energy via the wireless link, the access control stage being configured to take at least some of the received energy in order to generate an interrogation signal for the sensor (col. 6 line 64- col. 7 line 20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Bedell, JR as disclosed by Davis et al. because such modification represents a substitution of one form of energy source for another for providing the predictable result of powering the device.
Regarding claim 10, Bedell, JR teaches the access control stage is electrically connected to the sensor by means of a connection bus, the retainable part of the support is connected to the disposable part by a multi-contact connector, and the retainable part is configured to be separated from the disposable part by disconnection, the connection bus being configured to be interrupted, upon separation of the retainable part from the disposable part, a male part of the connector being able to be contained either on the retainable part or on the disposable part (USB bus connect the sensor to the control stage, paragraph 025)
Regarding claim 11, Bedell, JR teaches the access control stage forms at least part of a radio tag., preferably able to implement a near-field communication (paragraph 037).
Regarding claim 13, Bedell, JR a data processing unit configured to receive the detection signal, to generate, from the received detection signal, an analysis signal comprising the access information, and to provide the analysis signal to the access control stage (access information to access the vehicle is generated, paragraph 037).
Regarding claim 18, Bedell, JR teaches the access control stage 1s able to implement a near-field communication (RFID, paragraph 037).
Regarding claim 21, Bedell, JR teaches a portable access device for accessing a restricted-access area, comprising a support, a sensor and an access control stage, wherein the portable access device is for single use in that the sensor is capable of being brought into contact with a biological sample taken from a subject (the cartridge contain the biological sample and is therefore single use and is a consumable product, paragraph 021-028), the support comprises a disposable part and a retainable part, the sensor is capable of being carried by the disposable part of the support and is configured to measure at least one health parameter of a subject, and to deliver a detection signal representative of the measurement of each health parameter (paragraph 028), the access control stage (biological -assay reader) is capable of being carried by the retainable part of the support and is configured to store access information depending on the detection signal delivered by the sensor (paragraph 031,033), and the retainable part of the support is capable of being mechanically separated from the disposable part in order to form an access key which (the cartridge is removable from the wearable device, paragraph 027), depending on the access information, permits or prohibits access to the restricted-access area (access to the vehicle is denied based on the blood alcohol level determined from the biological sensors, paragraph 037). Bedell, JR is silent on teaching the access device comprises an energy storage member charged by means of a wireless link. Davis et al. in an analogous art teaches alternate means of powering a wearable device other than a battery such as a solar panel, a kinetic energy device, a wireless power receiver (col. 6 line 64-col. Line 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Bedell, JR. as disclosed by Davis et al. because such modification represent the substitution of one means for powering the wearable for another and producing the predictable result of reliably powering the wearable device.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bedell, Jr. US Patent Application Publication 20180220947 in view of Davis et al. US Patent 11471078 and further in view of Lalonde et al. US Patent Application Publication 20190262827.
Regarding claim 3, Bedell, JR. is silent on teaching the sensor is composed of a graphene sheet, said graphene sheet being covered with a thin layer having functional groups specific to a given analyte. Lalonde et al. in an analogous art teaches the sensor is composed of a graphene sheet, said graphene sheet being covered with a thin layer having functional groups specific to a given analyte (paragraph 032-033).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Bedell, JR in view of Davis et al. as disclosed by Lalonde et al. because such modification represents the substitution of one known sensor for another and producing the predictable result of detecting a specific analyte from a biological sample.
Claim(s) 5 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bedell, Jr. US Patent Application Publication 20180220947 in view of Davis et al. US Patent 11471078 and further in view of Caposcasale US Patent Application Publication 20170206329.
Regarding claims 5 and 17, Bedell is silent on teaching the access control stage is further configured to store a unique identifier of the subject. Caposcasale in an analogous art teaches storing a unique identifier of the subject and the unique identifier is associated with the biological samples (paragraph 053).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Bedell in view of Davis et al. as disclosed by Caposcasale because such modification represents an improvement over the system of Bedell by ensuring that access privileges can be uniquely assigned and further increasing the security of the access control system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9,12,14-16, and 19-20 are 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.
Regarding claim 9, the prior art of record is silent on teaching the access control stage is electrically connected to the sensor by means of a connection bus, the retainable part of the support being configured to be separated from the disposable part by being peeled off at a predetermined bonding zone, the electrical continuity of the connection bus in the bonding zone being provided by a conductive adhesive or by vias configured to break during the peeling-off.
Regarding claim 12, the prior art of record is silent on teaching the sensor and the retainable part of the support are spaced apart from each other, a distance between the sensor and the retainable part of the support being greater than a predetermined contamination limit.
Regarding claims 14-16 and 19-20, the prior art of record is silent on teaching measuring, by means of the sensor, at least one health parameter of the subject; generating the access information according to the detection signal; storing the access information in the access control stage; and separating the retainable part of the support from the disposable part in order to form the access key, in the access control stage, a unique identifier of the subject.
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 VERNAL U BROWN whose telephone number is (571)272-3060. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8AM-5PM, EST.
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, Steven Lim can be reached at 571 270 1210. 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.
/VERNAL U BROWN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686
Prosecution Insights