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 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 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 broadest reasonable interpretation 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, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(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) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, 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) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, 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) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, 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) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 8-9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) and 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Weitnauer [US 20140378809 A1].
As per claim 1, Weitnauer teaches a heart rate detection system (Weitnauer Fig 1), comprising:
acquisition means for acquiring heartbeat data indicating a heartbeat of a person to be measured (Weitnauer Fig 1A item 31, Fig 2 step 114 ¶0029, radar data regarding heart rate is acquired) in each of a plurality of time windows based on a Doppler signal (Weitnauer Fig 5A, 5B temporal windows);
conversion means for converting respective pieces of the heartbeat data into frequency spectra (Weitnauer Fig 2 step 112, Fig 1A, . Item 28/33, ¶0029 “Method 110 may be performed by UWB sensing system 14 (e.g. by digital signal processing system 33 or digital signal processing system 33 in combination with controller 28”. Item 28/33 is equivalent component);
peak identification means for identifying peaks included in each of the frequency spectra (Weitnauer Fig 4, identifying frequency domain peaks (pa, pb…) at frequency locations (e.g. DFT bin). Item 28/33 is equivalent component);
peak tracking means for determining whether corresponding peaks are present in the frequency spectra (Weitnauer Fig 2 step 118-120, ¶0044, ¶0045 “discerning ascertaining local maxima (peaks) in frequency domain data 116” by thresholding process. Item 28/33 is equivalent component) relating to a predetermined number of consecutive time windows (Weitnauer Fig 2 step 112, Fig 4, 5A-5B, ¶0066-¶0070, DFT bins comprising the spectra and peaks are related to the “successive temporal windows”), the predetermined number being three or more (Weitnauer ¶0068 “block 210 comprises applying a DFT to each block 206 temporal window W1, W2, W3, . . . of time domain data...”); and
heart rate generation means for generating a heart rate of the person to be measured based on a result of the determination (Weitnauer Fig 2 step 124, ¶0057 “discerned harmonic(s) 120 to use for the purpose of determining heart rate estimate 124”. Item 28/33 is equivalent component).
As per claim 2, Weitnauer further teaches wherein the heart rate generation means is configured to generate, when the corresponding peaks are present in the frequency spectra relating to the predetermined number of consecutive time windows, the heart rate of the person to be measured based on at least some of the corresponding peaks (Weitnauer Fig 2 step 124 is performed when harmonics relating to HR is present. Further, ¶0091 “looping back to block 112 via path 111…method 110 may perform one iteration of method 110 and output a corresponding heart rate estimate 124 at a rate corresponding to once for each temporal offset t.sub.0. In such embodiments, each successive iteration of block 112 (e.g. method 200), input time domain data 114 may comprise a new available window W.sub.1, W.sub.2, W.sub.3...” each loop is another time window, where processing is performed for HR estimate).
As per claim 3, Weitnauer further teaches wherein the peak tracking means is configured to determine that the corresponding peaks are present when values of frequencies of peaks relating to temporally adjacent time windows are within a predetermined range (Weitnauer ¶0054 “ peak location fpeak may be considered to be approximately equal to fpeak =if where i=1, 2, 3 . . . if the location fpeak is within a suitable threshold window. In some embodiments, this threshold window may be set at i f.+-..α … Candidate paths that do not satisfy the harmonic test may be rejected and candidate paths that do satisfy the harmonic test may be retained as candidates for members of the heart rate harmonic set or discerned harmonic(s) 120.”)
As per claim 4, Weitnauer further teaches the peak tracking means is configured to determine that the corresponding peaks are present when all values of frequencies of peaks relating to the predetermined number of consecutive time windows are within a predetermined range (Weitnauer ¶0054 same as claim 3 above. Note I f =1f, 2f, 3f, etc.. implies all frequencies of concern).
As per claim 8, it is directed to method of claim 1 and is rejected for same reasons as above.
As per claim 9, Cho further teaches a non-transitory computer readable information storage medium storing a program (Weitnauer ¶0101).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7 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. References cites in PTO are considered relevant to the claimed invention. None of references anticipate, amplitude ratio calculation means for calculating an amplitude ratio of a peak included in each of the frequency spectra to another peak, wherein the heart rate generation means is configured to generate the heart rate of the person to be measured further based on the amplitude ratio as in claim 1 or wherein the heart rate generation means includes means for calculating temporary heart rates corresponding to the respective time windows, and wherein the heart rate generation means is configured to avoid generating the heart rate of the person to be measured when the number of temporary heart rates that satisfy a predetermined criterion among the temporary heart rates calculated during a predetermined period is smaller than a predetermined number as in claim 7. Further, examiner does not find it obvious to modify references of record to show all these limitations in combination with the parent claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OOMMEN JACOB whose telephone number is (571)270-5166. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:00.
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, ANNE M KOZAK can be reached at 571-270-0552. 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.
/Oommen Jacob/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Prosecution Insights