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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Connor (US 20170164878 A1.)
Regarding claim 1, Connor (‘878) teach a detection device (“infrared light sensor” see [0201]) comprising: a light source (“emitters and/or receivers” see [0234]); a plurality of optical sensors that are arranged so as to be capable of receiving light of the light source and have light-receiving areas different in size (“sensors can have a selected progression of different sizes, shapes, and/or orientation” see [0257]); a detection circuit that is electrically coupled to each of the optical sensors and configured to detect waveform data that allows an amount of received light of each of the optical sensors to be identified (“sensors which collect data which is used to measure a person's intra-body glucose levels” see [0239]); and a control circuit configured to select at least one piece of the waveform data having waveform amplitude that satisfies a selection condition from a plurality of pieces of the waveform data detected by the optical sensors (“sensor can be changed from a first level of operation to a second level of operation based on changes in physiological or environmental factors which are detected by other wearable or implanted sensors” see [0267]).
Regarding claim 2, Connor (‘878) teach the detection device according to claim 1, further comprising an external light detection circuit configured to detect an external light intensity, wherein the light source is configured to emit a larger amount of light as the external light intensity increases (see [0201], [0273]-[0277]).
Regarding claim 3, Connor (‘878) teach the detection device according to claim 2, wherein the control circuit is configured to select the waveform data that has a largest average value of a plurality of amplitudes of waveforms indicated by the waveform data, from among the pieces of the waveform data detected by the optical sensors (see [0201], [0273]-[0277]).
Regarding claim 4, Connor (‘878) teach the detection device according to claim 3, wherein the control circuit is configured to select the waveform data in accordance with a predetermined priority order when a plurality of the average values are the same (see [0201], [0273]-[0277]).
Regarding claim 5, Connor (‘878) teach the detection device according to claim 4, wherein the control circuit is configured to select the waveform data of the optical sensor having a smaller area of the light-receiving area when a plurality of the average values are the same (see [0201], [0257]).
Regarding claim 6, Connor (‘878) teach the detection device according to claim 5, wherein the external light detection circuit is configured to detect the external light intensity based on the waveform data of any one of the optical sensors (see [0201], [0273]-[0277]).
Regarding claim 7, Connor (‘878) teach the detection device according to claim 6, wherein the external light detection circuit is configured to use the waveform data of the optical sensor having a largest size of the light-receiving area among the optical sensors (see [0201], [0257]).
Regarding claim 8, Connor (‘878) teach the detection device according to claim 7, wherein the light source is configured not to emit light when detecting the external light (see [0201], [0273]-[0277]).
Regarding claim 9, Connor (‘878) teach the detection device according to claim 8, wherein the light-receiving areas of the optical sensors have the same area, and light-blocking layers covering the light-receiving areas have different areas (see [0201], [0273]-[0277]).
Regarding claim 10, Connor (‘878) teach the detection device according to claim 8, wherein the light-receiving areas of the optical sensors have different sizes in at least one of first and second directions (see [0201], [0257]).
Regarding claim 11, Connor (‘878) teach the detection device according to claim 1, wherein the optical sensors are arranged in the first direction and have different lengths in the second direction intersecting the first direction (see [0201], [0257]).
Regarding claim 12, Connor (‘878) teach the detection device according to claim 11, wherein the optical sensors are arranged such that the optical sensors having different lengths in the first direction are arranged adjacent in the second direction and the optical sensors having different lengths in the second direction are arranged adjacent in the first direction (see [0201], [0257]).
Regarding claim 13, Connor (‘878) teach the detection device according to claim 1, wherein the light source is configured to emit any one of infrared light, red light, and green light (see [0201]).
Regarding claim 14, Connor (‘878) teach the detection device according to claim 1, wherein the light source is configured to emit red light and either one of infrared light and green light (see [0201]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK REMALY whose telephone number is (571)270-1491. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00 - 6:00.
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, Christopher Koharski can be reached at (571) 272-7230. 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.
/MARK D REMALY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797